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 05-12-2009, 07:00 PM
 
1,750 posts, read 2,802,331 times
Reputation: 764

Advertisements

Rank them and discuss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-12-2009, 07:08 PM
 
Location: Isn't It Obvious
85 posts, read 126,735 times
Reputation: 40
Koreatown - Los Angeles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Teaneck, NJ
1,576 posts, read 5,020,967 times
Reputation: 677
Union City, NJ

it's 1 square mile with over 60,000 people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 08:09 PM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,989 posts, read 29,779,743 times
Reputation: 7238
Houston is built pretty dense, as well as Dallas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 08:15 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,520 posts, read 11,969,207 times
Reputation: 3820
Well clearly NYC is the densest big city (>5 sq miles) by far, averaging 27k/sq mile over an area of 304 sq miles. Some small cities in NJ like Union City are denser but only over a very small area. SF is a distant second at 17k/sq mile over an area of 46 sq miles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 08:20 PM
 
177 posts, read 417,992 times
Reputation: 197
My list for US:
1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. Philly
4. SF
5. DC
6. Boston
7. LA
8. Miami
9. Seattle
10. Detroit
11. Minneapolis
12. Houston
13. Dallas
14. Cleveland
15. Atlanta

For strictly 'dense built environments', not residential or population density, in the US its still clearly NYC. Then Chicago. Midtown and downtown Manhattan, then the Loop and Mag. mile in chicago.

After that its a little harder to determine. Does height play a key role, and how much height is necessary? How about sq mile area and size of the dense environment? Given loose criteria I would say the next densest built environments would be in tightly packed downtowns like Philly, SF, DC, and Boston respectively. DCs density is wider than most cities, just shorter so I knocked it down a little for height. SFs height is also less than Phillys although the number of midrises and lowrise buildings put it pretty close. LA would likely be next, its often overlooked, but there are a decent number of midrises surrounding downtown LAs skyline. Those are cities that come to my mind.

Miami is starting to build out a lot more, and its density is still in its infancy, but still may be comparable to LA without the midrises. Houston and Dallas have the height, but also have large parking lots near their downtowns, and ATL is so spread out, with few midrises. I would still go with smaller, older cities like Detroit, Minneapolis or Seattle over those cities in terms of densely built up environments. Also, Vancouver and Toronto are certainly among the top cities in NA, likely just below Chicago.

Maybe Pittsburgh, Cleveland or Baltimore, with their old style density should be on here as well ahead of some of the other sunbelt cities.

Worldwide the densest built environments are in Hong Kong, Seoul, Shanghai, and Sao Paulo. No US city, except maybe NYC can even hope to match these cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 08:26 PM
 
Location: Denver
6,628 posts, read 12,112,091 times
Reputation: 4051
For central cores of a city:
NYC
Chicago
Philly
Boston
SF
DC

For Metro areas:
LA
NYC
SF
DC
Philly
Boston
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 08:27 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,520 posts, read 11,969,207 times
Reputation: 3820
Quote:
Originally Posted by roboto View Post
My list for US:
1. NYC
2. Chicago
3. Philly
4. SF
5. DC
6. Boston
7. LA
8. Miami
9. Seattle
10. Detroit
11. Minneapolis
12. Houston
13. Dallas
14. Cleveland
15. Atlanta

For strictly 'dense built environments', not residential or population density, in the US its still clearly NYC. Then Chicago. Midtown and downtown Manhattan, then the Loop and Mag. mile in chicago.

After that its a little harder to determine. Does height play a key role, and how much height is necessary? How about sq mile area and size of the dense environment? Given loose criteria I would say the next densest built environments would be in tightly packed downtowns like Philly, SF, DC, and Boston respectively. DCs density is wider than most cities, just shorter so I knocked it down a little for height. SFs height is also less than Phillys although the number of midrises and lowrise buildings put it pretty close. LA would likely be next, its often overlooked, but there are a decent number of midrises surrounding downtown LAs skyline. Those are cities that come to my mind.
I agree that the densest parts of Chicago are denser than the densest parts of SF, due to the greater concentration of high rises as well as the greater amount of transit which allows people from afar to congregate in these areas (the Loop and Mag Mile.) Some residential neighborhoods on the north side of Chicago have population densities of NYC level (30k+). What pulls the average density of Chicago below SF is the great amount of desolate/depopulated land on the west and south side of Chicago. Much of this land is/was industrial and was always low population, and some of used to be high density residential but has become depopulated due to urban decay/white flight. If these parts of town ever gentrify to the levels seen across the north side of Chicago, the city could easily double its population. Of course that won't happen anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 09:58 PM
 
Location: Chicago metro
3,375 posts, read 7,044,203 times
Reputation: 1852
Even though New Orleans population density is kind of low, the French Quarter is impressive; It's like a taste of Europe. It's probably the best dense built area in the south.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2009, 04:18 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
31,575 posts, read 53,094,619 times
Reputation: 14494
Population Density Per Square Mile
1 New York, NY 27,147
2 San Francisco, CA 16,380
3 Chicago, IL 12,649
4 Boston, MA 12,327
5 Philadelphia, PA 10,883
6 Washington, DC 9,581
7 Los Angeles, CA 8,205
8 Baltimore, MD 7,889
9 Seattle, WA 7,085
10 Detroit, MI 7,085
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top