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.
People get so hostile and resort to posting blatant untruths haha. Both these cities and areas have their own redeeming qualities and some negative aspects. I prefer Philadelphia and can understand why some would prefer SD.
Actually it kind of is. Cities are urban because of the way they are built, not just because of population density, that type of nonsensical logic doesn't work against anybody that's familiar with urbanity.
Does San Diego plan on tearing up their whole city just to give that urban northeast fabric? What reason would they even have to do that? To make it more popular in city data? All that imaginary scenario would accomplish is alienate the people that like San Diego for what it actually is.
All it can do realistically is make little nodes here and there a bit more urban, kind of like LA has done, but it it's case one would think to an even smaller extent. That in no way can ever compete with the urban fabric of the northeast.
When does San Diego plan on becoming as urban as the northeast? When the Atlantic is the size of the Pacific? Well by that time Philly probably will have its type of climate.
When does San Diego plan on becoming as urban as the northeast? When the Atlantic is the size of the Pacific. Well by that time Philly probably will have its type of climate.
I don't know if San Diego has ambitious plans for urbanity or not; all I am saying is that it is possible to build San Diego into a great, pedestrian friendly, urban city. On the other hand, Philly will not have the beaches, climate, nor topography of San Diego, unless some random geologic event where to happen.
I don't know if San Diego has ambitious plans for urbanity or not; all I am saying is that it is possible to build San Diego into a great, pedestrian friendly, urban city. On the other hand, Philly will not have the beaches, climate, nor topography of San Diego, unless some random geologic event where to happen.
Well then you need to answer my question from the first post. Possible how exactly? Do you seriously expect them to tear down their whole city and build it from scratch? LOL.
Since we are on the topic of imaginary scenarios, Philly can have beaches and mountains too if it starts annexation of territories around it. They will be more usable and aesthetically pleasing too, imo.
Philly has a murder rate 10 times higher, winter sux, summer sux, the economy sux....San Diego has a super low crime rate, the best climate in the USA, and a much better average income than Philly....why would any sane person prefer Philly?
There should be an unspoken rule here about anybody starting posts with crime rate statistics be automatically declared an ignorant tool. A city that's a host to large amount of low income minority population has parts were crime rate is high? No way Jose!!!
Summer temps of northeast are heavily over-exaggerated anyways. It can get pretty hot in the day at times, that's true, but nights are usually extremely pleasant. Not that it matters much to me anyways, I will take interesting 4 season weather over dull repetitive weather you get in San Diego, more tolerable year-round or not.
Well then you need to answer my question from the first post. Possible how exactly? Do you seriously expect them to tear down their whole city and build it from scratch? LOL.
There is no need to; you just build up the land strategically, converting previously auto-oriented areas to pedestrian paradise. For instance, where there are surface lots downtown, a new residential unit can go up, complete with street-level retail on the bottom. Strip-mall parking lots can be parsed strategically, and built up into urban landscapes the same way as well, especially if they lie on a defined grid system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaneKane
Since we are on the topic of imaginary scenarios, Philly can have beaches and mountains too if it starts annexation of territories around it. They will be more usable and aesthetically pleasing too, imo.
No they wouldn't. San Diego's mountains are mightier than anything east of the Mississippi, and the beaches have the wild topography that you can't get on much of the East Coast, so they are quite photogenic in that regard. Furthermore, San Diego has a mild climate fruitful to the cultivation of all sorts of subtropical/tropical plants that Philly can only dream of.
There is no need to; you just build up the land strategically, converting previously auto-oriented areas to pedestrian paradise. For instance, where there are surface lots downtown, a new residential unit can go up, complete with street-level retail on the bottom. Strip-mall parking lots can be parsed strategically, and built up into urban landscapes the same way as well, especially if they lie on a defined grid system.
It doesn't work like that at all. Every city can add multi units and turn parking lots into buildings. How exactly do you plan on turning an endless array of spacious wide streets into narrow ones without tearing everything down?
There is a reason sprawly cities find it so difficult to be urban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.I.0.N.I.C.
No they wouldn't. San Diego's mountains are mightier than anything east of the Mississippi, and the beaches have the wild topography that you can't get on much of the East Coast, so they are quite photogenic in that regard. Furthermore, San Diego has a mild climate fruitful to the cultivation of all sorts of subtropical/tropical plants that Philly can only dream of.
It sure is. Eastern scenery is way more lush green and way much better looking. It's a lot better than having ugly dry/arid brown scenery that the southwest gets, height does nothing to change that.
You call it photogenic, I call it year-round frigid that most people can't comfortably use. I don't think most people go to beaches to take pictures of rocks.
And OMG no way, they grow oranges!!! I must live there this instant!!!
There is no need to; you just build up the land strategically, converting previously auto-oriented areas to pedestrian paradise. For instance, where there are surface lots downtown, a new residential unit can go up, complete with street-level retail on the bottom. Strip-mall parking lots can be parsed strategically, and built up into urban landscapes the same way as well, especially if they lie on a defined grid system.
No they wouldn't. San Diego's mountains are mightier than anything east of the Mississippi, and the beaches have the wild topography that you can't get on much of the East Coast, so they are quite photogenic in that regard. Furthermore, San Diego has a mild climate fruitful to the cultivation of all sorts of subtropical/tropical plants that Philly can only dream of.
Is it just me or are you a another multi account of slo1318? The things you type and the type of logic you throw around... they are strikingly similar.
LOL, what you couldn't even wait a day after you already got caught red-handed? No thanks, I'm not getting sucked into this again.
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.
