U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [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)
View Poll Results: San Jose vs Vancouver: which is a better city?
Vancouver 31 86.11%
San Jose 5 13.89%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-28-2018, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Vancouver
11,380 posts, read 7,843,684 times
Reputation: 6452

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
And that's the mic drop
Went for a walk yesterday. No destination in mind, just wandered a few blocks from home. I live downtown.

This is a downtown neighbourhood which is not atypical of many in Vancouver. Again, the away from the water comment is quite bizarre.



One of the many mini-parks designed to calm traffic in residential areas.





Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-28-2018, 07:05 PM
 
137 posts, read 49,906 times
Reputation: 121
[quote=Natnasci;51743609]
Quote:
Originally Posted by usuariodeldia View Post

Re-read my post and see the link I gave to that neighbourhood.

Vancouver unsheltered homeless population was 539 persons. Mostly concentrated in that neighbourhood. The count done within the boundaries of Vancouver city's population of 631,000.

http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/homele...016-report.pdf

Within the city of Sydney's boundaries, the homeless count was 516 people, with a population of 208,000.

Homelessness - City of Sydney

Metro areas of course will change these numbers, but the point is Vancouver's homeless population is very concentrated and between two tourists spots, Gastown and Chinatown, so easily seen by all.
It says 516 people but it also says 60% sleep in rough places (unsheltered), 23% stay in temporary and crisis accomodation while in Vancouver there are 539 unsheltered homeless and concentred in one particular place which makes this issue worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:06 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,138 posts, read 21,401,324 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by the topper View Post
Metro SJ: 7 million! That was just Santa Clara county.
Uh...that's the entire Bay Area dude, not San Jose. The San Jose metro is Santa Clara County and adjacent areas of San Mateo and far southern Alameda Counties. San Jose, while the third largest city in California and largest in the Bay Area, like it or not, still exist in San Francisco's shadow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:13 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,138 posts, read 21,401,324 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci View Post
Went for a walk yesterday. No destination in mind, just wandered a few blocks from home. I live downtown.

This is a downtown neighbourhood which is not atypical of many in Vancouver. Again, the away from the water comment is quite bizarre.



One of the many mini-parks designed to calm traffic in residential areas.




Beautiful. You are so lucky to live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:30 PM
 
2,784 posts, read 1,470,708 times
Reputation: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
Lol of course you have to leverage S.F to beat out Vancouver. Why didn't you just create the thread as Greater Vancouver vs Bay Area then?



San Jose is alright but it isn't dense enough to hang with Vancouver. The 1 million in the city you quote Is over 180 sq miles the 700K people in the city of Vancouver are in 44 sq miles.... Think about that.. Vancouver is 2.5X as dense and that matters. It matters when you are walking in the core and it matters in terms of availability of things to do and proximity.

city population is also arbitrary but the density of an urban core is not. Vancouver doesn't just stop on the borders 44 sq miles and there are other cities contiguous with it but the city of Vancouver is a good measuring stick of a compact yet dense and urban core. S.F is the part of the Bay Area that is more equivalent to the urban density of Vancouver, not San Jose.. Heck even S.F is technically a 'smaller city' than San Jose. SF is 884K in 48 sq miles... Again, a snapshot of a compact yet dense urban core. When people visit San Francisco from around the world - what makes its mark is that 884K in 48 sq miles - not Oakland!

Which of the following are more city like - well... Let's see here

SF 884K in 48 sq miles
Van 700K in 44 sq miles

And lookiehere - the outlier by far San Jose with 1 million in 180 Sq Miles.... Have you ever done those tests where you look at a pattern to see which one is the most 'unlike' - kinda reminds me of that eh? The only thing I would say to try and be more fair to SJ is perhaps if you cut out a lot of the fat in San Jose's suburban sprawl it may be more compact and dense. If you capture the urban core of SJ to 44-48 sq miles and equivalent area to S.F and Van, I doubt it would be as populated or dense as either S.F or Vancouver city proper's because the nature of a city like SJ is more sprawl vs the likes of S.F and Van. You are pitting your city against one of the most dense and urban on the continent btw.
You fail to understand that Coyote Valley, which is in SJ, is all farmland. So the actual urban area of SJ is about 90 sq. miles, meaning it's much more dense than you would believe. The rest of non development area is bay
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:36 PM
 
2,784 posts, read 1,470,708 times
Reputation: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci View Post
San Jose's downtown is not better. It lacks so many things that Vancouver offers.

As for the airport.

YVR ranked best airport in North America for ninth straight year

Vancouver doesn't lack arenas or stadiums. We have two stadiums right downtown.

https://www.bcplace.com/the-stadium/the-roof

https://bit.ly/2r7UUFq

Little Saigon is nothing compared to Richmond BC. Major Chinese malls, hundreds of authentic restaurants, and a population that is now majority Chinese.

Chinese reach majority in Richmond

The East Indian population is large with two Vaishakh Parades in the area. Here's Vancouver's.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2knx33eW6U

Diversity that works so it makes world news.

Highway to Heaven - BBC News

...but keep going. LOL
Yes, Downtown SJ is way better. What does Downtown SJ lack? water? then yeah. It has Guadalupe river park with trails just like your bay park trails.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 08:37 PM
 
2,784 posts, read 1,470,708 times
Reputation: 980
San Jose also has Little Portugal, Japantown, Little Italy and Little India.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 10:19 PM
 
Location: Toronto
12,581 posts, read 10,444,139 times
Reputation: 3716
Quote:
Originally Posted by the topper View Post
You fail to understand that Coyote Valley, which is in SJ, is all farmland. So the actual urban area of SJ is about 90 sq. miles, meaning it's much more dense than you would believe. The rest of non development area is bay
Well i'll take your word for it that the urban area is 90 Sq miles but that is still quite a bit less dense than either Vancouver or S.F and quite frankly, it shows.

The point about the Coyote Valley demonstrates very nicely what I've been saying in these forums - low density farmlands don't make a city feel like a city - they may be in a metro statistic, they may be part of the makeup of a MSA or CSA but they are not at all urban.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2018, 11:34 PM
 
2,784 posts, read 1,470,708 times
Reputation: 980
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
Well i'll take your word for it that the urban area is 90 Sq miles but that is still quite a bit less dense than either Vancouver or S.F and quite frankly, it shows.

The point about the Coyote Valley demonstrates very nicely what I've been saying in these forums - low density farmlands don't make a city feel like a city - they may be in a metro statistic, they may be part of the makeup of a MSA or CSA but they are not at all urban.
Most of the urban part of city is fairly dense. Coyote Valley is a beautiful open space with wilderness and farmlands. There's a cute cluster of homes and a neighborhood in the middle of rural valley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2018, 08:35 AM
 
Location: Toronto
12,581 posts, read 10,444,139 times
Reputation: 3716
Quote:
Originally Posted by the topper View Post
Most of the urban part of city is fairly dense. Coyote Valley is a beautiful open space with wilderness and farmlands. There's a cute cluster of homes and a neighborhood in the middle of rural valley.
I'm not saying Coyote Valley isn't beautiful. Actually San Jose isn't an ugly city and the surrounding environs are actually quite nice. I just find it odd that a city limits would include so much low to possibly no density infill as part of its city limits.
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 > World Forums > World
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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