View Single Post
  #177  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2022, 12:02 AM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
Tokyo is the world’s largest urban agglomeration, has the most developed rail network on Earth, (rapid transit, commuter rail, high-speed rail), and (probably safe to assume) the highest transit ridership anywhere on the planet. It is *functionally* the world’s most urban city, even though its built environment is post-war and doesn’t fit the Northeastern US / Western European archetype.

LA’s Koreatown being post-war doesn’t preclude it from becoming functionally urban. And by virtue of the fact that it’s mostly of post-war fabric, yes, it won’t ever become SF’s Nob Hill. No need to speculate.
Tokyo is very urban, but I'd say somewhere like Dhaka is easily more urban. Urbanism is about more than transit mode share, and while Dhaka's transit mode share is nothing too exceptional, its private auto mode share is extremely low and will always remain that way as long as most of its population lives on streets like these:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@23.76840...7i13312!8i6656

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Tokyo has easily the most extensive transit network on earth, but I don't think it's the most functionally urban city, at all. Hong Kong has higher transit share, and is much more functionally urban.

There are cities with fantastic transit network and extreme transit share, with relatively poor urbanity. Moscow, for example. Almost any former Soviet or (mainland) Chinese city. Tokyo has vastly better urbanity than a Moscow but I wouldn't rank it close to environments like Paris, Barcelona or Venice. Even Seoul is functionally stronger, with higher density and better street-level pedestrian orientation.
eh, I'd give Tokyo the edge over Seoul.

Much of Tokyo is like this:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@35.76629...7i16384!8i8192

Much of Seoul is like this:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@37.50516...7i13312!8i6656
Reply With Quote