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.
hmm
different criteria will give different rankings.
for mass transit: DC, Boston, SF, Philly, LA
dowtowns: Philly, Boston, SF, DC, LA
walkable: SF, Boston, Philly, DC, LA (with LA behind)
Density: LA, SF, Boston / Philly, DC
Density (always odd how this pops up since it's only relevant on a per city basis which are not equal):
City Level
1. San Fran
2. Boston
3. Philly
4. DC
5. LA
Metro Level
1. Los Angeles
2. San Fran
3. Philly
4. DC
5. Boston
Walkable:
1. Boston
2. San Fran
3. DC
4. Philly
5. LA
Downtown:
1. Philly
2. Boston
3. San Fran
4. Los Angeles
5. DC
This mostly makes a lot of sense to me, on the cities themselves I am honestly surprised that DC and LA are recieving as many votes, i would have assumed the race would have been between Philly/Boston/SF on city urbanity
on the Metro - likely LA would be first by shear size and continuity of semi dense development
I would probably say on metro that Boston and Philly would likely be the bottom two of these 5 on metro but would probably think they would be at the top on the city itself
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,468 posts, read 14,901,686 times
Reputation: 7263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infamous Past
You're seriously saying LA has a better downtown than DC? I hope you know we're talking about LA in California...
Yes, I am saying this (odd you would point this out given you too rated LA above DC).
To me Downtown DC (just Downtown), is rather pretty blah. Just businesses and goverment offices. I understand they've tried to make it more of an entertainment destination lately, but DC has far more notable neighborhoods surrounding Downtown than Downtown itself.
LA on the other hand has seen a vast improvement in it's Downtown in the last few years. Most notably with LA Live which was quite impressive.
Yes, I am saying this (odd you would point this out given you too rated LA above DC).
To me Downtown DC (just Downtown), is rather pretty blah. Just businesses and goverment offices. I understand they've tried to make it more of an entertainment destination lately, but DC has far more notable neighborhoods surrounding Downtown than Downtown itself.
LA on the other hand has seen a vast improvement in it's Downtown in the last few years. Most notably with LA Live which was quite impressive.
Look, I am from LA, spent the first 22 years of my life in LA. And I do think its more urban than Philly, Boston, DC but less than SF. But downtown is the worst argument there is for LA. Your Atlanta has a better downtown than LA for its size. For the 2nd largest city in the nation LA does a pitiful job using its downtown. Only 2.5% of its population interacts with downtown on a daily basis versus 18% for DC.
LA Live? It was a failure but it tried to bring back attention to downtown. None of it has worked. So don't waste your time trying to convince anyone LA has a better downtown than DC, which is easily top 8 in downtowns.
I will speak for LA and say that it is more urban in a larger area. In its metro and urban area (its the densest UA in the nation) LA easily outpaces everyone else. But to say LA has a comparable downtown to any of the other 4 cities is beyond idiotic.
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.