San Francisco or San Diego bigger? (Los Angeles, Oakland: to live in, military, vs)

[dosd]

San Diego has more people right? So why does it feel that SF is bigger? when it comes to news and events and talking about world cities.. I don't understand. which one is actually bigger?

[violone]

San Diego is bigger by both geography and population. The population in San Francisco is much denser (ie. more people in each block), which makes it feel much bigger. Plus, the the cities that surround San Francisco are quite large (Oakland, Berkeley), while San Diego has many smaller suburbs (Chula Vista being the biggest one) surrounding it. San Diego's geography also kind of splits the city up a bit...there are so many canyons and things that spread the population out. San Francisco is solid people (though they have their share of geographical challenges).

[kettlepot]

The city of San Diego is bigger than the city of San Francisco, however, the metropolitan area of the Bay Area is substantially bigger than that of San Diego. The San Francisco metro area contains 7m to SD's 3m. Therefore, the urban core of the Bay Area, downtown San Francisco, is supported by a population over twice as large as the population which supports downtown San Diego. Also, San Francisco has been a substantially sized city for a longer period. Almost immediately, as of 1850, San Francisco was a large city of national significance. The city of San Diego didn't match San Francisco's 1850 popluation until 1940. The city of San Diego didn't surpass the city of San Francisco in population until 1980.

[jksouthbay88]

Originally Posted by kettlepot

The city of San Diego is bigger than the city of San Francisco, however, the metropolitan area of the Bay Area is substantially bigger than that of San Diego. The San Francisco metro area contains 7m to SD's 3m. Therefore, the urban core of the Bay Area, downtown San Francisco, is supported by a population over twice as large as the population which supports downtown San Diego. Also, San Francisco has been a substantially sized city for a longer period. Almost immediately, as of 1850, San Francisco was a large city of national significance. The city of San Diego didn't match San Francisco's 1850 popluation until 1940. The city of San Diego didn't surpass the city of San Francisco in population until 1980.

Very true.That might be why people can ID San Francisco and not San Diego.I went to Cleveland last year and some lady(well educated and all) said "San Diego?Is that in Los Angeles?"Plus you will see or read more about SF than San Diego.

[dosd]

OK thanks for clearing that up. I guess it depends on where you are reading the stats then on population size - whether it includes the whole area or just the downtown area.

[SurekRZA]

San Francisco is much more influential in the world when it comes to business and politics. Remember, San Francisco is a Beta World City even though its population does not reach 800,000. San Diego is just more appealing to most individuals to live in while San Francisco appeals mostly visitors.

[mnmsevii]

San Diego is a place that more find appealing to live whereas SF is a place where more people find appealing to visit?.. What do you base that on? For sure SF receives a substantial amount of tourist as compared to SD, but there are a great many people who not only live in the SF Bay Area, there are many more who consider moving there. Truth be told, as it stands, SF has not only jobs that pay more, but more jobs in general. Keeping that in mind wouldn't more people consider moving to SF? Sorry I'm just speculating here since I can't read people's minds to know enough of whether they are considering this that and the other in terms of SF v SD.

[NYSD1995]

It's better to compare the SF bay area to the SD County metro than to compare SD City to SF City. While SF City is dense, it is really only a city of about 750k. SD City (the core metro, not counting the annexes) is probably of similar population. Also, SD City includes wholly suburban areas like Allied Gardens or Clairemont which really don't have an analog in SF. The City of SF is definitely a tourist city, in fact tourism is the #1 industry there. There is very little industrial left in SF and it's commercial districts are really not all that much bigger than San Diego's.

Now, as to to the SF vs SD metro, SF is bigger, has a bigger commercial base, a bigger industrial base, a substantial military presence, a major container port, the tech industry etc... SF is bigger and more influential than SD in that regard. LA, in comparison, dwarfs both.

[jeevcy]

Originally Posted by Sassberto

The City of SF is definitely a tourist city, in fact tourism is the #1 industry there. There is very little industrial left in SF and it's commercial districts are really not all that much bigger than San Diego's.

Huh? Isn't SF's Montgomery St known as the Wall Street of the West with all the Financial companies?

[NYSD1995]

Originally Posted by jeevcy

Huh? Isn't SF's Montgomery St known as the Wall Street of the West with all the Financial companies?

Traditionally yes, but LA has taken a lot of that away from SF.