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.
Population: San Jose, no question about that: 1,046,000 compared to 700,000 Vancouver
Economy: San Jose- high tech capital of the world. No dispute here
Weather: San Jose- of course!
Downtown: San Jose- at least it's not an unattractive city center like Vancouver's, berated by Mercer
Shopping: San Jose- all the way!
Scenery: tie
San Jose got this covered- just about every metric
Population
You know Vancouver is bigger and much more dense.
Vancouver ...city only 631,000 but in just 44 square miles.
San Jose ....city 1,046,000 but in a much larger area of 179 square miles.
Population: San Jose, no question about that: 1,046,000 compared to 700,000 Vancouver
Oh give me a break - the other criteria you can justify to a degree esp economy and weather but this one makes ZERO sense. Vancouver city without going into details is far more dense and compact as a city. As in most cases with U.S cities the population is always BLOATED given how sprawled out with super low density suburban exurban stuff that in no real way represents a 'city' unless you consider farms and low density single family housing development counts as a 'city' - S.F is an outlier in the bay area because it is a substantial, urban and dense city - more so than Vancouver but this vs is just San Jose vs Vancouver.
Greater Vancouver is over 2.5 million people but the city itself is 700K in a much more dense and compact real city than San Jose. San Jose has more people in its city by an arbitrary boundary. That 1 million is probably spread over almost the same land area as Greater Vancouver population 2.5 million itself.
Sure - if you go out to the Bay area than yeah - much more populated than Vancouver but San Jose is VERY distinct and separated from S.F.. Vancouver as a densely populated real city is far more 'city' than San Jose. I haven't researched but what area is Vancouver's 700K vs the 1 million for San Jose. Walking in the core of each isn't even close - Vancouver you feel like you are in a substantial, urban and dense 'city' - San Jose - umm not really lol...
If this thread was S.F vs Vancouver based on your criteria i'd give it to S.F.. For certain though, on the whole and as an urban city - Vancouver is closer to S.F than San Jose ever will be and you have to know that........
Oh give me a break - the other criteria you can justify to a degree esp economy and weather but this one makes ZERO sense. Vancouver city without going into details is far more dense and compact as a city. As in most cases with U.S cities the population is always BLOATED given how sprawled out with super low density suburban exurban stuff that in no real way represents a 'city' unless you consider farms and low density single family housing development counts as a 'city' - S.F is an outlier in the bay area because it is a substantial, urban and dense city - more so than Vancouver but this vs is just San Jose vs Vancouver.
Greater Vancouver is over 2.5 million people but the city itself is 700K in a much more dense and compact real city than San Jose. San Jose has more people in its city by an arbitrary boundary. That 1 million is probably spread over almost the same land area as Greater Vancouver population 2.5 million itself.
Sure - if you go out to the Bay area than yeah - much more populated than Vancouver but San Jose is VERY distinct and separated from S.F.. Vancouver as a densely populated real city is far more 'city' than San Jose. I haven't researched but what area is Vancouver's 700K vs the 1 million for San Jose. Walking in the core of each isn't even close - Vancouver you feel like you are in a substantial, urban and dense 'city' - San Jose - umm not really lol...
If this thread was S.F vs Vancouver based on your criteria i'd give it to S.F.. For certain though, on the whole and as an urban city - Vancouver is closer to S.F than San Jose ever will be and you have to know that........
San Jose is a real city you can get: large population, better downtown than Vancouver's, world class international airport, Capital of Silicon Valley, high tech capital of the world, world class shopping and wonderful arena/stadiums. It actually has more distinct diverse neighborhoods than Vancouver, looking at Little Saigon that actually make you think you're in Saigon.
San Jose is a real city you can get: large population, better downtown than Vancouver's, world class international airport, Capital of Silicon Valley, high tech capital of the world, world class shopping and wonderful arena/stadiums. It actually has more distinct diverse neighborhoods than Vancouver, looking at Little Saigon that actually make you think you're in Saigon.
Little Saigon....that’s nothing....
Go to Richmond, BC area of Metro Vancouver ....you’ll think you are in China (say it like Trump).
Now to be fair, Vancouver has a neighbourhood, of a few blocks downtown that isn't as pretty. Most cities do. It's near the water https://bit.ly/2r5c1sl”
You don’t see anything like that in any of the cities of Australia. There used to be many homeless people concentred in a particular area of Sydney but it wasn’t as bad as that pic and it doesn’t exist anymore. It is just odd that for a city to be considered on the top three of “most liveable cities” in the world has a terrible homeless issue and such a depressing place.
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.
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.
San Jose is a real city you can get: large population, better downtown than Vancouver's, world class international airport, Capital of Silicon Valley, high tech capital of the world, world class shopping and wonderful arena/stadiums. It actually has more distinct diverse neighborhoods than Vancouver, looking at Little Saigon that actually make you think you're in Saigon.
San Jose's downtown is not better. It lacks so many things that Vancouver offers.
Little Saigon is nothing compared to Richmond BC. Major Chinese malls, hundreds of authentic restaurants, and a population that is now majority Chinese.
Metro SJ: 7 million! That was just Santa Clara county.
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by the topper
San Jose is a real city you can get: large population, better downtown than Vancouver's, world class international airport, Capital of Silicon Valley, high tech capital of the world, world class shopping and wonderful arena/stadiums. It actually has more distinct diverse neighborhoods than Vancouver, looking at Little Saigon that actually make you think you're in Saigon.
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.
Last edited by fusion2; 04-28-2018 at 12:57 PM..
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.
).
