U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [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 11-17-2009, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Greeley, Colorado
631 posts, read 1,361,421 times
Reputation: 161

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
At one time about 15 years ago Longmont was the 4th most densely populated city in the US.
uhh.... that just blew my mind...THAT DOESN'T SEEM POSSIBLE!!! especially since i moved in 14 years ago....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-17-2009, 10:34 PM
 
Location: Aurora, CO
6,180 posts, read 9,499,905 times
Reputation: 8883
Quote:
Originally Posted by eon-krate32 View Post
uhh.... that just blew my mind...THAT DOESN'T SEEM POSSIBLE!!! especially since i moved in 14 years ago....
At one time Longmont's population density was over 4,500 people per square mile. According to City-Data it's down to 3943 - which is higher than Denver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 09:48 AM
 
2,437 posts, read 7,122,170 times
Reputation: 1506
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
At one time Longmont's population density was over 4,500 people per square mile. According to City-Data it's down to 3943 - which is higher than Denver.
Just to clarify... that really just means that there were many apartments and/or houses very close to one another in a relatively small area... it also would help having a lot of families and extended families in one place, as that would drive the density rate up. I don't know what Longmont was like 14 year, or now, but my guess is that to have a density like that it must have been a commuter location with lots of apts. and ther low cost housing for folks working jobs in surrounding communities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 09:56 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
4,901 posts, read 8,933,593 times
Reputation: 2454
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
At one time about 15 years ago Longmont was the 4th most densely populated city in the US.
What??? Where are you pulling this out of?
Sorry, but talking about any place in Colorado being densely populated is ridiculous if you've ever spent any time in D.C., NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, etc. etc.

The apartment buildings I lived in Arlington and Alexandria probably had 1500 - 2000 people living just in a single apartment buildling. The block I lived on in the Fort Greene neighborhood of Brooklyn probably had that many people just on a single city block. I'm not talking square miles here ... I'm talking a single block.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 10:32 AM
 
Location: Aurora, CO
6,180 posts, read 9,499,905 times
Reputation: 8883
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80skeys View Post
What??? Where are you pulling this out of?
Sorry, but talking about any place in Colorado being densely populated is ridiculous if you've ever spent any time in D.C., NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, etc. etc.

The apartment buildings I lived in Arlington and Alexandria probably had 1500 - 2000 people living just in a single apartment buildling. The block I lived on in the Fort Greene neighborhood of Brooklyn probably had that many people just on a single city block. I'm not talking square miles here ... I'm talking a single block.
Let me qualify that then, I can't remember where I read it - it was probably cities under 100,000 people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
4,901 posts, read 8,933,593 times
Reputation: 2454
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
Let me qualify that then, I can't remember where I read it - it was probably cities under 100,000 people.
Ok, that makes sense, thanks for the clarification
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Greeley, Colorado
631 posts, read 1,361,421 times
Reputation: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluescreen73 View Post
At one time Longmont's population density was over 4,500 people per square mile. According to City-Data it's down to 3943 - which is higher than Denver.

that still doesn't seem real, i go all over longmont EVERYDAY and with the stuff we got going on and have had going on that just doesn't seem like it's that possible. And Longmont being denser than Denver doesn't seem real either...Denver has easily 8x the population Longmont has and yet Denver is only about 3-4x bigger in land area...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 02:39 PM
 
2,437 posts, read 7,122,170 times
Reputation: 1506
Quote:
Originally Posted by eon-krate32 View Post
that still doesn't seem real, i go all over longmont EVERYDAY and with the stuff we got going on and have had going on that just doesn't seem like it's that possible. And Longmont being denser than Denver doesn't seem real either...Denver has easily 8x the population Longmont has and yet Denver is only about 3-4x bigger in land area...
It seems plausible to me. Keep in mind that a lot of Denver is taken up by businesses, industrial property, parks, golf courses, multiple freeways, and many other things. So although, Denver's main residential areas may seem quite dense, its overall population density may not be that high. Of course, I have no statistics to back it up wither way, but saying a place has a high pop density probably just means they have a lot of apartments and condos, compared to the amount of businesses and larger homesites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Greeley, Colorado
631 posts, read 1,361,421 times
Reputation: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by treedonkey View Post
...saying a place has a high pop density probably just means they have a lot of apartments and condos, compared to the amount of businesses and larger homesites.
and that's what i find difficult to believe about Longmont. with the possible exception of Old Town and the extreme SW/NE development most of the city's residential areas consist of decent sized properties, mainly individual homes.

Of course this whole conversation is ENTIRELY off topic, unless this can somehow be tied into the original topic: Pueblo being an anomaly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2009, 06:17 PM
 
2,437 posts, read 7,122,170 times
Reputation: 1506
Quote:
Originally Posted by eon-krate32 View Post
Of course this whole conversation is ENTIRELY off topic, unless this can somehow be tied into the original topic: Pueblo being an anomaly.
Yes, it's related to the original topic, which was if Pueblo is the only larger city close to the front range that is still fairly affordable. So, if Longmont is deemed both 'large' and 'affordable', then it would fit that anomaly description as well.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Colorado
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