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.
I never understood the "most unique in the world" claim. Think I've seen it in some brochure as well. What's the basis for this claim? More unique than Venice? Amsterdam? Rio? New York? I don't get it...
New Orleans is such a unique city because it is a city that has had a huge number of different immigrant groups moving into the city over its history. The difference between this ad other cities is that in NOLA, the different groups and cultures (everything from French, African, Italian, to Vietnemese) melded together over time to produce a truly "Creole" culture. There are whole books devoted to the cultural assets that are only present in the city of New Orleans and not even found 3 miles away.
Now, someone else might give you a different reason for this but this happens to be my opinion.
Unique as in there is no city like New Orleans...none.
Yeah but saying that it is the most unique city in the world because there is no other like it is a bit bombastic, isn't it? There are a lot of cities that could stake the same claim (some of which I listed). Anyway, just a thought...
Yeah but saying that it is the most unique city in the world because there is no other like it is a bit bombastic, isn't it? There are a lot of cities that could stake the same claim (some of which I listed). Anyway, just a thought...
The city usually markets itself as the most unique in the country, not the world.
The city usually markets itself as the most unique in the country, not the world.
Even so... what makes it more unique than San Francisco or NYC or even Vegas? I think each of those cities has an equally as good claim to being different from any other place in the country. It's a silly claim to make IMO.
Even so... what makes it more unique than San Francisco or NYC or even Vegas? I think each of those cities has an equally as good claim to being different from any other place in the country. It's a silly claim to make IMO.
Even so... what makes it more unique than San Francisco or NYC or even Vegas? I think each of those cities has an equally as good claim to being different from any other place in the country. It's a silly claim to make IMO.
Honestly I feel NOLA is more unique than any of those
While they all have soem characteristics not truly available in other places, at their core they are not as unique
The most unique thing about NYC is scale in the US
SF, not sure anything absolutely unique but sort of its own vibe
Vegas, scale as AC offers some level comparable to Vegas
I personally think Quebec would be more unique in the North American context relative to any of those three
Honestly I feel NOLA is more unique than any of those
While they all have soem characteristics not truly available in other places, at their core they are not as unique
The most unique thing about NYC is scale in the US
SF, not sure anything absolutely unique but sort of its own vibe
Vegas, scale as AC offers some level comparable to Vegas
I personally think Quebec would be more unique in the North American context relative to any of those three
It does have a more unique architectural style, that's true. But architecture is not the only barometer of uniqueness. SF has a unique setting (and is the only city in the country that combines a dramatic setting with a dense urban core), NY has the vibrance and density, and Vegas has the obvious. They are all unique in their own ways. Comparing AC to Vegas is like comparing Charleston or Savannah to NO. Not quite the same.
It has actually gained more people. On December 22nd 2011 it is approximately 1,346,729 up from 1.1 million. The population in the metro is growing along with the city. New Orleans was the fastest growing city in the nation and continues to grow. Katrina was only a temporary setback as the city has suffered many disasters in the past. This is nothing new and some people don't even realize it's growing population today. Source: Newsroom: Population: New Orleans was Nation's Fastest-Growing City in 2008
I think it may bounce back more, but you are skewing things greatly. It grew only because some of the people came back, after the city hit rock bottom at 210,000 population. The latest 2010 numbers are down from 2009. The current city population is 343,829 in the city limits, in 180 square miles. The city density is under 2,000 per sq mile.
Metro census numbers for 2010:
#46 New Orleans/Matairie/Kenner 1,167,764 down 11.3% from 2000
One point that I think should be made is that out of all American metros, probably a greater proportion of the residents of New Orleans live in "urban" areas than in any other. Despite being 1/5 the size of Boston's metro, we have more buildings on the National Historic Register.
I think it may bounce back more, but you are skewing things greatly. It grew only because some of the people came back, after the city hit rock bottom at 210,000 population. The latest 2010 numbers are down from 2009. The current city population is 343,829 in the city limits, in 180 square miles. The city density is under 2,000 per sq mile.
Metro census numbers for 2010:
#46 New Orleans/Matairie/Kenner 1,167,764 down 11.3% from 2000
Much of the "180 square miles" of land area cited for New Orleans is wetland that is, by law, closed off to development.
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.