U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-11-2016, 09:41 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,238 posts, read 19,541,004 times
Reputation: 12994

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by boulevardofdef View Post
The SF core seemed much bigger than Boston. I thought Chicago and New York were better parallels; even a Seattle might be a better analogue than Boston.
Population:

San Francisco = 805,000

Boston = 667,000

Chicago = 2,700,000

New York = 8,550,000

Seattle = 609,000

Therefore, Boston and Seattle are 83% and 76%, respectively, the size of San Francisco.

You can fit more than 3 San Franciscos in Chicago, and more than 10 San Franciscos in New York City.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2016, 10:11 AM
 
Location: Denver
14,151 posts, read 19,759,815 times
Reputation: 8803
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy View Post
I get that Miami and LA both have popular beaches, but I think the similarities end there. Miami is a popular nightlife/party destination. LA is not really. LA is known for other things, many other things.

Idk I wouldn't say my "feathers are ruffled" or whatever, I'm just not seeing these comparisons. I've never been to OC and I don't know anything about Orlando outside of Disney and Universal so I can't comment on those, but I've been to all the others.
I still think you're reading too much into this. LA is a major influence on it's region, it's known for beaches, rich people, flashy lifestyle, famous people, taco trucks, hispanic culture, etc. Miami is also known for beaches, rich people, flashy lifestyle, moreso a Caribbean culture than central American, but still very similar in my opinion.
You can point out many differences bwtween the two cities but many cultural similarities.

LA is definitely the west coast version of Miami.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 10:34 AM
 
1,192 posts, read 875,253 times
Reputation: 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by the city View Post
Miami and LA, have been around, but didn't see their growth until around the WW2 era
That's true for Miami, and while the LA metro grew significantly post-war, the biggest decade for population boom was pre-WW2, the 1920's. By the start of WW2, Miami-Dade county had 267,000 people, LA county was at 2.8 million. Miami city at the start of WW2 was at 172,000, Los Angeles city was at 1.5 million. Miami is much more of a post WW2 city than LA is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2016, 11:42 AM
 
Location: The Pacific Northwest
6,015 posts, read 6,367,272 times
Reputation: 8281
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr roboto View Post
Why does the west coast need a NYC, Miami and Orlando?
It most certainly does not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 12:31 AM
 
Location: North America
1,151 posts, read 1,474,156 times
Reputation: 1228
Miami is the west coast Honolulu mixed in with Vegas. Beaches, sunshine, heat, highrises, tourists. Miami is more stylish and party scene.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 01:04 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
3,930 posts, read 2,214,400 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
Population:

San Francisco = 805,000

Boston = 667,000

Chicago = 2,700,000

New York = 8,550,000

Seattle = 609,000

Therefore, Boston and Seattle are 83% and 76%, respectively, the size of San Francisco.

You can fit more than 3 San Franciscos in Chicago, and more than 10 San Franciscos in New York City.
You can't really use city proper to compare since SF land area is tiny.

MSA

San Francisco = 4,656,132

Boston = 4,774,321

Chicago = 9,551,031

New York = 20,182,305

Seattle = 3,733,580

And if you look at CSA

San Francisco = 8,607,423

Boston = 8,099,575

Chicago = 9,928,312

New York = 23,632,722

Seattle = 4,526,991

So by population size alone SF and Boston are practically twins, and Seattle is much smaller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 06:17 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,238 posts, read 19,541,004 times
Reputation: 12994
Quote:
Originally Posted by grega94 View Post
You can't really use city proper to compare since SF land area is tiny.

MSA

San Francisco = 4,656,132

Boston = 4,774,321

Chicago = 9,551,031

New York = 20,182,305

Seattle = 3,733,580

And if you look at CSA

San Francisco = 8,607,423

Boston = 8,099,575

Chicago = 9,928,312

New York = 23,632,722

Seattle = 4,526,991

So by population size alone SF and Boston are practically twins, and Seattle is much smaller.
Yes, the post I was responding to was talking about the core city.

Either way, I agree that San Francisco is more similar to Boston than it is to other city on the east coast. In fact, I'd say they are the 2 most comparable cities on the east and west coasts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 08:04 AM
 
1,586 posts, read 1,540,553 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
Population:

San Francisco = 805,000

Boston = 667,000

Chicago = 2,700,000

New York = 8,550,000

Seattle = 609,000

Therefore, Boston and Seattle are 83% and 76%, respectively, the size of San Francisco.

You can fit more than 3 San Franciscos in Chicago, and more than 10 San Franciscos in New York City.
Those numbers are part of why I was expecting San Francisco to remind me more of Boston, but numbers don't tell the whole story -- when I was actually in San Francisco, it just struck me as significantly larger than Boston in feel. Here's an example for you: The last morning I was there, I drove from my hotel across the city to get some designer donuts. The drive took me about half an hour. There was no traffic to speak of. In all this time, I never left dense neighborhoods full of multi-family housing and drove down endless walkable streets packed wall to wall with shops, with the exception of cutting through a big-city park. I think if I'd set out from the edge of Boston and didn't hit traffic, I'd be well into the suburbs after half an hour.

The scale reminded me of Chicago because if I'd left a hotel in Lake View and driven half an hour, I think I might have a similar experience of density and probably land in the South Loop at the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 09:34 AM
 
Location: East Coast of the United States
17,238 posts, read 19,541,004 times
Reputation: 12994
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulevardofdef View Post
Those numbers are part of why I was expecting San Francisco to remind me more of Boston, but numbers don't tell the whole story -- when I was actually in San Francisco, it just struck me as significantly larger than Boston in feel. Here's an example for you: The last morning I was there, I drove from my hotel across the city to get some designer donuts. The drive took me about half an hour. There was no traffic to speak of. In all this time, I never left dense neighborhoods full of multi-family housing and drove down endless walkable streets packed wall to wall with shops, with the exception of cutting through a big-city park. I think if I'd set out from the edge of Boston and didn't hit traffic, I'd be well into the suburbs after half an hour.

The scale reminded me of Chicago because if I'd left a hotel in Lake View and driven half an hour, I think I might have a similar experience of density and probably land in the South Loop at the end.
It would be interesting to know where you drove in San Francisco that took half an hour with no traffic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2016, 09:55 AM
 
1,586 posts, read 1,540,553 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCityDreamer View Post
It would be interesting to know where you drove in San Francisco that took half an hour with no traffic.
North Beach, near Fisherman's Wharf, to Outer Sunset.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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 $104,000 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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top