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.
The bay bridge to the east bay is more than a couple miles...It's 5.8 miles from on ramp to off ramp and DT SF to DT Oakland is 10 miles or 12 to Berkeley...
It's absolutely nothing like Manhattan's relation to Brooklyn or Queens.
The surrounding of water is what creates SF's intimate atmosphere and beautiful vistas in every direction... you can't have it both ways.
In addition there is relatively no development at all going north, but you run into a giant national park in the Marin Headlands.
It may be 2050 which would about the current growth rate extrapolated - but who knows that is a long way off
would need to track down the other links
Also there is a whole thread with calculations of comaprative footprint to SF
NYC, LA, Chicago, and Philly all fit more into the central footprint equivalent of SF based on the census data
I dont disagree with your pooints on commercial or hotels, why to me in the Core SF gives off a slightly larger feel
and are you suggesting SF has more industrial and port space, let alone airpoirt space
Also the point on this was more in that there is a lot of space in Philly that isnt developed, same with other cities agree, just see less in SF including airports, ports, parks, efineries, abandoned 100 yo industrial wastelands etc.
I like SF just find some comments to be over the the top. I think SF gives off a larger feel in the direct core - Philly probably has the larger urban footprint (again depending on where you set your markers)
also you didnt even include NE Philadelphia airport another 1,250 acres, the ports, refineries etc.
But again this really wasnt the point to begin with
Last edited by kidphilly; 10-23-2013 at 10:09 AM..
I thought about this some more.. and it's pretty easy to gauge how big a city feels by walking. You can walk clear through the bustling areas of SF rather quickly even on a 1 day visit, so I'm not sure why it should be judged on a 10-20 sq mile core or whatever. That just means SF is busier, which it is, not the biggest feeling city. Again, the only way I see SF would feel like the bigger city is if you were a tourist and just never left 10-20 blocks from your hotel downtown. For instance in Chicago one could walk or bike from the South Loop all the way to Rogers Park (Which many people do, especially biking) and be in an area of constant urban development for around 15 miles. That gives the city a "big" feel... b/c it is.
Does San Francisco have anything like Northwest Philadelphia in the city limits?
-about 30 sq miles of very leafy and low density neighborhoods comprised of majority Single Family Home and Twins with nice sized yards. Each neighborhood functions as it's own small town with a downtown area surrounded by mainly residential streets-Chestnut Hill, East and West Mount Airy, West Germantown, East Falls, Roxborough/Andorra. Manayunk, Cedarbrook and East Germantown are nearly all rowhomes though. There are also three commuter rail lines.
I'm just saying density isn't everything. Cities don't really get more structurally dense than Philly in the rest of the city -Center City, North, South, West, Southwest, Northeast-but the neighborhoods in Northwest Philadelphia are a very beautiful way to enjoy the accessibilty and convenience of the city with more space and nature.
I think the one detriment to Philly's actual numbers are the slums. They bring the density numbers down, but they still have the bare bones of urbanity (Structural density). On the good side, the infrastructure makes redevelopment and re-densification much easier. Philly got it bad, but nowhere near as bad as Detroit, or even parts of the Southside of Chicago: http://goo.gl/maps/EVf89
The bay bridge to the east bay is more than a couple miles...It's 5.8 miles from on ramp to off ramp and DT SF to DT Oakland is 10 miles or 12 to Berkeley...
It's absolutely nothing like Manhattan's relation to Brooklyn or Queens.
The surrounding of water is what creates SF's intimate atmosphere and beautiful vistas in every direction... you can't have it both ways.
In addition there is relatively no development at all going north, but you run into a giant national park in the Marin Headlands.
I quoted 4 miles (2 spans of a couple miles each is what I said in addition to that), so I wasn't vastly underestimating distance. Also DT Oakland to DT Berkeley is only 4-5 miles tops, by Google Maps (have you been?) Telegraph Ave and other streets are major commercial lined streets that essentially link the two cities so that there is no "break".
After having made the point that distance is the big difference here, I stressed that Oakland's RELATIONSHIP to San Francisco mirrors Brooklyn's RELATIONSHIP to Manhattan. I never said they "look" the same. Never said Oakland's the same size or density. Oakland functions much like Brooklyn, and I've never met anyone who doesn't acknowledge that. The comparison is made in any major publication all the time. Oakland is where hipsters go and where people priced out of SF go. It has a demographic that's actually more similar to Brooklyn than SF (more African Americans for instance). It's connected to "The City" (SF being the other city in America where that term is used) by a bridge (12 lanes) carrying 280,000 cars a day and 4 subway routes carrying 400,000+ riders a day, similar to the way Brooklyn in connected to Manhattan by bridges and tunnels. In fact, SF is the only other city beside New York (Manhattan) where the term "Bridge & Tunnel" is used to describe lower class or suburban/visitor people. I could go on - I'm not inventing these similarities.
Oakland could in fact have a shorter bridge like the Brooklyn Bridge, and be "closer" to SF, and it would still be the same as it is today and function the same way - a refuge from SF's exorbitant prices and other things that tend to push people out of "The City".
Overall, I like millions of other Americans can easily draw the same comparisons between Oakland and Brooklyn, distance to their main cities obviously not being one of them (though they are both separated by water and would likely otherwise just be connected).
Does San Francisco have anything like Northwest Philadelphia in the city limits?
-about 30 sq miles of very leafy and low density neighborhoods comprised of majority Single Family Home and Twins with nice sized yards. Each neighborhood functions as it's own small town with a downtown area surrounded by mainly residential streets-Chestnut Hill, East and West Mount Airy, West Germantown, East Falls, Roxborough/Andorra. Manayunk, Cedarbrook and East Germantown are nearly all rowhomes.
I'm just saying density isn't everything. Cities don't really get more structurally dense than Philly in the rest of the city -North, South, West, Southwest, Northeast-but the neighborhoods in Northwest Philadelphia are a very beautiful way to enjoy the accessibilty of the city with more space and nature.
Yeah, Philadephia has tons of homes on massively sized lots, many areas look downright rural.
The home of the Chinese Consul General in Monterey Heights, just shy of 1 acre, most of which is steep hillside. I also know of a home in Pacific Heights that takes up half a city block, but generally even in SFs less dense areas, lots tend to be smaller than similar areas in other cities.
Yeah, Philadephia has tons of homes on massively sized lots, many areas look downright rural.
This is by far the largest residential lot in SF:
The home of the Chinese Consul General in Monterey Heights, just shy of 1 acre, most of which is steep hillside. I also know of a home in Pacific Heights that takes up half a city block, but generally even in SFs less dense areas, lots tend to be smaller than similar areas in other cities.
yes and no - NW Philly - say Chestnut hill would be the distance of the other side of GGB in the relative sense - but definately some large lot mansions there. A great main street but feels less city to me personally - great area though
not many large lot in closer though - this one always felt out of place to me however
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.
