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.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 6 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 976,625 times
Reputation: 1406
SF is closer to LA in stature/ influence than it is to SD.
San Fran's urban area does not include San Jose, as well as many other satellite UA's orbiting the greater Bay Area (Concord-Walnut Creek, Antioch, Livermore-Pleasanton-Dublin, Napa, Fairfield, Vacaville, Petaluma, Santa Rosa)
Most published works on international city rankings consistenly place SF near the top of the list, along with LA. Some preface it by labelling it the SF Bay Area. Heck, many place SF #3 in the USA ahead of DC and Chicago even (I personally do not place SF #3 nationally overall in terms of importance/influence, but I definitely feel in some regards it could be ahead of those two in some areas - technology, innovation, international investments, venture capital). SF/SJ feels like a solid #5, nationally-speaking, after considering all criteria. But that is just my opinion.
Lastly, and I know it is smidge in the way of nit-picky, but the figures in your OP are just a tad bit off:
Urban area population:
Los Angeles: 12.2 million (not 12.3)
San Francisco: 3.5 million (not 3.4, and again this is misleading as it does not include San Jose, et. all)
Here is a breakdown and sum of the adjacent UA's orbiting SF. Most do not have appreciable cores or business centers and thus look directly toward SF as *the* hub of business, culture, etc.)
San Francisco-Oakland 3,515,933 San Jose 1,837,446
Concord-Walnut Creek 538,583
Antioch 326,205
Santa Rosa 297,329
Livermore 240,381
Vallejo 175,132
Fairfield 150,122
Vacavile 101,027
Napa 84,619
Petaluma 65,227
Total of all UA's: 7,332,004 (sure it is a stretch, as some of these are far-flung, but even so, SF at 3.5 million is way too low and misleading)
SF is just too iconic, too urban, too cosmopolitan. It has a massive sphere of influence, whereas SD's sphere is less prominent as it is overshadowed being much closer in proximity to LA, and also SD's sphere is cut short, fast, and hard by an international border. SD is a great city, but it felt a bit sleepy to me. SF was very touristed and much more urban, historical, and business-oriented, from my personal experience. Then again I visited all three cities (including LA) back in 2007, so it has been a long while. I wonder how they are now.
Even though SF is not really Northern California geographically, it is often synonymous with being the main city in Northern California, as LA is for SoCal.
I honestly like SanDiego more than SF and LA but admit that it doesn’t define the part of California it’s in like the other two do.
It's closer to LA in size, regardless of some misleading subdivisions in how cities are counted. And SF has a huge brand, both the touristy stuff and tech.
I voted LA, but J actually changed my mind. I forgot how large LA really is. The CSA has a population of over 18 million, vs the Bay Area's 9 5 million. And even many people here argue that the greater Bay Area is smaller in reality than its bloated CSA. So, yeah, San Francisco seems closer to SanDiego in population.
Also, because the title specifically says San Francisco, instead of the Bay Area or making any mention of San Jose, which is larger and the actual tech hub, I am inclined to change my vote. And yeah, San Francisco is iconic, but I alwags thought SanDiego was also iconic for the laid back, beach image California is also associated with.
If you count the entire Bay Area it's third in the US in a lot of metrics related to economic weight, influence, certain industries and companies etc., outpacing the likes of even DC, Dallas, Houston etc. SanDiego is iconic in many ways but it's just too far apart.
It's closer to LA in size, regardless of some misleading subdivisions in how cities are counted. And SF has a huge brand, both the touristy stuff and tech.
It's closer in economic and culture stature.
In physical size it's absolutely closer to SD whether in isolation or including the greater Bay Area. Greater LA has 18 million people and feels every bit of it.
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.
