Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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: more urban city?
LA 87 53.70%
Philly 75 46.30%
Voters: 162. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-24-2011, 04:25 AM
 
Location: Metro Phoenix
11,039 posts, read 16,854,315 times
Reputation: 12950

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Nope.

We can brag about all the superiority we think we have(blah blah blah) but when it comes to actual size and scope, LA blows us out of the water.

So you have your points, but this isnt one of them. LA is a monster of a megacity whose developed land mass is only outsized, if at all, by either New York and/or Tokyo.

We're talking 18 Million people in the developed world spread out half almost way to Arizona and Nevada yo.
Nevermind the fact that LA has multiple downtown cores, some of which actually go on for miles (Wilshire Boulevard, for example). More or less every journal or body concerned with international rankings of cities lists LA as a megacity/megalopolis. The reason for this is that LA is, indeed, a megacity, in every possible sense of the word, whether someone likes it or not, or thinks it's a positive or negative.

To fully grasp how LA's downtown infrastructure(s) work and how they factor into peoples' lives, one really does have to spend time here.

I suppose that, to an extent, one can argue that the multiple downtown cores are a result of LA's storied sprawl and poor public transit: shopping, restuarant, nightlife cores started and expanded all over greater Los Angeles to reflect the fact that someone who lives in West LA, Marina Del Rey, Santa Monica, Venice, or Mar Vista would have an easier time of getting to Santa Monica than Hollywood for nightlife. Consequently, there are clusters of nightlife in Santa Monica (Promenade, Ocean, and smaller clusters up and down Santa Monica Blvd), as well as multipe office towers and multistory apartment complexes that house thousands of people per block.

One neighborhood in LA has more nightlife, shopping, and dining options than many medium-sized US cities have in their downtown cores.

 
Old 09-24-2011, 08:50 AM
 
Location: NYC/PHiLLY
857 posts, read 1,365,182 times
Reputation: 455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rah View Post
In other words, you don't like the facts and so choose to dismiss 18Montclairs well-put-together maps. He puts more effort into posting actual facts, with sources, in this forum than 90% of the other posters, yet all half of you guys do is complain when he does it because the truth often doesn't fit your preconceived ideas. In short, grow up.
Hey rah, Im not sure if you caught my question I asked..but its at the top of pg. 9 thanks in advance buddy!
 
Old 09-24-2011, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Center City
7,528 posts, read 10,252,903 times
Reputation: 11023
Quote:
Originally Posted by rah View Post
In other words, you don't like the facts and so choose to dismiss 18Montclairs well-put-together maps. He puts more effort into posting actual facts, with sources, in this forum than 90% of the other posters, yet all half of you guys do is complain when he does it because the truth often doesn't fit your preconceived ideas. In short, grow up.
No. There are maps, which are fact. Then there are suppositions drawn from those maps, which are subject to individual interpretation (such as concluding they definitively confirm one city is more "urban" than another).

As to how you chose to conclude your post, I can assure you I am quite grown up. Feel free to continue to insert snideness into your posts, if you feel it adds weight. Including such juvenilia only renders them easier to ignore, and I am not inclined to swallow such bait in any future such posts where you elect to use it. So flail away if you feel you must - your choice.

(BTW: I've already given my opinion on this topic in earlier this thread, along with my rationale for it and have no desire to re-phrase it a dozen different ways.)

Last edited by Pine to Vine; 09-24-2011 at 10:09 AM..
 
Old 09-24-2011, 03:43 PM
vop
 
62 posts, read 104,145 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJPhilliesPhan View Post
Your overgrown suburb is far from being "one of the largest metropolises in the world". Even with the help of the immigrants from South of the Border that LA recieves daily.

The Most Populated Cities of the World. World Megacities - Nations Online Project
the proof is in the pudding
World's Largest Urban Areas [rank: 1-1000]
 
Old 09-24-2011, 04:11 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,335 posts, read 1,661,088 times
Reputation: 344
What a fascinating list that is, who could have known that Baltimore would rank between Chicago and San Francisco, or that Philadelphia would not make the list until after Buffalo, NY. How funny is that? Please go find an accurate, credible list. You don't want to embarrass yourself, do you?

The numbers themselves are revealing, if the people who made that list had not screwed up their spreadsheet, Philly would be between Boston and Detroit at #43 on that list. Philly Urban Area population = 6,188,400

Quote:
Originally Posted by vop View Post
the proof is in the pudding
World's Largest Urban Areas [rank: 1-1000]
 
Old 09-24-2011, 04:31 PM
 
Location: NY-NJ-Philly looks down at SF and laughs at the hippies
1,144 posts, read 1,295,468 times
Reputation: 432
In my eyes the very first question that should be asked when judging two cities on urbanity is transit.

Is Philadelphia livable without a car? Yes
Is LA livable without a car? No

This is all I need to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vop View Post
the proof is in the pudding
World's Largest Urban Areas [rank: 1-1000]
The metro population of LA is far from impressive because it covers so many square miles.....33,000 to be exact.
 
Old 09-24-2011, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia,New Jersey, NYC!
6,963 posts, read 20,530,843 times
Reputation: 2737
^^ you need a car
 
Old 09-24-2011, 05:01 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,335 posts, read 1,661,088 times
Reputation: 344
That's 33 Rhode Islands!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gateway Region View Post
In my eyes the very first question that should be asked when judging two cities on urbanity is transit.

Is Philadelphia livable without a car? Yes
Is LA livable without a car? No

This is all I need to know.



The metro population of LA is far from impressive because it covers so many square miles.....33,000 to be exact.
 
Old 09-24-2011, 05:06 PM
 
Location: Metro Phoenix
11,039 posts, read 16,854,315 times
Reputation: 12950
Quote:
Originally Posted by john_starks View Post
^^ you need a car
Well, when I lived in Venice and worked in Santa Monica, I actually didn't. I lived exactly 1.1 miles door-to-door, and most of my walking commute was on the sand There was a supermarket at the end of my street, there were all manner of restaurants within easy walking distance... it was entirely possible and easy. If anything, it was easier than having to cross traffic on Lincoln and risk getting nailed by the overzealous LAPD.

Truth be told, there were stretches of a month or two where I only took my car out to race in the canyons to the North.

I have friends who live in LA and commute via bike, foot, or use public transit. The fact of the matter is that, more often than not, the cost of car ownership ends up being a wash for paying to live as close to work as possible here in LA. If you can ditch your car and are willing to use zipcar for bigger shopping trips and just walk or bike otherwise, you will save hundreds of dollars per month that can go towards renting a place closer to work.

I live and work in Beverly Hills and just like my car. I could get along OK without it, but, I'm not about getting along "OK"
 
Old 09-24-2011, 05:27 PM
 
Location: Center City
7,528 posts, read 10,252,903 times
Reputation: 11023
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k View Post
I have friends who live in LA and commute via bike, foot, or use public transit.
Of course. It is just that use of PT is considerably more common in Philly (List of U.S. cities with high transit ridership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia):

>Philly: No. 6 at 26.4%
>LA: No. 24 at 10.9%
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.


Closed Thread


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 > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top