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.
So do I. They keep the doctor away. However, the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, not so much.
Speaking of cities, 32,900,000,000,000,000 could fit in the New Jerusalem, if it has the average density of Chicago (12,000 ppsm). Now THAT'S a city.
That is definitely a city! I sure hope they have one he** of a mass transit system. Forget about a car I'll just take the subway. I hope I'll have a seat.
I think the point is because area size is so inconsistent on city size that population comparisons sometimes are worthless. Is Boston as a city 1/5th the size of Houston? Well the population would suggest that but is covers a land area (city proper) 1/14th that of Houston.
Another example the urban area (UA) population of Houston is 4.4 Million versus the UA of Chicago at 8.5 million
Pheonix is larger in population than Philly, does that mean it is a bigger city?
You know whats funny? I've been to Houston and even Phily and i swear to god that Philly feels bigger then Houston. I'm not even lying.When i went to Houston nobody told me how spread out it was, all i knew was that its the 4th largest city.......but it didn't feel big, i just thought it was the area around downtown, nobody told me it stretched all the WAY to Galveston,Tx ....... thats HUGE, ALot of land, most of it is suburban and some of it isn't even populated, like big lots of land that don't even have anything! It suburban not like Chicago's , NYC's, or even Phily's nearby suburbs, Chicago's nearby suburbs are more urban then most cities you'll find in the south, its suburban is in the FAR FAR way suburbs..... like in Chicago that would be Aurora or even Joliet type of suburban feel, for Phily it would be like Cherry Hill type of suburbaness, But they have palm trees and small ranch homes with drive ways pretty far apart from each other, and i even saw small homes with laminate roofs, maybe i should of kept that to my self, but if a hurricane comes those roof will fly off easily.
So do I. They keep the doctor away. However, the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, not so much.
Speaking of cities, 32,900,000,000,000,000 could fit in the New Jerusalem, if it has the average density of Chicago (12,000 ppsm). Now THAT'S a city.
Speaking of density, i bet you didn't know that Chicago has a higher density then London.
Chicago-about 3 million people living only on 227 square miles(density-12,700 per sq mi)
London-about 7.5 million living on 659 square miles(density-12,300 per sq mi) < also VERY spread out, but at least its urban.
The average density of Chicago for the north side is anywhere from (18,000 ppl per sq mi) to (45,000 ppl per sq mi) The densest would be the Near North Side(mag mile, gold coast, streeterville, etc) but Edge Water,Rogers Park,Uptown, and Humboldt Park(puerto rican hood) aren't that far behind.
It does look like that anymore, they closed down the mag mile aka michigan ave for a movie they're making,transformers 3. So it looks like the end of the world with film crews......but its still crowded! =)
The average density of the south side is anywhere from (8,000 ppl per sq mi) to (20,000 ppl per sq mi) oviously the south side is less urban for the ovious reasons and ovoiusly Little Village(mexican hood) would be the densest and the most crowded for the south side.
Some Little Village videos..... this is as busy as its going to get in the south side.... hard to find parking, some ppl walking around......nothing like the near north side though...not HUGE masses of people, btw its a hood/ghetto.
Speaking of density, i bet you didn't know that Chicago has a higher density then London.
Chicago-about 3 million people living only on 227 square miles(density-12,700 per sq mi)
London-about 7.5 million living on 659 square miles(density-12,300 per sq mi) < also VERY spread out, but at least its urban.
The average density of Chicago for the north side is anywhere from (18,000 ppl per sq mi) to (45,000 ppl per sq mi) The densest would be the Near North Side(mag mile, gold coast, streeterville, etc) but Edge Water,Rogers Park,Uptown, and Humboldt Park(puerto rican hood) aren't that far behind.
Let's not get confused by the simple "Total Population / Total Land Area" measurement. The density of London is much greater than that of Chicago. It's not even close.
Let's not get confused by the simple "Total Population / Total Land Area" measurement. The density of London is much greater than that of Chicago. It's not even close.
I agree, London feels dense everywhere.
Chicago is nice but it is no where close to London. Every square inch of London is infused with History. I think it is my favorite city in the world. I can't decide. Geneva doesn't have as much History but I love it too
Chicago is nice but it is no where close to London. Every square inch of London is infused with History. I think it is my favorite city in the world. I can't decide. Geneva doesn't have as much History but I love it too
And you have to be careful to as what "London" is. "The Greater London Area" is many times considered 'London', however the actual City of London is smaller in land.
It's like the people who tend to not include the four other boroughs from Manhattan, and count Manhattan as the only part of NYC.
And you have to be careful to as what "London" is. "The Greater London Area" is many times considered 'London', however the actual City of London is smaller in land.
It's like the people who tend to not include the four other boroughs from Manhattan, and count Manhattan as the only part of NYC.
oh yeah. My cousin lived in the outskirts and on the train we had to go passed cow pastured and such which would seem to make London less dense.
I miss London now. Thanks very much people I remember going to visit my school mate who lived in Harrow on The Hill. The train there is so ricketty, it was fun.
P.S. Mind the Gap
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.
....... thats HUGE, ALot of land, most of it is suburban and some of it isn't even populated, like big lots of land that don't even have anything! It suburban not like Chicago's , NYC's, or even Phily's nearby suburbs, Chicago's nearby suburbs are more urban then most cities you'll find in the south, its suburban is in the FAR FAR way suburbs..... like in Chicago that would be Aurora or even Joliet type of suburban feel, for Phily it would be like Cherry Hill type of suburbaness, But they have palm trees and small ranch homes with drive ways pretty far apart from each other, and i even saw small homes with laminate roofs, maybe i should of kept that to my self, but if a hurricane comes those roof will fly off easily.
I remember going to visit my school mate who lived in Harrow on The Hill. The train there is so ricketty, it was fun.
