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.
Oaklanders I’ve talked to hate this comparison. So do some here on C-D.
But the obvious similarities are impossible to ignore. Both are across a body of water and connected by bridge and subway to the larger central metro core. Both have seen a huge influx of folks priced out of Manhattan or San Francisco, respectively. Both are far more ethnically diverse than Manhattan or San Francisco, respectively.
Both have undergone wide swaths of gentrification, with expensive new upscale residences and rehabilitated older housing stock. Both have seen many of their poor pushed out, although the poorest parts of each are stubbornly unchanging high crime neighborhoods.
Both have sizable office districts downtown. Both have their own set of major cultural institutions. And both retain at least an aura of hipster bohemianism. Yes, architecturally they are very different. But if you like the vibe in one, you’ll probably like the vibe in the other.
Interesting,
I've spent a lot of time in Manhattan(friends in upper westside) and Long Island(Fire Island), but little time in Brooklyn. Next time I head to NYC I'll likely spend more in Brooklyn.
SF/Oakland feels so small compared to NYC in more ways than one,
Regarding the actual built environment San Francisco=Brooklyn; more than Oakland. There is no Manhattan equivalent in California.
LA/Houston
SF/Boston
Long Beach/Baltimore
Sacramento/Omaha
Inland Empire/Phoenix
How and why? Give us more.
For example,
Baltimore for San Francisco. When you walk the Inner Harbor, Fed Hill and Fells Point of Baltimore it looks and feels like the Marina/Wharf area of San Francisco. Baltimore' historic rowhouses are similar to "rows of Victorians" in SF. Baltimore's historic built core urban footprint is 200 years older than San Francisco's.
The San Francisco Giants ballpark looks like Baltimores Camden Yards ballpark. Though the Orioles have been around a lot longer than the Giants.
Omaha for Sacramento. - Southern Pacific Railroad and Union Pacific. Sacramento's Southern Pacific Railyard was one of the largest in the West and had a huge impact on Sacramento and now it is slowly becoming a new urban district of downtown Sacramento.
LA metro = Miami/Ft. Lauderdale metro (warm, sunny, palm trees, similar architecture, both known for wealth and materialism)
San Francisco metro = Boston (tech, intelligence, universities)
San Diego metro = Tampa Bay metro (tier 2 city in their respective states, young population, somewhat college town)
Austin for Sacramento - Metro populations are very similar, Sacramento's is larger. Both have Apple and Intel facilities/operations; I'm not talking about Apple retail stores. Both have Rivers, the Colorado River in Austin, the Sacramento and American Rivers in Sacramento. Both cities are capitals of large states. Both currently have Jewish Mayors. Sacramento had a very popular Black mayor, Mexican mayor and two Female mayors and Sacramento is very diverse and integrated. But can't say the same about Austin.
Philadelphia for ? - There is no real Philadelphia equivalent in California; which California city is similar and why?
NYC for Los Angeles - Large Jewish populations. Entertainment/Media industry heavily dominated by Jews. Both currently have Jewish mayors, or has that recently changed?
San Antonio for Sacramento - Metro populations are almost identical in size. Sacramento's is larger. Both have/had large military retiree populations. Although Sacramento's military retirees are dying off and not really being replaced. Both have large latino/Mexican populations.
I'm going to compare cities by their people and "vibes" more than physical appearance.
In that case I see San Francisco and DC being very similar. Both are very liberal, a little geeky and sort of boring (I know I'll be getting flak for that), and with historically strong minority groups (Asians in SF and African American in DC). Currently, both lack much of a middle class (either upper or lower, which is not necessarily the case with Boston).
I'd also compare Santa Barbara with Charleston, SC. Both lean on their history and depend on largely upper-class tourists. Both are coastal.
Interesting,
I've spent a lot of time in Manhattan(friends in upper westside) and Long Island(Fire Island), but little time in Brooklyn. Next time I head to NYC I'll likely spend more in Brooklyn.
SF/Oakland feels so small compared to NYC in more ways than one,
Regarding the actual built environment San Francisco=Brooklyn; more than Oakland. There is no Manhattan equivalent in California.
4thAs far as "built form", New York is hyperdense compared to everywhere else, but California's 2 big cities(and Honolulu apparently) are likewise a tier above the others, with SJ(Go figure) actually topping the rest. 2020 Weighted population density for MSAs over 1 million:
New York: 33,787.5
San Francisco....13,267.8
Honolulu....12,581.9
Los Angeles....12,169.4
San Jose....9,075.9
Chicago....9,011.9
Boston....8,987.9
Miami....8,489.2
Philadelphia....8,258.5
San Diego....7,381.9
Washington....7,296.1
Las Vegas....7,031.7
Seattle....6,146.3
Denver....5,418.0
Providence....5,204.6
Baltimore....5,144.7
Salt Lake City....5,070.9
Portland....5,058.8
Milwaukee....5,023.7
Sacramento....5,002.7
Phoenix....4,807.7
Riverside....4,636.9
Houston....4,606.4
New Orleans....4,577.0
Fresno....4,518.4
Buffalo....4,348.8
Dallas....4,274.7
Detroit....3,906.9
Minneapolis....3,784.4
Cleveland....3,676.9
Tampa Bay....3,616.6
Columbus....3,605.8
Virginia Beach....3,580.8
Austin....3,565.3
San Antonio....3,424.0
Tucson....3,285.2
Orlando....3,275.7
Hartford....3,195.3
Pittsburgh....2,970.0
Rochester....2,948.2
St. Louis....2,738.0
Atlanta....2,686.4
Louisville....2,686.3
Cincinnati....2,658.2
Oklahoma City....2,647.3
Richmond....2,590.4
Kansas City....2,561.4
Indianapolis....2,457.3
Jacksonville....2,431.3
Grand Rapids....2,413.3
Memphis....2,339.4
Tulsa....2,167.3
Raleigh....2,166.8
Charlotte....1,996.1
Nashville....1,943.3
Birmingham....1,402.6
In this context, the Inland Empire and Sacramento are far more similar to the rest of the country than LA & SF, which like NYC, have an extremely unique setting/appearance that is near impossible to mistake for anywhere else.
Austin for Sacramento - Metro populations are very similar, Sacramento's is larger. Both have Apple and Intel facilities/operations; I'm not talking about Apple retail stores. Both have Rivers, the Colorado River in Austin, the Sacramento and American Rivers in Sacramento. Both cities are capitals of large states. Both currently have Jewish Mayors. Sacramento had a very popular Black mayor, Mexican mayor and two Female mayors and Sacramento is very diverse and integrated. But can't say the same about Austin.
Both cities are diverse. They are fairly similar, really, but Sacramento has more Asians and Austin more Hispanics. I've never seen any statistical evidence showing that Austin lacks integration, either.
But I think Austin would be more like a miniature Bay Area with the central core / east side being SF/Oakland and North Austin/Round Rock being Santa Clara county.
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.
