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.
Sure, but you understand that a walkscore of 50 something is not that urban, that the East Bay is quite linear in development so it helps greatly with a north-south axis, and that walkscore has a much higher level of granularity in its data than just the municipality. Though it's also possible that you don't know those things and you have a difficult time navigating the website. However, I have faith in you that you can figure this out.
California is definitely not 8000 ppsm density zipcodes everywhere. Not even remotely close.
Its not my fault that topography aids the East Bay's development and forces tighter density of amenities. Lol that's life.
And Im referring to urban coastal CA. It is dense everywhere.
Again, Im sticking with the walk score cluster of 50+ because it delves deeper than mere density.
Its not my fault that topography aids the East Bay's development and forces tighter density of amenities. Lol that's life.
And Im referring to urban coastal CA. It is dense everywhere.
Again, Im sticking with the walk score cluster of 50+ because it delves deeper than mere density.
Urban coastal CA is not CA, you know that. I updated my previous post--don't you want to see if the metric Losfrisco thinks is a good one actually ends up being much better for the East Bay?
Walkscore is fine, but like I said, you understand that a walkscore of 50 something is not that urban, that the East Bay is quite linear in development so it compresses much of its urbanization into a north-south axis, and that walkscore has a much higher level of granularity in its data than just the municipality. Though it's also possible that you don't know those things and you have a difficult time navigating the website. However, I have faith in you that you can figure this out.
San Diego is more, uh, blobular.
Besides, the point is that you believe the East Bay is more urban, right? I do, too. I think with that, it means that if you do actually try to get granular with either dense zipcode populations or populations in neighborhoods above a certain high walkscore threshold, East Bay is likely to beat out San Diego. So if you believe that, too, just run the numbers and shut his arguments down.
Got any data to prove that East Bay/Oak is more dense than metro SD?
Didn't think so.
SD metro is a more populated and denser area than East Bay, with a more robust mass transit network. San Francisco can't save them in this particular contest.
Do YOU have any data to prove metro SD is more dense? You haven't actually shown that it is overall.
So your definition of "more robust transit network" is simply having more light rail stations? The fact that BART carries a lot more people, is a lot more efficient, and a lot more people use mass transit in the East Bay doesn't matter?
San Diego has about 440,000 in zip codes of 8000 ppsm or more, which exceeds the population of Oakland, with another million in the city on top of that.
8,000 is for chumps.
Just looking online, I see that 50% of Oakland-Berkeley live in Zip Codes that are 10,000+ppsm and this is one contiguous cluster of zip codes at that.
Total Population: 271,435
Population Per Sq Mile: 14,530
Size of Contiguous Cluster in Sq Miles: 18.68
So 50% of the population of Oakland-Berkeley lives in zip codes with 10,000+ppsm, in a contiguous cluster of zip codes that is 18.68 sq miles, approximately one third of the total land area.
Just looking online, I see that 50% of Oakland-Berkeley live in Zip Codes that are 10,000+ppsm and this is one contiguous cluster of zip codes at that.
Total Population: 271,435
Population Per Sq Mile: 14,530
Size of Contiguous Cluster in Sq Miles: 18.68
So 50% of the population of Oakland-Berkeley lives in zip codes with 10,000+ppsm, in a contiguous cluster of zip codes that is 18.68 sq miles, approximately one third of the total land area.
This helps Oakland's case, but not by much because the OP question is asking us to take the entire metro area into consideration. San Diego's density is well distributed at least 15 miles east of downtown and 20 miles south of downtown. Even outer suburbs like Santee are 3500 ppsm+.
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.
