U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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 08-27-2016, 03:13 AM
 
346 posts, read 760,565 times
Reputation: 296

Advertisements

Which cities shock you the most after viewing the population density numbers for the city and visiting/living in the city. For instance, a city could have density numbers much higher or lower than you expected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-27-2016, 02:13 PM
 
4,549 posts, read 2,711,831 times
Reputation: 4138
The city of Seattle's numbers are lower than a visitor might think. We put most of the density in the 15% of the city that allows it. This includes most of the heavy visitor areas, which are becoming truly urban at a high rate. But they don't necessarily notice that the rest is houses (2/3) or industrial, park, etc. So we were at 8,150 last year iirc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2016, 11:15 PM
 
6,817 posts, read 6,974,537 times
Reputation: 5486
One thing I've always been surprised about is how low the densities of Atlanta, Houston , and Dallas are. Barely around 3,500 ppsm. There are plenty of suburbs in this country with average densities of around 5k-6k ppsm. The latter half of the 20th century was not kind of these cities. Atlanta at one point had an average density of nearly 9,000 ppsm in 1950, but annexation and suburban flight really dropped the numbers over time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2016, 11:27 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,671 posts, read 27,149,515 times
Reputation: 9609
I wish Houston was just the inner loop. If it was, the density would be 5,200+ ppsm right now. Not high by any means but surprisingly high for a sunbelt post WW2 city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 03:02 PM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
3,511 posts, read 1,718,782 times
Reputation: 2226
^^^^
I would not call Houston's case special, 77450 and 77449 both have 3,300 people or more per square mile and are completely suburban. I think a good portion of Houston zip codes especially in South Harris county are close to 10,000 people per square mile or higher like 77036 for Chinatown and Sharpstown. I saw someone on another forum calculate Southwest Houston density and get nearly 9,000 ppsm. The loop partially suffers from the east side being mostly empty but I feel it's sad that a string of what were once considered the burbs of Houston are now by far the densest part of th city, and also the most diverse.
http://web.pdx.edu/~nkobel/portfolio...is_Houston.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2016, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,671 posts, read 27,149,515 times
Reputation: 9609
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare View Post
^^^^
I would not call Houston's case special, 77450 and 77449 both have 3,300 people or more per square mile and are completely suburban. I think a good portion of Houston zip codes especially in South Harris county are close to 10,000 people per square mile or higher like 77036 for Chinatown and Sharpstown. I saw someone on another forum calculate Southwest Houston density and get nearly 9,000 ppsm. The loop partially suffers from the east side being mostly empty but I feel it's sad that a string of what were once considered the burbs of Houston are now by far the densest part of th city, and also the most diverse.
http://web.pdx.edu/~nkobel/portfolio...is_Houston.pdf
I'm talking about inside loop 610. Both those zips are way on the fringes of the metro area. The thing with the parts around Gulfton/Southwest Houston is it's nothing but suburban apartments. The density is nothing impressive. It's not walkable, or cohesive. It's 100% suburban and will always remain so. I'm not saying that inside the loop is a urban paradise either but if the city somehow changes their tune in creating a walkable city, this part of the city would be easily fixable. Not to mention it has the bones to accomplish this already. Unlike Sharpstown.

Basically this:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gu...!4d-95.4831693
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2016, 11:16 AM
 
11,456 posts, read 6,648,892 times
Reputation: 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant131531 View Post
One thing I've always been surprised about is how low the densities of Atlanta, Houston , and Dallas are. Barely around 3,500 ppsm. There are plenty of suburbs in this country with average densities of around 5k-6k ppsm. The latter half of the 20th century was not kind of these cities. Atlanta at one point had an average density of nearly 9,000 ppsm in 1950, but annexation and suburban flight really dropped the numbers over time.
Atlanta's density is lower than that of the suburban Town of Hempstead in New York
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2016, 11:32 AM
 
7,748 posts, read 4,613,791 times
Reputation: 8471
For me, it's the NY metro area. I grew up in the city, so it's shocking for me to discover the areas I thought of is purely suburban are more densely populated than Boston or DC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2016, 12:05 PM
 
29,998 posts, read 27,544,924 times
Reputation: 18578
I was surprised when I first saw the density stats of the Lexington, KY urbanized area...quite a bit higher than those of larger, classically urban places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2016, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,512 posts, read 2,990,385 times
Reputation: 2746
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
For me, it's the NY metro area. I grew up in the city, so it's shocking for me to discover the areas I thought of is purely suburban are more densely populated than Boston or DC.
This. Even Staten Island is denser than Seattle, and just behind the city of Los Angeles. Staten Island!
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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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