I would definately say this was already true between
Washington-Baltimore (declared a single census area metropolis) and New
York... but depending on what you consider a city scape.
But to bring this back to what cities are most often in SF... how about
what cities are conspicuously absent? I must be reading too many
post-catastrophic works, but it seems to me that large cities are mostly
known by their destruction.
misha
>----------
>From: Geoffrey D. Sperl[SMTP:gamgee@GEOCITIES.COM]
>Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 1997 1:08 PM
>To: FEMINISTSF@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
>Subject: Re: [*FSFFU*] San Diego/ SF cities
>
>l schmeiser wrote:
>
>> Gibson's got an interesting take on it: he predicts
>> that the East Coast cities will mutate into one huge urban corridor
>> known
>> as "The Sprawl." It'll start in Boston and wind its way down to
>> Atlanta.
>
>Actually, a lot of urban planners already see Gibson's BAMA
>(Boston-Atlanta Metropolitan Axis) as existing. I understand that,
>depending on the roads you take, you could crive the Boston-Atalanta
>corridor and never not see a cityscape...
>
>- Geoffrey
>--
>"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so." - Ford Prefect
>
>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/8499
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:41 PDT