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.
Skyline: Philly, but SF has the natural beauty for sure
Cohesiveness: not sure what you mean
Museums: Philly
Restaurants: Tie
Shopping: SF
Green Space: Philly by far
Growth and Development: SF is growing more quickly right now, but I think Philly has the brighter future. SF is just about entirely built out and NIMBYism is keeping the city back. Philly seems to be more welcoming of development, correct me if I'm wrong.
Transportation: Philly
Vibrancy: Pretty close. It could go either way. But I think one big thing holding SF back is the homeless population downtown. During tourist season, SF wins. During normal seasons, there are still a lot of tourists in SF compared to Philly, but the vibrancy is more on par with Philly's I think.
For me San Francisco is not a strictly better city. It is smaller, cosmically beyond laughably expensive, the public transportation is painfully lacking, the homeless are violent, the ego is unchecked, and is cold year round. Also it is not culturally balanced, it is completely bleach gentrified. In most fields like energy, food, nightlife, urbanity, class (top end) etc they are basically tied. However otherwise it does have a slightly bigger downtown, more foot traffic, amazing geography, an awesome tech industry and a few other things that are slightly better. Particularly the cost takes it off the map though especially in the face of manhattan.
Wow, look at page 9. San Francisco crushes Philly.
SF: Powell Street & Market: 46,000 per weekday/ 103,000(!!!!) per weekend day
Philly: Chestnut & 16th: 26,000 per weekday/ 22,000 per weekend day.
I'll give you that. SF does have more pedestrian activity. I still don't think that it can be the single factor the propels SF to 3rd place, though. If anything, they more or less tie. They are each good at different things.
Skyline: Philly, but SF has the natural beauty for sure
Cohesiveness: not sure what you mean
Museums: Philly
Restaurants: Tie
Shopping: SF
Green Space: Philly by far
Growth and Development: SF is growing more quickly right now, but I think Philly has the brighter future. SF is just about entirely built out and NIMBYism is keeping the city back. Philly seems to be more welcoming of development, correct me if I'm wrong.
Transportation: Philly
Vibrancy: Pretty close. It could go either way. But I think one big thing holding SF back is the homeless population downtown. During tourist season, SF wins. During normal seasons, there are still a lot of tourists in SF compared to Philly, but the vibrancy is more on par with Philly's I think.
This.
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 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.
