Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
It's been two and a half years since this topic was last posted in.
For Brooklyn, the last two and a half years has seen a number of skyscrapers constructed in downtown Brooklyn, but mostly residential, the expansion of an amazing waterfront park (with a great view of Lower Manhattan as a draw--since you don't really get to see much of that if you're in Manhattan itself), the creation of a new stadium and a NBA team relocation to go with it (with a NHL team coming soon as well), the Asian population has surged in numbers (as has the Mexican population) with Brooklyn having the largest increase in its Asian population of any borough in NYC and that's especially true of the Chinese population where Sunset Park has made satellite Chinese enclaves of sorts and the J train in northern Brooklyn is doing the same in another part of the borough, the tech scene in NYC as a whole has seen massive increases in downtown Brooklyn and its adjoining areas as well as in northern Brooklyn (most visibly the massive new Kickstarter headquarters in Greenpoint), the number of upscale/fancy restaurants such as those listed in the Michelin guide have grown (including an upgrade of a two star restaurant to three stars which is odd as SF itself does not have any three star restaurants), and housing prices in many tony parts of Brooklyn have become almost absurd.
The funny thing is, in the last two and a half years, all those things have made Brooklyn more and more like SF on the surface.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 07-16-2014 at 07:03 PM..
The funny thing is, in the last two and a half years, all those things have made Brooklyn more and more like SF on the surface.
Anecdotally lots of places are sprucing up their urban cores so congrats to places like Brooklyn and Salt Lake City for being headed in the right direction.
It's gratifying to know that SF serves as a template for up and coming locales such as Brooklyn to aspire to.
Anecdotally lots of places are sprucing up their urban cores so congrats to places like Brooklyn and Salt Lake City for being headed in the right direction.
It's gratifying to know that SF serves as a template for up and coming locales such as Brooklyn to aspire to.
Im touched.
*snort*
Brooklyn doesn't look to SF for anything, believe me. It doesn't need to. Same the other way around. SF is not on the radar of anyone in NYC.
Brooklyn's not becoming more like SF, it's becoming more similar to Manhattan (though is not a duplicate, not even close), and is a desirable borough as well. I'd say at this time, Brooklyn is second in popularity to Manhattan. The cool new thing to do is move to Brooklyn if you're looking in NYC.
Anecdotally lots of places are sprucing up their urban cores so congrats to places like Brooklyn and Salt Lake City for being headed in the right direction.
It's gratifying to know that SF serves as a template for up and coming locales such as Brooklyn to aspire to.
Im touched.
I don't think it's that much of an aspirational measure to any specific city--it's more like convergent "evolution" (probably a better word for that). SF isn't the goal by any stretch of the imagination, but gentrification in inner cities, increasing Asian migration, and a move towards the tertiary sector, including the tech industry, in general are broader US trends (and perhaps a broader developed Western country trend). A possibly very homogenizing trend.
Regardless, by almost any more of the original measures cited by the OP, Brooklyn has it over SF for the most part except for scenery.
Brooklyn doesn't look to SF for anything, believe me. It doesn't need to. Same the other way around. SF is not on the radar of anyone in NYC.
Brooklyn's not becoming more like SF, it's becoming more similar to Manhattan (though is not a duplicate, not even close), and is a desirable borough as well. I'd say at this time, Brooklyn is second in popularity to Manhattan. The cool new thing to do is move to Brooklyn if you're looking in NYC.
Yes, Brooklyn looks more like Manhattan as does SF. Manhattanization is sort of a real thing. Sort of.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,133,609 times
Reputation: 3145
I don't know why anyone who likes the San Francisco lifestyle would be drawn to compare it with Brooklyn, or vice versa. Very different places. It's quite possible to like both, but they share very little to make a comparison.
For me, San Francisco by a wide margin, though Brooklyn would probably be my choice for living in NYC.
Aww shucks. And here I thought some people had come to their senses and realized that it's okay to aspire to be unattainable places like Manhattan and San Francisco.
Indeed, Brooklyn-ever the bridesmaid in it's own city, will ***NEVER*** be San Francisco, much less Manhattan, so long as it's a secondary, peripheral, non essential place of economic and cultural activity.
That said, it's perfectly acceptable to celebrate whatever developments and projects serve to improve the meager class of amenities that exist there now.
The whole warehousey, lofty, hipster vibe is a great place to start tho, so congrats!
Aww shucks. And here I thought some people had come to their senses and realized that it's okay to aspire to be unattainable places like Manhattan and San Francisco.
Indeed, Brooklyn-ever the bridesmaid in it's own city, will ***NEVER*** be San Francisco, much less Manhattan, so long as it's a secondary, peripheral, non essential place of economic and cultural activity.
That said, it's perfectly acceptable to celebrate whatever developments and projects serve to improve the meager class of amenities that exist there now.
The whole warehousey, lofty, hipster vibe is a great place to start tho, so congrats!
It's not a much less so or any pecking order comparison for this topic. Brooklyn is what it is, and what it is is better in the categories the OP listed:
-Food (includes restaurants, mom and pops stores, and street vendors)
-Art (includes museums and the more organic local art scene)
-Diversity
-Architecture
-Live Music scene
-Nightlife
-Transportation (or just ease of getting around)
-Parks
-Scenery
-Street Vibrancy (everything from outdoor cafes to graffiti to street dancers, etc)
The only one I think are on the fence would be art--SF has the better museums, but it's actual art scene is dead compared to Brooklyn's and Parks - I can definitely buy an argument for SF but I can see an argument for Brooklyn. SF has a pretty solid case for scenery - a view of lower Manhattan, the New York harbor and the Atlantic are fine, but it's not a match for the San Francisco Bay and the Pacific especially with the vantage points SF offer. Maybe an argument for Food for SF based on an average though Brooklyn would have the far greater diversity and number of interesting things to try.
Also, the warehousey, lofty, hipster vibe is a pretty small portion of Brooklyn and even the neighborhoods in Brooklyn associated with that in the past such as DUMBO (in an earlier era) has given way to far more intensive luxury condo development (definitely not universally welcomed) while the more traditional image of Brooklyn is its large spans of quaint brownstone neighborhoods. I mean, there's Bushwick/East Williamsburg but that's a very small part of the city and even then it's a small part of the neighborhood that's like that.
Anyhow, this was a topic about preference. Obviously, my preference is Brooklyn as I live here and have been pretty uninterested in offers from SF.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 07-16-2014 at 09:56 PM..
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.