If you've got the money you can live on a gorgeous multi acre property in the burbs or even Riverdale about 30 min from the office via a nice clean commuter train, or car service.

In no way does this count as living in New York City.

Portland (and less so, Seattle, they are bigger and a bit more accepting) just can't believe the concept of growth

It's not that we have a problem with the idea of growth, it's that we fear sprawl. The example of San Jose is instructive here -- part of what makes Portland what it is is the fact that you can get out of the city and be in rolling hills and mountains and farmland within half an hour on a Saturday morning; if, say, Salem were suddenly to balloon to four times its current size and swallow up all of that stuff, it would annhilate a large part of the city's appeal. Portland has grown enormously since I was a kid there -- almost 200 000 people have been added just within the city limits since 1980 -- and the worry is that the same thing will happen to it as happened to Seattle: it will turn into a clogged, congested, landscape-eating, poorly-managed quasi-California car haven. And at that point, what's the point? The appeal is gone.

Part of the reason that there's so much sturm und drang about this whole business is that Portland was still pretty much a backwater until the mid-90s, no more hip and happenin' than, say, Tucson, or Omaha. There are a lot of complicated dynamics at play, and a lot of the people who freak out about the newcomers remember (and prefer) Portland as a redneck metropolis, as much about pickup trucks as about hybrids. I, personally, though a native of Oregon and not born that far away from Portland, never really understood the nativist instinct -- or rather, understood it, but never really appreciated it. When you live in Oregon, unless you're on an Indian reservation, the longest your family could possibly have been here is six, maybe seven generations, right? But all that said, if there wasn't so much hand-wringing about Californians (and nobody gives a #### about New Yorkers, by the way -- it's just Californians), then we wouldn't be able to maintain the things which make Portland a good place to live: its close-knit feel, its environmental standards and parks, its bike culture, its book culture, its outdoor culture.

Despite some of the tongue-in-cheek things I've said in this thread, I am not, in fact, one of those Portlanders who spends 90% of his time taking passive-aggressive jabs at every person who comes from farther away than Eugene. (Hell, I just moved away, so maybe I shouldn't speak as though I still live there. But I did, for 20 years.) But I do think that having a concern for where and how the city grows is important. Because I lived in California for six years -- both Los Angeles and the Bay Area -- and you know what? It ####### blows. They took a paradise and turned it into a hellhole. All we're trying to do is prevent that from happening again.

Because I lived in California for six years -- both Los Angeles and the Bay Area -- and you know what? It ####### blows. They took a paradise and turned it into a hellhole. All we're trying to do is prevent that from happening again.

Los Angeles was never a paradise, and except for San Francisco, neither was the Bay Area. And San Francisco's still great, although expensive as all hell.

But trying to stop growth in urban areas is a fool's errand - all you can try to do is manage it. Don't make the same mistake Los Angeles and San Jose did - provide infrastructure, so that people aren't forced into cars. Set aside land for parks, so that not all of it is developed. Either your tax dollars will be spent on something natives might benefit from, or someone else's private money will be spent on something that will definitely not benefit natives. It's up to them.

Well-said, Voxter, and reasonable.

But (ohhhh you knew it was coming), the whole thing reminds me of a scene from the end of "The River". My dad isn't a particularly emotional person but there's a scene at the end that almost made him cry because growing up on a farm he knew an impossible task when he saw it, and one guy stopping that much water is such a thing.

Portland will not stop growing. Period, fact, end of story. I say it's a microcosm for U.S. immigration but even that isn't it, because we don't have open borders. Portland does. There are most certainly people who accept that the city grows and that there are intelligent ways to make this happen. But the bell-curve says, "No, too big, stop, no more growth, stay away, you're ruining it, if you stay away, we can hold on to what we had." Not going to work, never going to happen. Better luck stopping a river single-handed. Starting with any strategy that even HINTS that you can stop or slow the city from growing will simply make things worse. It's probably subjective, but even your perfectly well-reasoned attitude seems like blinders. (And I get it, really. I went by my old place in northern NY this week and someone built a new house in the field across the road, increasing the houses over a mile stretch from about five when I was growing up to about eight now. LOOKS TERRIBLE.)

As far as not caring about New Yorkers, it may be sample size. It was definitely more "Californians are the plague"; but someone asked my mom where she was from when she was visiting, she said New York (not specifying from the deep rural part) and was greeted with a "we really don't need any more people from New York coming here," so that's where I get it from.

It's always excitingly new and refreshing to see the word American used as an insult

Not an insult, just an identifier.

In no way does this count as living in New York City.

I'm saying if you want the culture, night life, and buzz of the city, w/o having to live 'cheek-to-jowl' with others, it can be done, with money.

New York City is quite a broad construct. There are ample suburban and near suburban areas in Queens, the Bronx and Brooklyn.

Living in Riverdale, in the Bronx, and being ~30 min from midtown, offers almost all the same advantages as living in a more urban area of Brooklyn, and being 45 mins from Midtown.

Kisses to you too.

Hey, you started it.

Other than the fact that THAT walk puts you in Queens. Yikes.

What's Yikes about it? There's a walkway for pedestrians. I've lived on the Lower East Side, Long Island City and Forest Hills. I walked the bridge when I lived in LIC.

People are so caught up in their own Bostoness that there is an unbelievable homogenity in things like dress and food and conversation topics.

Yup, Boston's so unbelievably homogenous that all class, race, and ethnic divisions have been entirely erased. One of my favorite cultural attractions is the evening sing-along where black and white, straight and gay, Southie and Roxbury, Brookline and Mattapan, Cambridge and Everett can all get together in a rousing rendition of "Kumbaya" and "We Shall Overcome" before each group retreats back into the enclave in which they were born; only to sally forth the next day for another big civic lovefest. Hell, even the NY and NJ college kids are greeted with hugs and hearty slaps on their back, even if they're wearing Yankee caps. My heart warms to the memory of Whitey Bulger singing along with Cornel West (before he left for Princeton), their hands clasped together in eternal brotherhood...

I take it that you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express when you visited Boston, because that might be the only way you'd have arrived at this perspective.

Los Angeles was never a paradise

Unless the idea of raising your children in a reasonably priced home, with a decent lot and ideal weather in a beautiful natural environment- all with a thriving economy, are your idea of paradise. In which case, yes it was.

Southern California is in an ugly phase (transportation wise) because it can't handle its volume of cars during peak hours. Once clowns like Waxman and co. get out of the way and take advantage of the pockets of high-density living and industry, existing rail lines, and pedestrian-friendly weather- "Los Angeles" will be fine.

The city once boasted one of the most extensive intracity rail lines in the world. Unfortunately, most of it was at-grade and wasn't compatible with the automobile. It will take a bit to fix, but it's by no means impossible- assuming some industry remains to support the necessary changes.

What's Yikes about it? There's a walkway for pedestrians. I've lived on the Lower East Side, Long Island City and Forest Hills. I walked the bridge when I lived in LIC.

The funny thing actually is the location right where the bridge makes landfall there in Queens is pretty blech. If you go West towards the water and LIC, it gets nicer, and if you head north towards Astoria it gets more livable (although to my eyes, hideously ugly) but the trek along 21st is really not nice. I've been riding from Astoria into Manhattan for two years now (left, literally, last week until Feb. or April, depending) and I just personally don't find much to like about that stretch of Queens. LIC may be nicer but it isn't really on the way to Manhattan, so I may not have gotten a chance to appreciate it.


Southern California is in an ugly phase (transportation wise) because it can't handle its volume of cars during peak hours. Once clowns like Waxman and co. get out of the way and take advantage of the pockets of high-density living and industry, existing rail lines, and pedestrian-friendly weather- "Los Angeles" will be fine.

I lived in northeastern South-Central in '92, and a bunch of summers in a row around that time in the San Jacintos, and I have no idea about LIFE now, but the air is way way way WAY better from my recent visits over the last five years. Coming into and looking down on the city then, the air was a truly ugly visible scary yellow that you could actually see. I have to wonder if domestic life in general hasn't improved there as well. I have no idea, but the air, yes, it's better now, you can tell just by looking at it.

It's the City and will always be the City

Manhattan is "the City" because when anyone in the NYMA -- including the ouer boroughs -- says they are going into "the City", that is what they mean. And it is a City. San Francisco and Boston are towns.

you can take Broadway from lower Manhattan all the way up through Westchester

Or you could if it weren't one-way downtown below Columbus Circle :)

Seriously, my favorite walk in the world is to take the 1 train to 215th and walk down Broadway till I can see the Statue of Liberty. There must be other city streets that long that are as continuously busy and inhabitable their whole length, but there is nothing like seeing (most of) Manhattan at that pace on foot. And only laziness has prevented me from starting the walk in the Bronx, which would be possible, but 13.7 miles or whatever it is has been my limit.

Manhattan is "the City" because when anyone in the NYMA -- including the ouer boroughs -- says they are going into "the City", that is what they mean. And it is a City. San Francisco and Boston are towns.

Sure, I'm with you, I love Manhattan. But you can enjoy 90% of the advantages of "the City" while still living in a "suburban" area.

Hey, Lassus, I used to live on 28th Street in Astoria. Great neighborhood, IMO.

you can take Broadway from lower Manhattan all the way up through Westchester

You can take it all the way to Albany, which gave it its name through most of Westchester.

Hey, Lassus, I used to live on 28th Street in Astoria. Great neighborhood, IMO.

24th between 28th and 29th, kitty-corner to the Beer Garden. Very livable, very peaceful (comparatively), very convenient, very cheap, lots of good things going for it. But to me, very dull. And towards the end, the architecture of the area started to give me migraines.

Southern California is in an ugly phase (transportation wise) because it can't handle its volume of cars during peak hours. Once clowns like Waxman and co. get out of the way and take advantage of the pockets of high-density living and industry, existing rail lines, and pedestrian-friendly weather- "Los Angeles" will be fine.

They'll have to re-write the state constitution so that 90+% of California's budget isn't tied up in mandated projects created by crazy ballot initiatives, as well, and that's just for starters.

I'll believe that Southern California is redeemable when I see it. Right now, it looks like an irretrievable mess.

Manhattan is "the City" because when anyone in the NYMA -- including the ouer boroughs -- says they are going into "the City", that is what they mean. And it is a City. San Francisco and Boston are towns.

Well San Francisco is the City for pretty much the same reason. The other reason being it's awesome. But I digress.

Of course, if we're talking about the real City, it's a square mile in London.

Of course, if we're talking about the real City, it's a square mile in London.

That, frustratingly, is mostly closed on Saturdays. Seriously, it's a struggle even to find an open Starbucks there, let along a menswear store or barbershop.

Living in Riverdale, in the Bronx, and being ~30 min from midtown, offers almost all the same advantages as living in a more urban area of Brooklyn, and being 45 mins from Midtown.

Riverdale is great if one is under 14 or over 40. Between those ages, it's really slow.

That, frustratingly, is mostly closed on Saturdays. Seriously, it's a struggle even to find an open Starbucks there, let along a menswear store or barbershop.

Why would you even go there on a Saturday?

Where in SE London do you live by the way? I'm in Forest Hill.

Manhattan is "the City" because when anyone in the NYMA -- including the ouer boroughs -- says they are going into "the City", that is what they mean. And it is a City. San Francisco and Boston are towns.

People from the Bronx might say he's going downtown rather than to "the city."

And only laziness has prevented me from starting the walk in the Bronx, which would be possible, but 13.7 miles or whatever it is has been my limit.

I can assure you that Broadway in Kingsbridge and Riverdale isn't terribly interesting, at least until you get up to Van Cortlandt Park. You should stop for a Lloyd's carrot cake, though.

They'll have to re-write the state constitution so that 90+% of California's budget isn't tied up in mandated projects created by crazy ballot initiatives, as well, and that's just for starters.

This is the real problem with this ####### place.

I don't see how anyone could refer to Northern CA as a "hell-hole." Have you been outside? We have unequivocally amazing weather at least 6 months a year, and equivocally amazing weather the other 6. Southern CA is a bit too hot for my tastes, and has smog.

I was in NY for a week about 2 months ago, prime time for NYC weather. The weather was in fact quite nice. I got home and realized that the worst day here is as nice as the best day there (given that NYC smells and has stagnant air.)

We have unequivocally amazing weather at least 6 months a year, and equivocally amazing weather the other 6.

I see variations on this a lot, and I think the idea that there is any kind of objective best weather is amusing. To me, the idea of living somewhere where it doesn't snow at least part of the year is pretty damn unappealing.

You people and your cities are so cute.

the idea of living somewhere where it doesn't snow at least part of the year is pretty damn unappealing.

I have shovelled my last driveway, and stepped into my last slush puddle, and I don't miss it at all.

You people and your cities are so cute.

Imitation manure stink just doesn't cut it for you, huh, country boy?

I take it that you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express when you visited Boston, because that might be the only way you'd have arrived at this perspective.

I actually lived for a year in Fenway Park.

I actually lived for a year in Fenway Park.

Wally!

actually Manny. I lived in the green monster during a particularly trying time in my relationship with the wife. Wally was a dear friend through it all. We used to listen to Pink Floyd and play checkers at home plate.

Why would you even go there on a Saturday?

Where in SE London do you live by the way? I'm in Forest Hill.

Combination of working in Europe during the week and wanting new suits without the crowds and prices of Covent Garden. Found one in the end.

I'm in Charlton, so not far off. Nice walk in on a weekend from Cannon Street, through St. Paul's and Fleet Street, to the West End. Much better than the direct Charing Cross train if you have the time to enjoy the walk.