U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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 05-27-2016, 09:12 AM
 
5,546 posts, read 5,873,839 times
Reputation: 3795

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
That's not necessarily true either. If you look at a city map of Phoenix you'll see over one quarter of the city footprint is unihabited. The Sonoran Mountain preserve is to the north is about 50 sq mi of unihabited land, and South Mountain park is 25 sq mi of unihabited land(Other parks and mountains make up the rest). The areas north of Bethany Home Rd. and South of South Mountain are very suburban. Central Phoenix itself is surprising is closer to 6000-7000ppsm.

Alot of people have these ideas about Phoenix that it's entire 500sq mi is completely built out in low density suburban tracts. When you mix that along with the other overplayed stigmas of the city, it's hard for people to believe that it has a couple census tracts that have over 25000ppsm. Make no mistake the Phoenix area is quite characterized by characterless suburbanism it is also light years away from a place like Philly. However it is a lot more dense than people on here would guess, and the central city itself is built out in dense closer together neighborhoods.
I don't doubt it has a few tracts that are somewhat dense. Most cities have these. And every city has about a quarter of its land area undeveloped (look at South Philly and the airport, the refinery and the undeveloped land, plus Fairmount park). I know Phoenix has more undevelopable land, but it's not unusual and the margin isn't that large between it and other cities. Note undevelopable land vs. undeveloped land. I know Phoenix has more undeveloped land, and I acknowledge that central Phoenix is larger than Atlanta population-wise.

Modern suburbs in the west are absolutely denser than many in the east, including Philly. However, Philly doesn't have much of that at all in its city limits. Northeast Philly tends to get more suburbanish in nature, but is still pretty densely built:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0233...7i13312!8i6656

Of course, when you get closer to the border, it gets more Northeast suburban:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ph...652215!6m1!1e1

And while Philly has a city-wide density of approximately 11,500, it has census tracts that hit 100,000+. Although those census tracts are pretty small. For example, my tract is ~40,000, but my neighborhood hits about 30 - 35,000 ppsm.

All in all, Phoenix is a much smaller city on pretty much every metric with exception of the 2020 city-limit population figure. I wish City-Data allowed you to select multiple census tracts to determine population figures in larger areas.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-27-2016, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Louisville
4,403 posts, read 4,209,872 times
Reputation: 7572
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA View Post
I don't doubt it has a few tracts that are somewhat dense. Most cities have these. And every city has about a quarter of its land area undeveloped (look at South Philly and the airport, the refinery and the undeveloped land, plus Fairmount park). I know Phoenix has more undevelopable land, but it's not unusual and the margin isn't that large between it and other cities. Note undevelopable land vs. undeveloped land. I know Phoenix has more undeveloped land, and I acknowledge that central Phoenix is larger than Atlanta population-wise.

Modern suburbs in the west are absolutely denser than many in the east, including Philly. However, Philly doesn't have much of that at all in its city limits. Northeast Philly tends to get more suburbanish in nature, but is still pretty densely built:



And while Philly has a city-wide density of approximately 11,500, it has census tracts that hit 100,000+. Although those census tracts are pretty small. For example, my tract is ~40,000, but my neighborhood hits about 30 - 35,000 ppsm.

All in all, Phoenix is a much smaller city on pretty much every metric with exception of the 2020 city-limit population figure. I wish City-Data allowed you to select multiple census tracts to determine population figures in larger areas.
Just so we are clear I am the biggest advocate of NOT using city pop as a comparison metric on here. I would go number crazy on the "Phoenix has more people than Philly" crowd should it happen. I have a weakness for rising cities and for pointing out where stigmas are wrong, hence my Phoenix fact fest. But to the larger point I'd never try to compare the two.

As a side note to your comment I'd point out that the land in Phoenix i was referring to is Uninhabitable as it is park and land preserve.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 09:39 AM
 
10,276 posts, read 8,365,342 times
Reputation: 10644
All cities have extensive areas of uninhabited land. All cities also have denser cores than the overall city density. So not really getting the conversation.

I could probably find a census tract in Phoenix with higher density than NYC overall (like maybe a prison or a university or a big apartment complex). Not sure why this is relevant.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Louisville
4,403 posts, read 4,209,872 times
Reputation: 7572
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
All cities have extensive areas of uninhabited land. All cities also have denser cores than the overall city density. So not really getting the conversation.

I could probably find a census tract in Phoenix with higher density than NYC overall (like maybe a prison or a university or a big apartment complex). Not sure why this is relevant.
I am still not convinced that grumpy cat isn't sitting on the other side of that keyboard. I embrace your need to be contrarian NOLA

I'm not somehow under the impression that these things are unique to Phoenix. However the comparison was made that at the same land area Phoenix would be about the same pop as Atlanta. I saw a statistic not too long ago that showed there was not a single census tract in the state of Georgia that was over 10,000ppsm(including the city of Atlanta). If anyone has data pointing otherwise please feel free to prove me wrong. My point was that if you cut away the fat around Phoenix you have a city core that is more dense, that it would still be larger than Atlanta.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 09:56 AM
 
5,546 posts, read 5,873,839 times
Reputation: 3795
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
Just so we are clear I am the biggest advocate of NOT using city pop as a comparison metric on here. I would go number crazy on the "Phoenix has more people than Philly" crowd should it happen. I have a weakness for rising cities and for pointing out where stigmas are wrong, hence my Phoenix fact fest. But to the larger point I'd never try to compare the two.

As a side note to your comment I'd point out that the land in Phoenix i was referring to is Uninhabitable as it is park and land preserve.
Your points are fair IMO.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: The City
22,402 posts, read 34,216,126 times
Reputation: 7844
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
That's not necessarily true either. If you look at a city map of Phoenix you'll see over one quarter of the city footprint is unihabited. The Sonoran Mountain preserve is to the north is about 50 sq mi of unihabited land, and South Mountain park is 25 sq mi of unihabited land(Other parks and mountains make up the rest). The areas north of Bethany Home Rd. and South of South Mountain are very suburban. Central Phoenix itself is surprising is closer to 6000-7000ppsm.

Alot of people have these ideas about Phoenix that it's entire 500sq mi is completely built out in low density suburban tracts. When you mix that along with the other overplayed stigmas of the city, it's hard for people to believe that it has a couple census tracts that have over 25000ppsm. Make no mistake the Phoenix area is quite characterized by characterless suburbanism it is also light years away from a place like Philly. However it is a lot more dense than people on here would guess, and the central city itself is built out in dense closer together neighborhoods.

actually I think we are more in agreement then not


I find where Phoenix is developed it is fairly dense (the 6k ish makes sense based on my experience albeit not extensive) and it feels when developed more like the density and consistency of SOCAL, maybe a tad lower than LA or similar to SD. And imagine the core is more dense ad is more dense consistently then Atlanta which is sort of the NE version/styling but of low density especially in the burbs


btw the grumpy cat comment made me chuckle
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 11:36 AM
 
62 posts, read 51,051 times
Reputation: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
I am still not convinced that grumpy cat isn't sitting on the other side of that keyboard. I embrace your need to be contrarian NOLA

I'm not somehow under the impression that these things are unique to Phoenix. However the comparison was made that at the same land area Phoenix would be about the same pop as Atlanta. I saw a statistic not too long ago that showed there was not a single census tract in the state of Georgia that was over 10,000ppsm(including the city of Atlanta). If anyone has data pointing otherwise please feel free to prove me wrong. My point was that if you cut away the fat around Phoenix you have a city core that is more dense, that it would still be larger than Atlanta.
Midtown had a few census tracts above 20k, but that's about it. I can't wait to see what the census tracts in Atlanta look like in 2020 especially Midtown. I have a bunch we may see a 50k+ census tract.

Atlanta is weird though. The city is actually less dense than the suburbs around it. Decatur for example had a density of around 4500 ppsm. The suburban/quasi-urban areas of Sandy Springs, Dunwoody, Brookhaven are all as dense or denser than Atlanta despite that obviously Atlanta had a far denser and more built out urban core.

I almost want to say the city of Atlanta has some of the densest and least densest areas of the entire metro area. NW Atlanta is extremely sprawled because of the large Buckhead mansions which takes up several acres on their own so there may only be 10-15 mansions per square mile.

That being said, Atlanta feels a lot denser and more built out than Pheonix does in it's urban core and part of the reason is that the older 37 square mile core in Atlanta 50-60 years ago was nearly 9,000 people per square mile.

http://www.census.gov/population/www...0027/tab18.txt

33 Atlanta city, GA......... 331,314 36.9 8,979
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 01:55 PM
 
Location: livin' the good life on America's favorite island
2,197 posts, read 3,899,124 times
Reputation: 1323
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatsbyGatz View Post
Here's a direct link to the US Census Data:
City & Towns Totals: Vintage 2015 - U.S Census Bureau

Here's a numerical population change from 2014-2015:

1. NYC: +55,211
2. LA: +34,943
3. Chicago: -2,890
4. Houston: +40,032
5. Philadelphia: +5,880
6. Phoenix: +24,614
7. San Antonio: +29,536
8. San Diego: +12,677
9. Dallas: +19,642
10. San Jose: +10,311
11. Austin: +19,117
12. Jacksonville: +13,069
13. SF: +12,279
14. Indianapolis: +4,121
15. Columbus: +12,175
16. Fort Worth: +19,894
17. Charlotte: +17,695
18. Seattle: +15,339
19. Denver: +18,582
20. El Paso: +442
Looks like Charlotte will hurdle Indy and Columbus in the next 5+ years..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-27-2016, 02:12 PM
 
62 posts, read 51,051 times
Reputation: 84
Seattle probably has the most impressive growth(or 2nd most after SF) when you consider city proper size. On a per square mile basis, it's growing extremely quickly. Most of the other cities on there have large city limits. SF is also very impressive when you consider it's only 46 square miles and has very limited land.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2016, 02:53 PM
 
Location: Not a Trump Building
3,319 posts, read 4,125,662 times
Reputation: 3667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perverse Instantiation View Post
Seattle probably has the most impressive growth(or 2nd most after SF) when you consider city proper size. On a per square mile basis, it's growing extremely quickly. Most of the other cities on there have large city limits. SF is also very impressive when you consider it's only 46 square miles and has very limited land.
Agree. Now we just need to make SF 1/10th as clean as Seattle.
Rate this post positively 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.

© 2005-2021, 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