HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 2:40 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp View Post
The flight path into San Jose's airport goes directly over downtown San Jose. It limits the buildings there to ~250'.
That has nothing to do with the quality of SJ's downtown, though. The best urban neighborhoods worldwide don't have particularly tall buildings. Even in Manhattan, the best, most vibrant neighborhoods tend to be midrise.

SJ has a weak downtown because's it's essentially a giant postwar Sunbelt suburb, and the SV corporate behemoths are located elsewhere. If Facebook, Apple and Google were downtown, yeah, things would be more vibrant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 2:44 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
Well, facilities of a metro area don't need to be all located on the central city proper. Silicon Valley is an integral part of San Francisco metropolitan area and due the lack of space developed immediately south of it. There isn't a rule preventing suburbs to have strong job markets.

Look at Detroit: I don't have the numbers, but I would guess 85% of jobs of its metro area are outside Detroit city proper. Likewise, it doesn't change the fact Oakland and Macomb counties are only fully urbanized today because Detroit outgrew it city limits on the past.
The difference is that San Jose grew up independent of SF. It's an independent city, with it's own character. It isn't like some random white flight sprawlburb of Detroit.

San Jose is also really freakin far from SF. It was never a bedroom suburb for people working in SF. Of course suburban sprawl eventually engulfed the whole distance between the cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 2:51 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 27,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYNYC View Post
[bangs head into wall]

People are clearly missing the point.

San Jose would not exist in it's current form (for certain), if at all, without San Francisco.

Baltimore has always functioned as a significant independent city and economy long before becoming a part of its current CSA.

Why is that so difficult to comprehend / accept?
So what? Cities are not static. It might have sprung up because of nearby SF and served as an exurb for decades but it is evolving into something different and a city in its own right. The east coast has had centuries of development where as the west coast is relatively new with a few sporadic exceptions like San Francisco.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 2:59 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is online now
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The Tropic of Sir Galahad
Posts: 32,973
Wrightville (later Hull, later still, Gatineau) was founded years before Bytown (later, Ottawa). Regardless, Ottawa is clearly the centre of this region, hence why it prefaces Gatineau in the CMA sweepstakes. Things change for sure.

I believe New Westminster was also founded before Vancouver.

Maybe Boston wouldn't exist if it weren't for decisions made in London (England).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 3:41 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
A university in a satellite town usually has a lot to do with the central city, no matter the arbitrary administrative lines.
Yes, Stanford is there because of San Francisco. But San Jose is not a direct result of San Francisco sprawl, which is the point that was attempting to be made.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 3:43 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,507
Regarding the Baltimore/Washington analogy... It makes more sense if you consider Baltimore to be the analogy of San Francisco, and Washington the analogy of San Jose.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 3:47 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,737
Stanford definitely isn't there because of SF.

SJ, while sprawly and not traditionally citylike, was historically unrelated to SF. It's 50 miles away, and was its own city, when the stretch between the two cities was farmland. Obviously now they're part of the same region.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 3:51 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Stanford definitely isn't there because of SF.

SJ, while sprawly and not traditionally citylike, was historically unrelated to SF. It's 50 miles away, and was its own city, when the stretch between the two cities was farmland. Obviously now they're part of the same region.
It most definitely is there because of San Francisco. The purpose was to create a west coast Ivy League, and it was purposely built within proximity to what was at the time the largest city on the west coast.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:24 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Stanford definitely isn't there because of SF.

SJ, while sprawly and not traditionally citylike, was historically unrelated to SF. It's 50 miles away, and was its own city, when the stretch between the two cities was farmland. Obviously now they're part of the same region.
In antes case, just compare the size of Downtown San Francisco and Downtown San Jose. It’s like comparing Downtown Detroit with Pontiac, Southfield or Troy

We are just talking about San Jose here because it has an unusual large city proper, as it’s not even the centre of Silicon Valley, itself a multinodal area.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:28 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 2,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
It most definitely is there because of San Francisco. The purpose was to create a west coast Ivy League, and it was purposely built within proximity to what was at the time the largest city on the west coast.
The major reason it's there because that's where Leland Stanford owned land. Why he owned land there is likely because it was close to San Francisco (his other residence), but I don't really know (maybe someone does...). Maybe if he didn't own land proximate to San Francisco he would have purchased land. Who knows (anyway it was his wife who started Stanford). He also had a residence in Sacramento though (since he was governor for a while).

Anyway that's all mostly irrelevant to why Stanford became so important to Silicon Valley. I suspect if Stanford were in the middle of nowhere rather than close to San Francisco, it may not have become as important an academic center. Also, I don't know to what extent many of us are wrongly attributing Silicon's Valley growth to just Stanford. It's a nice story that helps my CV but there are other drivers too (e.g. NASA Ames).
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead. Trump delenda est.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:30 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 27,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
In antes case, just compare the size of Downtown San Francisco and Downtown San Jose. It’s like comparing Downtown Detroit with Pontiac, Southfield or Troy

We are just talking about San Jose here because it has an unusual large city proper, as it’s not even the centre of Silicon Valley, itself a multinodal area.
No offense but you're not in the US and yet you're arguing Americans about their own cities. Plus you're still hung up with downtowns and densities which doesn't define cities and urban areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:32 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 828
It’s OBVIOUS Stanford is where it is because there were a big and wealth city northwards, otherwise it could be on California-Oregon border instead in the middle of nowhere.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:35 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
No offense but you're not in the US and yet you're arguing Americans about their own cities. Plus you're still hung up with downtowns and densities which doesn't define cities and urban areas.
JManc, that’s ad hominem. No need to resort to that. My opinion has nothing to do with my current location as there are forumers who actually lived in both SF and SJ spouses the same opinion.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 5:39 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
The major reason it's there because that's where Leland Stanford owned land. Why he owned land there is likely because it was close to San Francisco (his other residence), but I don't really know (maybe someone does...). He also had a residence in Sacramento though (since he was governor for a while).
That's the reason that the university sits in its current physical location. But Stanford was created as a west coast analogy to Princeton, which necessitated that it be located in proximity to a major population center: San Francisco. Stanford's medical school also began in San Francisco.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 8:03 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
It’s OBVIOUS Stanford is where it is because there were a big and wealth city northwards, otherwise it could be on California-Oregon border instead in the middle of nowhere.
I don't think that's particularly obvious.

When Stanford was founded, there was no big/wealthy city anywhere in the Western U.S. And it isn't like you need a nearby big city to have an elite university.

Cornell's Ithaca campus is in the middle of nowhere. The nearest cities of note are NYC and Toronto, both about 4 hours away. Duke, Dartmouth, Amherst and many other elite universities were established in relatively isolated settings.

Leland Stanford lived in Sacramento and San Francisco, so yeah, Stanford was established where it was based on him; it wouldn't be on the Oregon border. But I don't think it's accurate to say that Stanford was established based on a relationship with SF.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 9:14 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 255
Seems like a spire height vs roof height discussion...Anyway, Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA definitely seems like an offshoot of Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA. If they can throw Newark into the NYC metro, I don't see why they should not through Riverside in LA's metro.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 9:24 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 22,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
If they can throw Newark into the NYC metro, I don't see why they should not through Riverside in LA's metro.
well, for starters, riverside already is in LA's CSA.

but beyond that, the comparison to newark and NYC is more than a little off.


as the crow flies:

downtown newark to lower manhattan: 8.5 miles

downtown riverside to downtown LA: 50 miles


that's kind of a big difference from a functional & psychological standpoint.
__________________
The world that we used to know, People tell me it don't turn no more
The places we used to go, Familiar faces that ain't smilin' like before
The time of our time has come and gone, I fear we been waiting too long

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jun 1, 2020 at 11:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 10:13 PM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: In COVID-19 exile
Posts: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
The major reason it's there because that's where Leland Stanford owned land. Why he owned land there is likely because it was close to San Francisco (his other residence), but I don't really know (maybe someone does...). Maybe if he didn't own land proximate to San Francisco he would have purchased land. Who knows (anyway it was his wife who started Stanford). He also had a residence in Sacramento though (since he was governor for a while).

Anyway that's all mostly irrelevant to why Stanford became so important to Silicon Valley. I suspect if Stanford were in the middle of nowhere rather than close to San Francisco, it may not have become as important an academic center. Also, I don't know to what extent many of us are wrongly attributing Silicon's Valley growth to just Stanford. It's a nice story that helps my CV but there are other drivers too (e.g. NASA Ames).
Agreed on all points. The Stanfords moved from Sacramento to a mansion on San Francisco's Nob Hill; when their son died young, they founded Stanford in his memory on land they purchased south of SF; the land was called (and sometimes still is) "the farm," which they also used as a weekend home; and the role Stanford played in creating today's Silicon Valley was important, but there were other critical players, without which the area wouldn't be what it is today.
__________________
*Impeached; fair trial necessary for exoneration never held.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 11:03 PM
Buckeye Native 001 Buckeye Native 001 is online now
E pluribus unum
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,929
*delete*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2020, 11:06 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
well, for starters, riverside already is in LA's CSA.

but beyond that, the comparison to newark and NYC is more than a little off.


as the crow flies:

downtown newark to lower manhattan: 8.5 miles

downtown riverside to downtown LA: 50 miles


that's kind of a big difference from a functional & psychological standpoint.
And Newark isn't just physically close, it's very connected. The PATH subway and the busiest commuter rail stretch in the Americas connects Newark to Manhattan. The airport is the closest of the major airports to Manhattan. The skyline is very visible from waterfront Brooklyn and Staten Island.

A "Riverside" of NY would be somewhere like New Haven or Trenton. A "Newark" of LA would be somewhere like Pasadena or Inglewood.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jun 1, 2020 at 11:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:18 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.