U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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 02-01-2013, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,798 posts, read 19,003,355 times
Reputation: 6800

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Well no. He was referring to that particular block, not the entire city.

I didn't see that you had referred to that area, and his comment was an example he brought up months ago (he's never been to Chicago).

You can also find houses 6 miles past the city center in Paris (see the one I posted above). They are outside the city limits, though.
Exactly. You can find it in European cities. You can even find it in Istanbul which is kind of darted with huge SFHs on the Bosphorus Strait in certain areas right in the middle of everything, but it still doesn't take away from the fact that it's a high density city of officially 14 million people (unofficially 16-20 million).

http://www.ocean.washington.edu/peop...rray/yali1.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/213/5...fab0ca5720.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2013, 11:27 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
You can't find any detached single family homes in Paris, but that's partly because the city limits are only 50 square miles (as showed from the streetview, there are plenty of houses outside).

I suspect it might be hard to find houses in Spanish cities, in or outside of the city limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,798 posts, read 19,003,355 times
Reputation: 6800
Just a little bit of a stark difference between the urbanism of the south side of chicago versus north/near west sides...

San Francisco's land area is 46.87 sq miles for 805,235 people.

In Chicago, take the north/northwest neighborhoods of:
Near North Side, Lakeview, North Center, Lincoln Park, Avondale, Logan Square,Uptown, Edgewater, Rogers Park, Albany Park, West Ridge, Lincoln Square, North Park, Irving Park, and Portage Park

Add up the populations and their square mileage. You get 847,957 in 39.59 sq miles. That's almost 40,000 more people for over 7 less sq miles than San Francisco. If you compare north/northwest side of Chicago to San Francisco, then Chicago is denser.

If you expand this out to just a few more neighborhoods of Chicago to make it around the same size as San Francisco area wise...you could add the neighborhood of Jefferson Park and West Town. The area is then 46.51 sq miles (.3 sq miles less than San Francisco). The population of this area in Chicago is 956,837, which is over 150,000 more people than San Francisco for basically the same area (and these areas are continuous too, not sporadic areas picked).

By the way, the areas of North Park, part of Lincoln Square, Jefferson Park, part of Portage Park, and part of Irving Park are pretty suburban for north/northwest side standards and many people here think they ARE actually suburbs. They all contain sizable SFHs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,103,705 times
Reputation: 3979
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
Just a little bit of a stark difference between the urbanism of the south side of chicago versus north/near west sides...

San Francisco's land area is 46.87 sq miles for 805,235 people.

In Chicago, take the north/northwest neighborhoods of:
Near North Side, Lakeview, North Center, Lincoln Park, Avondale, Logan Square,Uptown, Edgewater, Rogers Park, Albany Park, West Ridge, Lincoln Square, North Park, Irving Park, and Portage Park

Add up the populations and their square mileage. You get 847,957 in 39.59 sq miles. That's almost 40,000 more people for over 7 less sq miles than San Francisco. If you compare north/northwest side of Chicago to San Francisco, then Chicago is denser.

If you expand this out to some western neighborhoods of Chicago to make it around the same size as San Francisco area wise...you could add the neighborhood of Jefferson Park and West Town. The area is then 46.51 sq miles (.3 sq miles less than San Francisco). The population of this area in Chicago is 956,837, which is over 150,000 more people than San Francisco for basically the same area (and these areas are continuous too, not sporadic areas picked).

By the way, the areas of North Park, part of Lincoln Square, Jefferson Park, part of Portage Park, and part of Irving Park are pretty suburban for north/northwest side standards and many people here think they ARE actually suburbs. They all contain sizable SFHs.
You can do this with Los Angeles too, and a few other cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:05 PM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,798 posts, read 19,003,355 times
Reputation: 6800
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
You can do this with Los Angeles too, and a few other cities.
I would like to because it's very interesting. I just looked at downtown Los Angeles district has a population of 45,518 for 5.305 sq miles. Density of 8580 per sq mile...which is actually slightly less dense than the least dense neighborhood I mentioned above in Chicago (North Park). I understand it's the CBD though so things are denser in other areas.

I would love to expand out though (it's lunchtime though so after it )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:06 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 16 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,987 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33050
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I thought MSA was the metro population, not the CSA, which is more of a greater regional population.
Here's a time when Wiki comes in handy.

Combined Statistical Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A Combined Statistical Area (CSA) is a grouping of adjacent metropolitan and/or micropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in the United States and Puerto Rico. The United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB) defines combined statistical areas based on social and economic ties measured by commuting patterns between adjacent MSAs. The areas that combine retain their own designations as metropolitan or micropolitan statistical areas within the larger combined statistical area. The primary distinguishing factor between a CSA and an MSA is that the social and economic ties between the individual MSAs within a CSA are at lower levels than between the counties within an MSA.[1]

However you look at it, San Franscisco, the city, has a lot of surrounding suburban area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:08 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu View Post
I would like to because it's very interesting. I did a little bit and all I could find in a few minutes was downtown Los Angeles district has a population of 45,518 for 5.305 sq miles. Density of 8580 per sq mile...which is actually slightly less dense than the least dense neighborhood I mentioned above in Chicago (North Park). I understand it's the CBD though so things are denser in other areas.

I would love to expand out though (it's lunchtime though so after it )
There was a thread on this, it would be a bit more on topic here:

What density would your cities density be if it was the size of San Francisco?

The densest 47 square miles of LA do not include its CBD, though that could change in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,798 posts, read 19,003,355 times
Reputation: 6800
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
There was a thread on this, it would be a bit more on topic here:

What density would your cities density be if it was the size of San Francisco?

The densest 47 square miles of LA do not include its CBD, though that could change in the future.
That's awesome. A lot to read through too. It would be interesting to see what people picked for each city to add up. For example, someone not familiar with Chicago might not pick the north side so the density might appear less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
14,798 posts, read 19,003,355 times
Reputation: 6800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post

However you look at it, San Franscisco, the city, has a lot of surrounding suburban area.
Lots of cities come to mind like this. Washington DC, Boston, Atlanta, Miami. All cities where their populations aren't amazing, but the MSA population (not CSA) are all over 5 million each.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 12:16 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
I don't care for CSAs. They combined cities with separate histories and identies far apart. Balitmore and Washington are combined together as one CSA. Providence and Worcester with Boston, IMO the first two are separate. The census does count them as separate MSAs and urban areas. Is San Jose a suburb of San Francisco, or just another city in the Bay Area? I'd think the second.

If you don't consider South Bay (Silicon Valley), which isn't part of the urban area or MSA, San Francisco is similar to Boston and DC in the percent of people living outside the city limits. And the San Francisco area is rather urban, both its city and suburbs are among the densest in the country and comes out somewhat denser than Boston.
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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
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