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.
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+.
15 miles? The East Bay matches and far exceeds that.
But more importantly to me is this. The East Bay's walkability covers a distance twice that of SD.
Contiguous clusters of walk score 50+
29 miles North-South
88 Emeryville
83 Berkeley
82 Albany
74 Oakland
70 San Pablo
66 Alameda
64 El Cerrito
63 San Leandro
57 Richmond
56 San Lorenzo
55 Hayward
14 miles North-South
67 Imperial Beach
66 National City
57 El Cajon
51 Coronado
51 San Diego
So the East Bay has higher density, greater walkability, and a heavy rail transit system.
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+.
Well-distributed doesn't really mean much when you're talking about a place being urban. Santee at 3500 ppsm is very much suburban, so how does that factor into a topic about which metro is more urban?
Nobody said that. SD is urban and Id even say just as 'urban' as Oakland--we're just debating certain aspects of what urban means.
San Diego is basically a suburban beach town, not an urban city. low density neighborhoods permeate the city. Only 4,000 people per sq. mile. Only Downtown may be urban but actually, it's more rural downtown than urban downtown. However, things are changing, though.
15 miles? The East Bay matches and far exceeds that.
But more importantly to me is this. The East Bay's walkability covers a distance twice that of SD.
Contiguous clusters of walk score 50+
29 miles North-South
88 Emeryville
83 Berkeley
82 Albany
74 Oakland
70 San Pablo
66 Alameda
64 El Cerrito
63 San Leandro
57 Richmond
56 San Lorenzo
55 Hayward
14 miles North-South
67 Imperial Beach
66 National City
57 El Cajon
51 Coronado
51 San Diego
So the East Bay has higher density, greater walkability, and a heavy rail transit system.
That metric is silly. A walkscore of 50 is not urban, the East Bay obviously goes on a linear axis which is not inherently better than being more blobular, and the site you're citing, walkscore, breaks down into a lot more detail than just municipalities which you very well know changes greatly in size and composition.
You live in the East Bay, so you must be familiar with at least some of those cities, right? In what world would Hayward be considered urban?
San Diego is basically a suburban beach town, not an urban city. low density neighborhoods permeate the city. Only 4,000 people per sq. mile. Only Downtown may be urban but actually, it's more rural downtown than urban downtown. However, things are changing, though.
Downtown San Diego (4635 ppsm) is the 16th most densely populated neighborhood in the city. It kind of sounds like you haven't been to San Diego.
Well-distributed doesn't really mean much when you're talking about a place being urban. Santee at 3500 ppsm is very much suburban, so how does that factor into a topic about which metro is more urban?
Exactly....its probably the most suburban area in the region. 3500 ppsm would be a dense neighborhood in Texas or Tennessee.
It beats equivalent burbs in the East Bay like Danville.
Exactly....its probably the most suburban area in the region. 3500 ppsm would be a dense neighborhood in Texas or Tennessee.
It beats equivalent burbs in the East Bay like Danville.
No, that's not a dense neighborhood anywhere. So, something like maybe 10,000 ppsm is generally pretty urban, right? Do you want to use that as a cut-off and find either census tracts or zipcodes and their populations in the San Diego metropolitan area that are at that level or higher.
No, that's not a dense neighborhood anywhere. So, something like maybe 10,000 ppsm is generally pretty urban, right? Do you want to use that as a cut-off and find either census tracts or zipcodes and their populations in the San Diego metropolitan area that are at that level or a higher.
And I would also like a contiguous cluster of 10,000+ppsm zip codes such as the one I produced for Oakland.
Downtown San Diego (4635 ppsm) is the 16th most densely populated neighborhood in the city. It kind of sounds like you haven't been to San Diego.
Downtown San Diego pop. 34,000 vs Downtown San Jose 49,000; nah. I go to San Diego a lot. My favorite: Point Loma: Liberty Market and Ocean Beach. Also like Ensinitas. I used to have a girl friend in Fairbank Ranch.
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.
