Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-18-2009, 10:31 AM
 
3,674 posts, read 8,659,687 times
Reputation: 3086

Advertisements

Aaah, I meant to get to this discussion.

A while back, there was a conversation I had on this board with someone who posted some pic of this vacation island in Florida. "But it has density!" He cried. "There's tall buildings and density and people! That makes it a city!"

And there certainly were. It was a strip of an island with hotels, high rises and the big white sandbar you expect to see in Florida. I'm sure it's a lovely place. But is it really a city? No.

What makes a "real" city? Urban neighborhoods. An urban way of life. High concentrations of people that live a lifestyle not dominated by the automobile.

But the heart of that situation is a living, breathing necklace of urban neighborhoods either around or between the "downtown" areas, where millions of people send their children to school, shop at local stores and generally go on about their life in an urban fashion. They live in high-density areas, in apartment buildings and rowhomes. Many don't own a car. Community is less a function of pleasantry and more a matter of simply having to see people every single day without ever quite being able to escape them.

Those urban neighborhoods are the essence of the equation. That's where people live and work. It's where the definition of urban character is written. Few people live in those glass highrises in the Loop, but take a look at Chicago's south or north sides. You don't even have to have "interesting" architecture, because the real neighborhoods of NYC are pretty bland. But does anyone deny that those are urban cities? Heavens no. They support populations in the millions that live a very specific way.

Those, then, are what make "real" urban cities. Very few cities in the United States actually offer that kind of lifestyle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-18-2009, 11:14 AM
 
7,845 posts, read 20,801,231 times
Reputation: 2857
Is the thread topic "real urban cities" or simply "real cities"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 12:47 PM
 
79 posts, read 157,931 times
Reputation: 90
So Dublin's fake, since it dosen't have a subway?? Quick, someone tell the Irish! Oh, and tell New Orleans, Houston, San Diego, Charlotte, Tampa, Minneapolis, and all the other "fake" cities that all their buildings are illusions. HURRY!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 01:49 PM
 
10,624 posts, read 26,728,110 times
Reputation: 6776
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldwine View Post

What makes a "real" city? Urban neighborhoods. An urban way of life. High concentrations of people that live a lifestyle not dominated by the automobile.

But the heart of that situation is a living, breathing necklace of urban neighborhoods either around or between the "downtown" areas, where millions of people send their children to school, shop at local stores and generally go on about their life in an urban fashion. They live in high-density areas, in apartment buildings and rowhomes. Many don't own a car. Community is less a function of pleasantry and more a matter of simply having to see people every single day without ever quite being able to escape them.

Those urban neighborhoods are the essence of the equation. That's where people live and work. It's where the definition of urban character is written. Few people live in those glass highrises in the Loop, but take a look at Chicago's south or north sides. You don't even have to have "interesting" architecture, because the real neighborhoods of NYC are pretty bland. But does anyone deny that those are urban cities? Heavens no. They support populations in the millions that live a very specific way.

Those, then, are what make "real" urban cities. Very few cities in the United States actually offer that kind of lifestyle.
No they don't, at least in NYC. But people deny all the time that cities like LA are "urban cities," despite the large number of highly dense, public transit-oriented neighborhoods in LA, neighborhoods like Koreatown and Westlake and Hollywood. These are areas where many people don't own cars, public transportation is excellent, density is high, and people live very urban lives. Yet you hear all the time that LA isn't "urban," it's not "real," and that it's one big suburb.

Often I think what people really mean, intentionally or not, (although coldwine, this is not directed at you; it's a more general statement), is that "real" cities, or "real, urban" cities, have to include large numbers of white people, or alternatively, perhaps only neighborhoods or cities with large numbers of gentrified upscale urban neighborhoods count. (LA does have plenty of upscale urban neighborhoods, too, but the densest, busiest, and often best-served by public transportation neighborhoods are those that have large numbers of poorer and non-white residents. Try telling them they don't live in a "real" city.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 02:53 PM
 
Location: NYC
1,213 posts, read 3,607,567 times
Reputation: 1254
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist View Post
Often I think what people really mean, intentionally or not, (although coldwine, this is not directed at you; it's a more general statement), is that "real" cities, or "real, urban" cities, have to include large numbers of white people, or alternatively, perhaps only neighborhoods or cities with large numbers of gentrified upscale urban neighborhoods count. (LA does have plenty of upscale urban neighborhoods, too, but the densest, busiest, and often best-served by public transportation neighborhoods are those that have large numbers of poorer and non-white residents. Try telling them they don't live in a "real" city.)
You just hit the nail right on the head. When people say that "no one walks in LA or no one takes public transit in LA", what they really mean is no white people take mass transit in LA. Millions of people use the bus and rail system here everyday, yet they are largely ignored as if they don't count as real people. As you said, go to Hollywood, or Koreatown, or Westlake, or Downtown, and you'll see tons of people walking, taking transit, and all the other things that should qualify LA as a real city. However, since it's not Beverly Hills-types that you see out in these streets, everyone just declares that "nobody walks in LA". What they are really saying is, "Nobody who matters in LA walks in LA".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 02:59 PM
 
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,990,056 times
Reputation: 7333
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt345 View Post
You just hit the nail right on the head. When people say that "no one walks in LA or no one takes public transit in LA", what they really mean is no white people take mass transit in LA. Millions of people use the bus and rail system here everyday, yet they are largely ignored as if they don't count as real people. As you said, go to Hollywood, or Koreatown, or Westlake, or Downtown, and you'll see tons of people walking, taking transit, and all the other things that should qualify LA as a real city. However, since it's not Beverly Hills-types that you see out in these streets, everyone just declares that "nobody walks in LA". What they are really saying is, "Nobody who matters in LA walks in LA".
You would be correct in this and I would say the same goes for Atlanta. Our subway here is never ever used...except by the "wrong kind of people"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 03:01 PM
 
7,845 posts, read 20,801,231 times
Reputation: 2857
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
You would be correct in this and I would say the same goes for Atlanta. Our subway here is never ever used...except by the "wrong kind of people"
The "right kind of people" only use it to commute to work and back and to attend sporting events downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
7,731 posts, read 14,357,654 times
Reputation: 2774
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
You would be correct in this and I would say the same goes for Atlanta. Our subway here is never ever used...except by the "wrong kind of people"
Hey, I'm a Breeze card carrying white guy. Do I count?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 03:31 PM
 
7,845 posts, read 20,801,231 times
Reputation: 2857
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnatl View Post
Hey, I'm a Breeze card carrying white guy. Do I count?
Shhhh...you're gonna throw a wrench in the theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2009, 03:47 PM
 
Location: 30-40°N 90-100°W
13,809 posts, read 26,549,608 times
Reputation: 6790
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt345 View Post
You just hit the nail right on the head. When people say that "no one walks in LA or no one takes public transit in LA", what they really mean is no white people take mass transit in LA. Millions of people use the bus and rail system here everyday, yet they are largely ignored as if they don't count as real people. As you said, go to Hollywood, or Koreatown, or Westlake, or Downtown, and you'll see tons of people walking, taking transit, and all the other things that should qualify LA as a real city. However, since it's not Beverly Hills-types that you see out in these streets, everyone just declares that "nobody walks in LA". What they are really saying is, "Nobody who matters in LA walks in LA".
I have noticed at times that in entertainment the image of LA mostly revolves around the wealthy whites of the city. To the point that they basically give the impression LA is a city of rich white people, plus some Asians, who go to highscale restaurants and never use public transport. The last few years this is starting to change, but still lingers some.

Which is weird because even as a kid living in the Plains all I had to do is watch the news to know LA included a great deal more than wealthy whites in fancy cars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top