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.
For me it was a close race between Frankfurt and Joburg. Both are major transportation hubs with an international feel.
I give Frankfurt the edge however due to the natural landscape. Parts of Hesse look very similar to northern Georgia. Also, both cities have been substantially rebuilt following war. Both are major business cities for their respective continents. Atlanta is slowly developing a more lively core that may rival the Zeil eventually. It may already surpass it in some aspects.
Joburg's surrounding landscape is reminiscent of parts of California. Sandton reminded me of Buckhead. Although Atlanta can be dangerous it's not on the same level as Joburg I believe.
In that regard Sydney and Toronto would be most similar for non-US cities. They both have a lot of suburban sprawl. Of course their CDB's are very urban, but their suburbs are pretty spread out. Sydney especially is more car centric than rail.
I wouldn't say Sydney is necessarily more car centric. My guess is that Sydney's suburbs are on average less car centric than an average North American suburb in fact. There's less dependence on 'strip malls' and much less space given to surface parking lots, and commercial and retail areas are typically built around pedestrianised areas within walking distance of a train station or a transit hub. A little like a sprawlier, less populated London in this regard I suppose.
However I think it would be Sydney's underdeveloped transport system and its lack of density, both relative to European and Asian cities, which explains why it has a much higher dependence on cars than cities in those continents. Unfortunately its road infrastructure is not much better too. A few new freeways coming online over the next few years but the network is still quite underdeveloped compared with North America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2
Toronto's CBD is probably substantially larger than either Atlanta or Sydney (though Sydney's is larger than Atlanta). Its suburban sprawl is more dense as well and is more highrise in nature. Metro Toronto does have sprawl no doubt, but it also has a lot of higher density highrise clusters that are pretty prevalent. In turn - Sydney is more vertical and dense than Atlanta.
On a global scale when you have behemoths like Tokyo or Barcelona, the difference in densities between those cities you mentioned I'd say would be negligible. Besides, don't underestimate the rate at which Sydney's densifying. Last time I checked, it's building even more than Toronto, it seems :P
Regardless Sydney and Toronto would be my pick of the cities on the list. Not sure about Johannesburg?
Last edited by ciTydude123; 03-10-2018 at 11:53 AM..
To put it in perspective if sydney was in the US it would have the second busiest public transport network in the country after New York. About 2 million trips on train and busses and fairies are taken each day.
A lot of those trips are just legs of the one commute though. Sydney's train, bus and ferry networks are pretty well connected, and most folk seem to have at least one connection on their daily commute. The number of actual trips, work to home or return, is likely to be only a fraction of the 2 million, perhaps 1/2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielsa1775
Sydney is also more a collection of cities than anything. It has places like Bankstown which is 20km from the centre. Its home to 350, 000 people at an average of 3200 per square km. (8100 per square mile). Which makes it slightly denser than Seattle.
Exactly. Parramatta and North Sydney are fair sized CBDs in their own right. Parramatta was actually founded as NSW's second city, only later to be joined up in the expanding urban sprawl. North Sydney was in reality almost another city until the Harbour Bridge was opened in the 1930s.
Atlanta, as an inland local capital with a strong university and arts scene, that sprawls considerably, has a significant light rail system, and is in a state that is conservative and often at odds with it politically, is like a larger, warmer Edmonton. I think that that is the most similar international comparison.
A lot of those trips are just legs of the one commute though. Sydney's train, bus and ferry networks are pretty well connected, and most folk seem to have at least one connection on their daily commute. The number of actual trips, work to home or return, is likely to be only a fraction of the 2 million, perhaps 1/2.
The bus to train model is how most of the worlds transport systems work. You could say the same thing about virtually any city with a public transport system in the world.
Except Brisbane of course where the state owned trains and council owned bus/ferry network seem to compete against each other on the same routes.
Last edited by danielsa1775; 03-10-2018 at 07:03 PM..
On a global scale when you have behemoths like Tokyo or Barcelona, the difference in densities between those cities you mentioned I'd say would be negligible. Besides, don't underestimate the rate at which Sydney's densifying. Last time I checked, it's building even more than Toronto, it seems :P
Regardless Sydney and Toronto would be my pick of the cities on the list. Not sure about Johannesburg?
Well sure - scale is always important but not every city on the list is Tokyo or Barcelona either... BCN isn't really a behemoth either - it is dense i'll give it that but it isn't a particularly large urban area. For what it is it is simply a compact and dense city. As for Sydney building more than Toronto i'd like to see something more substantive from you on that claim. I'll offer the following as something preliminary. Scroll down to the bottom of each.
Granted these sources only count greater than 150m and may not be 'definitive' but i'm seeing a lot more scrapers U/C and approved in Toronto over Sydney. Please don't even bother mentioning less than 150m - Toronto builds those things left, right and centre all over.
All said, Sydney is an impressive city to me. I think it has more in common with Toronto in general characteristics (minus obviously beaches, geography weather), growth and dev, cosmopolitan, transit, demographics and overall density than Atlanta.
Thankfully no where in Italy or Europe for that matter is remotely as boring and bland as Atlanta. Atlanta is a conservative city with hard right wing suburbs in a crazy gun loving state where you are allowed to carry guns in airports and bars. Think about that Europe, and then think about how awful life is for us here in the more rational liberal northern cities of the US to be stuck in a nation with a place like Atlanta and Georgia. I hope and pray for the day the US breaks apart into smaller nations and I can be free of the people from Georgia and Atlanta.
Thankfully no where in Italy or Europe for that matter is remotely as boring and bland as Atlanta. Atlanta is a conservative city with hard right wing suburbs in a crazy gun loving state where you are allowed to carry guns in airports and bars. Think about that Europe, and then think about how awful life is for us here in the more rational liberal northern cities of the US to be stuck in a nation with a place like Atlanta and Georgia. I hope and pray for the day the US breaks apart into smaller nations and I can be free of the people from Georgia and Atlanta.
Whoa! TSA will allow one to carry a gun in the restricted area. I can see maybe before security but after security?
Well sure - scale is always important but not every city on the list is Tokyo or Barcelona either... BCN isn't really a behemoth either - it is dense i'll give it that but it isn't a particularly large urban area. For what it is it is simply a compact and dense city. As for Sydney building more than Toronto i'd like to see something more substantive from you on that claim. I'll offer the following as something preliminary. Scroll down to the bottom of each.
Granted these sources only count greater than 150m and may not be 'definitive' but i'm seeing a lot more scrapers U/C and approved in Toronto over Sydney. Please don't even bother mentioning less than 150m - Toronto builds those things left, right and centre all over.
All said, Sydney is an impressive city to me. I think it has more in common with Toronto in general characteristics (minus obviously beaches, geography weather), growth and dev, cosmopolitan, transit, demographics and overall density than Atlanta.
Sydney has very strict building height codes due to the proximity of its airport to the city. In Brisbane we have a strict limit of 274m, i believe sydney is even lower.
Melbourne and the gold coast, which are not so constrained by the proximity of the airports ti the city are the tallest cities in Australia as far as building heights go.
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.
