is Pueblo the only anomaly? (Denver, Boulder: apartment, how much, homes)

[eon-krate32]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

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....

[bluescreen73]

Originally Posted by eon-krate32

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.

[treedonkey]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

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.

[80skeys]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

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.

[bluescreen73]

Originally Posted by 80skeys

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.

[80skeys]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

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

[eon-krate32]

Originally Posted by bluescreen73

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...

[treedonkey]

Originally Posted by eon-krate32

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.

[eon-krate32]

Originally Posted by treedonkey

...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.

[treedonkey]

Originally Posted by eon-krate32

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.