U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: The More Urban City (s)?
Jersey City/Hoboken 33 50.00%
San Francisco 35 53.03%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 11-21-2010, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,180 posts, read 4,369,132 times
Reputation: 4047
Default More Urban City (s): San Francisco VS Jersey City/Hoboken

Jersey City: 242,503 (14.9 Square Miles) = 16,275 people per square mile
Hoboken: 41,015 (1.3 Square Miles) = 31,550 people per square mile

Jersey City + Hoboken: 283,518 (16.2 Square Miles) 17,501 people per square mile

VERSUS

San Francisco: 815,000 (48 Square Miles) 16,979 people per square mile

You can make a case for the peak of highest density in either city (s), so lets hear it. Which one would be considered a more urban city?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-21-2010, 10:10 AM
 
Location: The City
18,778 posts, read 15,190,239 times
Reputation: 5421
Tough call but think give the edge to SF as it has a much larrger downtown area. both are among the most urban areas to live in the country and JC/Boken are a stones tthrow from Manhattan but as a stand alone would be missing a pure downtown of the size and scale of SF - add in manhattan and the discussion changes but as a stand alone i go with SF
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Arroyo Grande, California
5,310 posts, read 3,471,464 times
Reputation: 3125
San Francisco, easily. Although density is similar, its over 49 sq miles not 16. Within SF there are parts much denser than 17k/sqmi
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 11:09 AM
 
1,728 posts, read 2,636,837 times
Reputation: 449
I consider Jersey City/Hoboken an extension of NYC. Therefore, Jersey City/Hoboken.

Stand alone...definitely San Francisco.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 11:13 AM
 
Location: St Paul, MN - NJ's Gold Coast
5,262 posts, read 7,357,510 times
Reputation: 2895
Quote:
Originally Posted by slo1318 View Post
San Francisco, easily. Although density is similar, its over 49 sq miles not 16. Within SF there are parts much denser than 17k/sqmi
No... There's probably sections of the city that exceed over 49Kppsm- But the average population density overall is around 17K PPSM
~


I'd say it's a tie. I voted for both.

San Francisco clearly has the more urban downtown (Jersey City's DT is pretty quiet.. Hoboken is livelier)- Though Jersey City/Hoboken has the more urban residential areas.
Public transportation in both excel, but NJ Transit is definitely the more extensive system. (Plus, PATH)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 11:37 AM
rah
 
Location: San Francisco
3,097 posts, read 4,948,864 times
Reputation: 2166
one-on-one? SF wins (47 square miles of high density vs. 16 square miles of high density)

metros taken into account? NJ/NYC wins.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 12:38 PM
 
1,694 posts, read 3,421,287 times
Reputation: 624
I have love for JC/Hoboken,but this is no contest,imo.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 01:10 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
2,481 posts, read 3,050,994 times
Reputation: 1935
Just Hoboken & Jersey City?
Hudson Co feels like one congruent city to most who have ever been there (West New York, Union City, North Bergen, Weehawken, ect).

But hey, I didn't make the poll...................
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 01:14 PM
 
Location: California
142 posts, read 194,288 times
Reputation: 61
How the hell can you even compare Jersey to San Fran?????????????
SF is a world class city. You better off comparing Jersey with Oakland.
And obviously SF is way more urban, SF is one of the most denses compact, cosmopolitan cities in the world, theres something to do in SF any time day or night. I doubt Jersey has much too offer. Just cause your packed like sardines in some ****ty apartment building dosnt mean your urban!!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-21-2010, 01:17 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
2,481 posts, read 3,050,994 times
Reputation: 1935
Quote:
Originally Posted by goonzy View Post
How the hell can you even compare Jersey to San Fran?????????????
SF is a world class city. You better off comparing Jersey with Oakland.
And obviously SF is way more urban, SF is one of the most denses compact, cosmopolitan cities in the world, theres something to do in SF any time day or night. I doubt Jersey has much too offer. Just cause your packed like sardines in some ****ty apartment building dosnt mean your urban!!
Wha?
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top