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.
San Antonio is a typical Sunbelt city. It isn't really unique. What is "different" about SA?
New Orleans is definitely unique, in ways good and bad.
So it comes down to whether you want a typical U.S. city, or perhaps the least typical U.S. city.
San Antonio may be many things (bad or good) but a typical U.S. city (sunbelt or otherwise) it is not IMHO.
The only thing typical US there IMO is chin restaurants and/or strip-malls outside of downtown.
But if that is the measure then I'm sure NO would have to classified as pretty typical US, too.
With it's architecture alone I would argue that it stands out from the usual "typical" US city, just like NO actually does.
San Antonio may be many things (bad or good) but a typical U.S. city (sunbelt or otherwise) it is not IMHO.
The only thing typical US there IMO is chin restaurants and/or strip-malls outside of downtown.
But if that is the measure then I'm sure NO would have to classified as pretty typical US, too.
With it's architecture alone I would argue that it stands out from the usual "typical" US city, just like NO actually does.
What is unique about SA? Could you name something? To me it seems to be a very typical U.S. city. Very sprawly, small downtown, small urban core, very new, lots of freeways, tract homes, malls, etc.
And architecture? Not seeing that, at all. How does SA have any different architecture from other Sunbelt cities?
What is unique about SA? Could you name something? To me it seems to be a very typical U.S. city. Very sprawly, small downtown, small urban core, very new, lots of freeways, tract homes, malls, etc.
And architecture? Not seeing that, at all. How does SA have any different architecture from other Sunbelt cities?
Well then by your own standards would New Orleans for the most part be just a typical US/sunbelt city as well?
Also are you sure we both are talking about the same San Antonio, because how can you call San Antonio "very new" ????
Anyway.
I'm no expert on the matter and haven't seen every city (sunbelt city) in the US but to me San Antonio with it's age and heritage and architecture (colonial Spanish influenced) does come across different as say Atlanta or Charlotte for example, which to me would be cities which fit more in a description of typical US (sunbelt) city.
Well then by your own standards would New Orleans for the most part be just a typical US/sunbelt city as well?
Not really. What other Sunbelt city looks or feels like New Orleans? Could you name one? What city has similar architecture, accent, urban streetscape, attractions, etc.?
New Orleans is arguably the most unique city in the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustermannBB
Also are you sure we both are talking about the same San Antonio, because how can you call San Antonio "very new" ????
Um, because it is? You realize San Antonio is a very new city, right? It's a high growth Sunbelt city that was overwhelmingly developed post WW2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustermannBB
I'm no expert on the matter and haven't seen every city (sunbelt city) in the US but to me San Antonio with it's age and heritage and architecture (colonial Spanish influenced) does come across different as say Atlanta or Charlotte for example, which to me would be cities which fit more in a description of typical US (sunbelt) city.
You have never been to San Antonio if you think it is an old city with "colonial Spanish influenced" architecture. That is not remotely typical of the city.
Are you like talking about the Alamo and Riverwalk and that kind of tourist stuff? I am talking the city as a whole, not some random building. SA as a whole is very sprawly, new, and suburban, and doesn't look any different from typical Houston or Austin or Dallas. In contrast, New Orleans looks nothing like Dallas. There isn't a street anywhere in greater New Orleans that could be mistaken with Dallas.
I never said why i would go with one or the other, so here goes:
Inner City:
Apart from King William, and the newer extensions of the River Walk, San Antonios inner city is far less interesting than New Orleans. Outside of SA's downtown is really dumpy too. Worse looking than NOLA, but not nearly as dangerous. Even the nicer looking historical neighborhoods like Monte Vista were poorly kept and looked less attractive than the inner neighborhoods surrounding the core of New Orleans.
Near Burbs:
They are about the same, I would give the nod again to NO for having the more tightly packed built which makes commuting easier.
Exerbs/ far flung burbs:
SA trumps NOLA on this one and quite handily too. The newer burbs in SA can get quite expensive but they looked top notch.
Transportation:
NOLA s buses run fairly quickly and because the US is so compact, getting around is really quick. Different agencies run the different buses so getting used to cross metro travel might take some getting used too, but not as frustrating as getting across the massive land mass that is the city is San Antonio.
NOLA, also has had trolls for a million years, that certainly helps getting around.
Both cities are served by amtrak and greyhound but NOLA is much more convenient in that amtrak, greyhound and the city buses converge at one station. Would be nice if megabus did too, but that one if memory serves me right stops in Metairie.
NOLA also wins the air and foot transport, SA wins the transit by bicycle race.
Culture:
In my opinion NOLA has forgotten more about culture than SA will ever know. SA might take the crown in Texas but NOLA is one of the heavy weights in all of the US. While San Antonio was a remote Mexican outpost, New Orleans was the second most important city in New France (after Quebec) and became capital of all of the Louisiana territories which ran from the gulf of Mexico up to Canada. San Antonio was never a really important city for Spain or Mexico like New Orleans was to France, Spain and then to the US..
New Orleans has a unique mixing of cultures. Originally French, it still maintains strong Spanish architecture as a large chunk of the city was burnt and rebuilt during it's Spanish Era which lasted about 40 years. Control reverted to the French then to the US.
NO grew to become a top five US ( something SA has yet to achieve despite its far larger land mass.
NO also at one point was the 2nd richest city in all of the New World. It was one of the busiest slave ports and still the exporting platform for the nation's crops.
In terms of music, sports, diversity, festivals, history and architecture NOLA has no competition from San Antonio.
Food:
for me the best SA has to offer is Texas Mex and I had better in Houston and DFW and many smaller towns in between. NOLA is more well rounded across the board. Not only do they have the creole influences but there is also good Vietnamese, southern, Italian, and other influences in NOLA.
Location:
This is New Orleans blessing and it's curse. New Orleans is located in a Crescent in the Mississippi river, is directly south of a large lake and has the gulf of Mexico not too far to the South. San Antonio isn't near a river as navigable as the Mississippi, is not near the gulf and has no sizeable lakes. So although flooding is an issue in SA, it is no where near as big as an issue as in NOLA. I still give the nod to NOLA on location because it makes for a more picturesque metro, and a bigger economic boost via the port.
Tourism:
For me NOLA wins again. Mardi Gras is a bigger and more well known affair than Fiesta. Outside the two main attractions, NOLA has many other more prominent cultural events than SA, such as jazz fest and Essence.
the Riverboat tours in NOLA are light years better than the simple little tours around the Riverwalk.
Neighborhood tours around new Orleans are much better organized than SA. Hospitality in general just seems more put together in general.
Economy:
San Antonio gdp is about 15B bigger than NOLA but San Antonio is twice as large. SAs big hitters are military, tourism/service, manufacturing and energy. NOLAs is shipping, energy, tourism.
Education:
With schools like Tulane, Xavier and Loyola the case closes here. Trinity is the best in my opinion in SA but the combination of NOLA schools out weighs SA schools by a large margin.
Other:
For obvious reasons SA wins the theme park category.
What else?
I guess those are enough reasons to back up MY OPINION that I would choose NOLA to live and play.
In fact I do actually want to move there.
What is unique about SA? Could you name something? To me it seems to be a very typical U.S. city. Very sprawly, small downtown, small urban core, very new, lots of freeways, tract homes, malls, etc.
And architecture? Not seeing that, at all. How does SA have any different architecture from other Sunbelt cities?
This part of your post, along with the fact that you seem to think New Orleans is free of typical Sunbelt sprawl, proves you've no idea what you're talking about.
Perfect example of my point, UTHORN. Some posters aren't even worth contesting. Let them dig their own hole
I think New Orleans is more enjoyable. If it wasn't for the crime in some areas, it would be a very easy choice to pick NoLa too. San Antonio doesn't really evoke any positive or negative reactions to me like some other cities do. It's kind of like "eh whatever" to me.
I have been there multiple times, and you are crazy if you think that San Antonio has different architecture from other Sunbelt cities.
Please show us these neighborhoods with claimed "unique architecture".
San Antonio, may not have that much different architecture but they do preserve a good chunk of the inner city a lot better than most of the sun belt.
They don't look all that too me, but they do preserve.
New Orleans is very good not only on preservation but also rebuilding. A lot of the post Katrina rebuilding seem to fit in quite nicely with the older stock.
Not really. What other Sunbelt city looks or feels like New Orleans? Could you name one? What city has similar architecture, accent, urban streetscape, attractions, etc.?
New Orleans is arguably the most unique city in the U.S.
Um, because it is? You realize San Antonio is a very new city, right? It's a high growth Sunbelt city that was overwhelmingly developed post WW2.
You have never been to San Antonio if you think it is an old city with "colonial Spanish influenced" architecture. That is not remotely typical of the city.
Are you like talking about the Alamo and Riverwalk and that kind of tourist stuff? I am talking the city as a whole, not some random building. SA as a whole is very sprawly, new, and suburban, and doesn't look any different from typical Houston or Austin or Dallas. In contrast, New Orleans looks nothing like Dallas. There isn't a street anywhere in greater New Orleans that could be mistaken with Dallas.
Well what is it now?
The entire city or the core/downtown?
Unless you say New Orleans looks like Bourbon Street or the french quarter throughout the entire city including the suburbs.
If we are talking about downtown I'd still argue that the spanish colonial influenced architecture is quite prevalent as well the historic aspects of the city and with it being pretty old by US standards.
Of course the further you get away from the core the newer it gets and with it the architecture.
So I ask you, is it your opinion that new Orleans outside its core is not sprawl or newer/newish.
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.
