Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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 03-30-2013, 11:05 PM
 
6,851 posts, read 10,910,385 times
Reputation: 8405

Advertisements

Format| City name: Population (land area/people per square mile)
01. New York: 20,673,000 (4,495/4,600)
02. Mexico City: 20,032,000 (790/25,400)
03. Los Angeles: 15,067,000 (2,432/6,200)
04. Chicago: 9,104,000 (2,647/3,400)
05. Toronto: 6,184,000 (883/7,000)
06. Dallas: 6,022,000 (1,998/3,000)
07. San Francisco: 6,020,000 (1,080/5,600)
08. Miami: 5,804,000 (1,239/4,700)
09. Philadelphia: 5,508,000 (1,981/2,800)
10. Houston: 5,485,000 (1,793/3,100)
11. Washington: 4,825,000 (1,322/3,600)
12. Atlanta: 4,707,000 (2,645/1,800)
13. Guadalajara: 4,567,000 (270/16,900)
14. Boston: 4,514,000 (2,056/2,200)
15. Phoenix: 4,044,000 (1,265/3,200)

Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed

Please keep this for only some North American cities, no where beyond those in Canada, Mexico, and the United States.

Last edited by Yac; 03-11-2014 at 08:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-30-2013, 11:14 PM
 
Location: City of Angels
2,923 posts, read 5,593,457 times
Reputation: 2267
not a fan of demographia but i consider urban area the most useful way to determine a cities size. find it amusing that NY barely beats out the DF population wise yet is allowed to have over 5 times the land area. kind of unfair, but w/e
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 11:21 PM
 
6,851 posts, read 10,910,385 times
Reputation: 8405
Quote:
Originally Posted by foadi View Post
not a fan of demographia but i consider urban area the most useful way to determine a cities size. find it amusing that NY barely beats out the DF population wise yet is allowed to have over 5 times the land area. kind of unfair, but w/e
Density speaks for itself though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 11:31 PM
 
90 posts, read 97,158 times
Reputation: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by valentro View Post
Format| City name: Population (land area/people per square mile)
01. New York: 20,673,000 (4,495/4,600)
02. Mexico City: 20,032,000 (790/25,400)
03. Los Angeles: 15,067,000 (2,432/6,200)
04. Chicago: 9,104,000 (2,647/3,400)
05. Toronto: 6,184,000 (883/7,000)
06. Dallas: 6,022,000 (1,998/3,000)
07. San Francisco: 6,020,000 (1,080/5,600)
08. Miami: 5,804,000 (1,239/4,700)
09. Philadelphia: 5,442,000 (1,981/2,800)
10. Houston: 5,485,000 (1,793/3,100)
11. Washington: 4,825,000 (1,322/3,600)
12. Atlanta: 4,707,000 (2,645/1,800)
13. Guadalajara: 4,567,000 (270/16,900)
14. Boston: 4,514,000 (2,056/2,200)
15. Phoenix: 4,044,000 (1,265/3,200)

http://demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf

Please keep this for only some North American cities, no where beyond those in Canada, Mexico, and the United States.
Atlanta's density is pathetic. Only 1800 ppsm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2013, 11:38 PM
 
Location: City of Angels
2,923 posts, read 5,593,457 times
Reputation: 2267
ya there are rural farming areas that are denser than that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2013, 12:24 AM
 
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,057 posts, read 7,449,234 times
Reputation: 5723
DC at 3600 ppsm is still 5th in density of the "American" cities after NY, LA, SF, MIA, it's ahead of Chicago and twice that of Atlanta's lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2013, 01:04 AM
 
411 posts, read 718,282 times
Reputation: 460
LA is 15M? They obviously didn't leave anything out in SoCal. Probably included inland empire, all of Orange County, and maybe even San Diego

Also, for SF, they probably excluded SJ and/or parts of East Bay

And Houston is significantly smaller than Dallas?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2013, 01:39 AM
 
Location: Canada
4,866 posts, read 10,488,648 times
Reputation: 5504
Quote:
Originally Posted by checkup View Post
LA is 15M? They obviously didn't leave anything out in SoCal. Probably included inland empire, all of Orange County, and maybe even San Diego

Also, for SF, they probably excluded SJ and/or parts of East Bay

And Houston is significantly smaller than Dallas?
Meanwhile, they're using Canadian and Mexican definitions of urban areas, which are calculated based on different rules than the US census uses (although frankly those rules are silly). If Toronto were calculated like an American metro is, it'd both be well over 6 million, and have a lower density then described. As is, it appears to exclude Oshawa and Hamilton.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2013, 02:30 AM
 
90 posts, read 97,158 times
Reputation: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIMBAM View Post
Meanwhile, they're using Canadian and Mexican definitions of urban areas, which are calculated based on different rules than the US census uses (although frankly those rules are silly). If Toronto were calculated like an American metro is, it'd both be well over 6 million, and have a lower density then described. As is, it appears to exclude Oshawa and Hamilton.
No. It includes Oshawa and Hamilton. It says so right in the .pdf if you'd bother to read it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-31-2013, 06:59 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati(Silverton)
1,607 posts, read 2,828,189 times
Reputation: 688
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIMBAM View Post
Meanwhile, they're using Canadian and Mexican definitions of urban areas, which are calculated based on different rules than the US census uses (although frankly those rules are silly). If Toronto were calculated like an American metro is, it'd both be well over 6 million, and have a lower density then described. As is, it appears to exclude Oshawa and Hamilton.
What are these rules?
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. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top