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.
Which city feels bigger? As many of you have noted, this is extremely subjective. These are two relatively similarly sized cities built in completely different ways. I was fortunate enough to spend some time in Atlanta because I went to Clemson University (graduated in '08), which is only a couple hours away and I had a few friends who were from the area. I personally consider "Big" to be a bustling city. Anybody can built out, but it takes a truly big city to be packed with density for a great distance. Boston's city borders are tiny compared to Atlanta's, but the satellite cities of Boston like Somerville, Cambridge and Brookline are all pretty much continuations of the city. In fact, all three of those "suburbs" are denser than Boston city proper! You wouldn't ever attempt to compare Atlanta with a city like Paris in size, right? The city of Paris is only 41 sq miles, which is even smaller than Boston. Its urban area is over 10 million people but covers a distance of only 1,051 sq miles! Is there even a question as to whether Atlanta feels bigger than Paris? Obviously not, but my point is that Paris stretches nowhere near as far as Atl, but feels (is)much bigger.
Yes, Boston is smaller in area than Atlanta, but...tiny comparatively? Boston is 49 square miles, and Atlanta is 131 square miles. You made it sound (above) like Atlanta covers a huge area, but 131 square miles is actually very average compared to other large U.S. cities and very small compared to some cities like Philadelphia, Houston, Charlotte, etc.
I wouldn't attempt to compare Atlanta to Paris, nor would I attempt to compare Boston to Paris - neither can compare favorably. Paris is FAR ahead of both in density.
Paris - 34 sq.mi./pop. 2.2 million
Boston - 49 sq.mi./pop. 608,000
Atlanta - 131 sq.mi./pop. 520,000
hello, tmac9wr, and welcome. It's nice to see a familiar face (assuming you're the same tmac9wr from Architectural Boston?) over here.
Excellent post and one that I completely agree with. I haven't spent as much time as you have in Atlanta, but I've spent enough to gain a reasonable feel for the city. Your description is similar to what I would have said (you put it a bit more eloquently), but I didn't have the data to back it up.
I think you'll find that many on this forum will participate in a welcome manner to any intelligent discussion, but many others will not. It's an interesting community here; one that can be both insightful and annoying depending on the subject matter.
Again, welcome and enjoy.
Hey lrfox, I am the same tmac9wr as ArchBoston. It's good to see you here too! I look forward to having some great conversations here.
Deacon, I know there are plenty areas in Boston which can be deserted...but there are much fewer areas like this in Boston in comparison to Atlanta. The reason why I'm being particularly critical of this part of Atlanta is because the aquarium, Georgia Dome, and more than a couple bars are located here. It seems like there should always be something going on in this area. I do remember when I went to the aquarium for my friends' wedding (amazing by the way...the ballroom had giant windows where we could watch sharks, whales, etc swimming by while we partied the night away), and there was a party being put on by a local radio station (I think that's what it was) in Centennial Park. It looked like an awesome time, and it was what I hoped would be in Atlanta more often.
You mentioned Atlanta isn't nearly as large as Philly...but Philly is only 135 sq miles. I know there are plenty of cities like Houston and Jacksonville that are much (much much much) bigger than Atlanta. However, Boston's land area is 37% of Atlanta's. Only San Francisco has the tiny, dense city proper with a huge metro population like Boston.
I understand nobody is comparing Paris to Atlanta as far as "feeling bigger". I was simply commenting on the fact that people were saying "well in Boston you drive through a very dense core, but after that it doesn't go on for very far". I just don't think that's a valid argument as to feeling bigger.
I compare the "big" feeling of Atlanta--which is mega-highways and skyscrapers spread out all over the place--to someone who has stuffed a fake muscle suit under their shirt. Sure, at first glance you say "wow, that dudes big" but when you get closer you can see that it's false. Boston is a Navy SEAL who isn't ripping his shirt off because he's so in-your-face big, but they're rock hard with muscle.
Don't take that as a knock on Atlanta, because that's not my intention...just a thought I had. My point is that while Atlanta may seem bigger at a quick first-glance of a photo, once you actually are in the city you see Boston is bigger. Of course this is all my opinion though.
Population, population, population. Boston has already been through this city to the burbs, back to the city phase. I get it, but the word fake can trigger the ATL haters in droves.
Hey lrfox, I am the same tmac9wr as ArchBoston. It's good to see you here too! I look forward to having some great conversations here.
Deacon, I know there are plenty areas in Boston which can be deserted...but there are much fewer areas like this in Boston in comparison to Atlanta. The reason why I'm being particularly critical of this part of Atlanta is because the aquarium, Georgia Dome, and more than a couple bars are located here. It seems like there should always be something going on in this area. I do remember when I went to the aquarium for my friends' wedding (amazing by the way...the ballroom had giant windows where we could watch sharks, whales, etc swimming by while we partied the night away), and there was a party being put on by a local radio station (I think that's what it was) in Centennial Park. It looked like an awesome time, and it was what I hoped would be in Atlanta more often.
You mentioned Atlanta isn't nearly as large as Philly...but Philly is only 135 sq miles. I know there are plenty of cities like Houston and Jacksonville that are much (much much much) bigger than Atlanta. However, Boston's land area is 37% of Atlanta's. Only San Francisco has the tiny, dense city proper with a huge metro population like Boston.
I understand nobody is comparing Paris to Atlanta as far as "feeling bigger". I was simply commenting on the fact that people were saying "well in Boston you drive through a very dense core, but after that it doesn't go on for very far". I just don't think that's a valid argument as to feeling bigger.
I compare the "big" feeling of Atlanta--which is mega-highways and skyscrapers spread out all over the place--to someone who has stuffed a fake muscle suit under their shirt. Sure, at first glance you say "wow, that dudes big" but when you get closer you can see that it's false. Boston is a Navy SEAL who isn't ripping his shirt off because he's so in-your-face big, but they're rock hard with muscle.
Don't take that as a knock on Atlanta, because that's not my intention...just a thought I had. My point is that while Atlanta may seem bigger at a quick first-glance of a photo, once you actually are in the city you see Boston is bigger. Of course this is all my opinion though.
When I was in Boston, it was very obvious that the city wasn't alive 24 hours. The bars closed at 1:00 a.m. The streets were deserted after a certain time - except for areas with bars/restaurants. Atlanta is much the same way...I'm not sure why you would expect to see a crowd in Centennial Park every night. For what? It closes at 11:00 p.m. - most public parks close at dusk.
It doesn't matter to me if you knock Atlanta...but I've spent time in both cities as well and I didn't see people in the streets of Boston 24 hours a day either. There aren't many cities that can honestly keep that going. My intention is not to knock any city, but to inject some truth into what is posted...opinion is one thing, but facts can be true or false.
Oh I'm not going to argue that Boston is a 24 hour city, because it's not. The only real 24-hour city I've ever been to is NYC. Yea the bars do close early (at 2, not 1), and that's something that definitely has to change. I'm not expecting Centennial Park to be jumpin all the time, I just wanted to see more activity. What do you mean it closes @ 11 pm? I've never heard of a park closing before, ever.
Hey lrfox, I am the same tmac9wr as ArchBoston. It's good to see you here too! I look forward to having some great conversations here.
Deacon, I know there are plenty areas in Boston which can be deserted...but there are much fewer areas like this in Boston in comparison to Atlanta. The reason why I'm being particularly critical of this part of Atlanta is because the aquarium, Georgia Dome, and more than a couple bars are located here. It seems like there should always be something going on in this area. I do remember when I went to the aquarium for my friends' wedding (amazing by the way...the ballroom had giant windows where we could watch sharks, whales, etc swimming by while we partied the night away), and there was a party being put on by a local radio station (I think that's what it was) in Centennial Park. It looked like an awesome time, and it was what I hoped would be in Atlanta more often.
You mentioned Atlanta isn't nearly as large as Philly...but Philly is only 135 sq miles. I know there are plenty of cities like Houston and Jacksonville that are much (much much much) bigger than Atlanta. However, Boston's land area is 37% of Atlanta's. Only San Francisco has the tiny, dense city proper with a huge metro population like Boston.
I understand nobody is comparing Paris to Atlanta as far as "feeling bigger". I was simply commenting on the fact that people were saying "well in Boston you drive through a very dense core, but after that it doesn't go on for very far". I just don't think that's a valid argument as to feeling bigger.
I compare the "big" feeling of Atlanta--which is mega-highways and skyscrapers spread out all over the place--to someone who has stuffed a fake muscle suit under their shirt. Sure, at first glance you say "wow, that dudes big" but when you get closer you can see that it's false. Boston is a Navy SEAL who isn't ripping his shirt off because he's so in-your-face big, but they're rock hard with muscle.
Don't take that as a knock on Atlanta, because that's not my intention...just a thought I had. My point is that while Atlanta may seem bigger at a quick first-glance of a photo, once you actually are in the city you see Boston is bigger. Of course this is all my opinion though.
Houston's inner city has the about the same population as Atlanta with only about 100 sqm.
I compare the "big" feeling of Atlanta--which is mega-highways and skyscrapers spread out all over the place--to someone who has stuffed a fake muscle suit under their shirt. Sure, at first glance you say "wow, that dudes big" but when you get closer you can see that it's false. Boston is a Navy SEAL who isn't ripping his shirt off because he's so in-your-face big, but they're rock hard with muscle.
Houston's inner city has the about the same population as Atlanta with only about 100 sqm.
I wasn't bashing Houston...I was simply remarking it's a behometh. It may have a similar population as Atlanta in only 100 sqm, but the total city is 580 sq mi. or something like that. That's enormous. The 2,200,000 population reported in the city limits is pretty deceptive. Same goes for cities like Jacksonville (800,000 in 767 sq mi), Phoenix (1,500,000 in 517 sq mi) and San Antonio (1,300,000 in 400 sq mi, with a metro of only 2,000,000)
Again, I'm not bashing these cities. I'm simply saying the statistics are deceptive. If they looked at the city proper pops, citizen X is going to think Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, and Jacksonville are all bigger than San Francisco and Boston. That simply isn't the case.
GladT, another user in the sprawl-is-big camp. Apparently Darkone and TheDude are going with density. As another adherent of the density school, I'll disagree with the statement that there is a difference between urban character and the feeling of bigness in a city. As someone with the pro-density perception, I think urbanness is a key characteristic of a city that feels or looks large.
One thought I've had regards the scenes I would include if I were making a movie, one I needed to have set in a big city for it to have the desired feel. I might show a skyline, which every major city has, but I would also need to show the film's characters in a number of scenes at street level. In order to give the audience the sense that the movie was set in a major city, I would be more inclined to show everyday street scenes like these:
There are parts of downtown that look like those boston pics you didnt even look for them
You're aware though that the ENTIRE core of Boston (not just the commercial districts, but surrounding residential districts and even areas of bordering cities like Cambridge) looks that way... it's not just selective photography.
Atlanta may have a few small sections like this (indeed it does and I've seen them in person), but it has NOWHERE NEAR the density Boston has. Not even close. Atlanta's a great city, but it's not even in the same league as Boston when it comes to that type of urbanity and density... only a few other cities are.
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.
Awesome. Gotta represent Beantown!
