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.
The point is that most of the "densely populated states" in the top 10 don't even match the population of the Los Angeles region, much less the density, which makes the braggadocio unwarranted.
Some of those states (Delaware, Rhode Island) don't even match the population of the city of San Diego.
BosWash = the 1,000 ppsm megapolis.
This is basically it, and in many areas 1,000 is being optimistic.
On the other hand, downtown LA to downtown SD is almost entirely 5,000+ppsm not including the gap at the military installation.
So while BosWash is a megalopolis, but LA-SD are more so imo if density is the deciding factor, and looking at the booming population in the Victor Valley, I wouldnt be surprised if LAs urbanization got to within commuting distance of Vegas.
This is basically it, and in many areas 1,000 is being optimistic.
On the other hand, downtown LA to downtown SD is almost entirely 5,000+ppsm not including the gap at the military installation.
So while BosWash is a megalopolis, but LA-SD are more so imo if density is the deciding factor, and looking at the booming population in the Victor Valley, I wouldnt be surprised if LAs urbanization got to within commuting distance of Vegas.
Ok but then again the whole population of LA to SD is less than NYC Metro and gets to the first 20 million in a smaller footprint than half of this
so if you want endless orange county, ok
Also isnt the space in the IE and northern parts of SD closer to 2K
Remember even with gaps in development the area from DC to NYC basically would fit in the space from Thousand Oks to the Mx border and includes nearly 40 million people (albiet more peaked and valley-ed and less uniform density) Or even simpler take just New Castle DE, the 5 PA Philly Metro counties, NJ and the rmeainder of the NY MSA and you have about 28 million in an even smaller footprint distance wise (albeit some large undeveloped areas like milatary bases and Pinelands etc.)
So if you continuous footprint (area covered not population intensity in the smallest space) well then maybe you are correct. OC is not why I like CA (albeit some very nice areas but on the whole, ehh...)
Last edited by kidphilly; 08-12-2013 at 01:54 PM..
Ok but then again the whole population of LA to SD is less than NYC Metro and gets to the first 20 million in a smaller footprint than half of this
so if you want endless orange county, ok
Also isnt the space in the IE and northern parts of SD closer to 2K
Remember even with gaps in development the area from DC to NYC basically would fit in the space from Thousand Oks to the Mx border and includes nearly 40 million people (albiet more peaked and valley-ed and less uniform density)
So if you continuous footprint (area covered not population intensity in the smallest space) well then maybe you are correct. OC is not why I like CA (albeit some very nice areas but on the whole, ehh...)
Yes but you guys cant even compare NY-Philadelphia to LA-SD as far as contiguous density, so why drag DC, whose urbanized density is rural by California standards into the mix?
5400 sq miles...if you took all the UAs in the Greater Los Angeles region + San Diego's UA, you would not approach that size.
And rightfully so, since you are talking about double the population for the NYC-Philly UA. Just to put this in perspective, all of the so-called SoCal LA-SD "megaregion" Monclair is talking about is relatively "tiny", it would fit inside NYC area alone (population wise). Keep in mind that the whole state of California is only ~38 million people.
Yes but you guys cant even compare NY-Philadelphia to LA-SD as far as contiguous density, so why drag DC, whose urbanized density is rural by California standards into the mix?
Are these the continuous development you speak of?
You are right though LA doesnt compare to NYC and SD doesnt compare to Philly
Also weighted density of the areas so the developed places where people live
NYC 31.3K ppsm (18.9 Million people)
Philly 7.8K (6.0)
Trenton 5.9K (0.4)
Bridgeport 5.1K (0.9)
LA 12.1K (12.8)
San Diego 6.9K (3.1)
Thousand Oaks 5.5K (0.8)
Riverside 4.3K (4.2)
I could also throw in
Allentown 3.9 (0.8)
Reading 4.7K (0.4)
Total Population:
NYC to Philly 26.2 Million (27.4 million with Allentown and Reading)
LA to SD 20.9 Million
But remember that Philly and NYC are much closer in distance than are LA and SD (Actually NYC and Philadelphia are 46 miles at their closest borders)
LAs urbanized density is significantly higher than NY and SD is significantly more dense than Philadelphia.
Its definitely noticeable in person as one travels
between NE cities. Density drops off as soon as
you leave immediate urban areas whereas the
suburbs look like sprawlsville-farmland compared to suburban
LA or suburban SD.
In fact basically the entire state of CA steamrolls
over the Northeast as far as consistent density:
California Urbanized Areas Population Density,
2010
Los Angeles 6,999
San Francisco 6,266
San Jose 5,820
Delano 5,482
Davis 5,156
Lompoc 4,815
Woodland 4,550
Santa Maria 4,478
Oxnard 4,352
Lodi 4,320
San Diego 4,037
Stockton 4,037
Simi Valley 3,983
Tracy 3,934
Vallejo 3,929
Modesto 3,898
Mission Viejo 3,877
Turlock 3,873
Manteca 3,828
Fresno 3,821
Bakersfield 3,875
Salinas 3,775
Sacramento 3,659
El Centro 3,589
Riverside 3,546
Santa Barbara 3,507
Madera 3,501
Visalia 3,459
Porterville 3,425
Antioch 3,412
Vacaville 3,398
Fairfield 3,387
Santa Clarita 3,371
Livermore 3,335
Hemet 3,327
Napa 3,250
Watsonville 3,219
Hanford 3,169
Santa Rosa 3,145
Concord 3,023
Yuba City 3,019
Petaluma 3,007
Compared to the most m in the NE, its not even
close actually.
Northeastern Urbanized Areas Population Density,
2010
New York 5,318
Washington DC 3,470
Baltimore 3,073
State College(PA) 3,033
Philadelphia 2,746
Trenton 2,810
New Bedford(MA) 2,712
Reading 2,564
Boston 2,231
Providence 2,815
But like I said, BosWash is still a megalopolis, that just happens to be significantly less dense than the emerging megalipolis in Southern California.
So basically LA and SD built over all their open land in the same total area as NYC to DC decided to have denser living spaces with more nature to go around? Hmmm...think I'm gonna take the latter. Why would I want a continuous built residential and commercial area instead of more high density and actually having some more natural space, but being the same drive time to each other? Isn't what LA and SD is doing kind of a bad thing? On a micro level it's like having a dense city with more park space vs a city that just builds allover the place with little parkspace.
So basically LA and SD built over all their open land in the same total area as NYC to DC decided to have denser living spaces with more nature to go around? Hmmm...think I'm gonna take the latter. Why would I want a continuous built residential and commercial area instead of more high density and actually having some more natural space, but being the same drive time to each other? Isn't what LA and SD is doing kind of a bad thing? On a micro level it's like having a dense city with more park space vs a city that just builds allover the place with little parkspace.
SD and LA don't have the same built environments. There is a lot more open space/undeveloped land between communities in San Diego County than there are in the LA Metro area.
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.
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.
