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.
The stats for urban area are mostly not even urban, they're mostly suburban. I guess it's somewhat of a measure of how built up the area is, but it's not even close to a measure of real urban area
The stats for urban area are mostly not even urban, they're mostly suburban. I guess it's somewhat of a measure of how built up the area is, but it's not even close to a measure of real urban area
That's what "urbanized" means in that context--built up or developed. The minimum density threshold is on the low side though.
The stats for urban area are mostly not even urban, they're mostly suburban. I guess it's somewhat of a measure of how built up the area is, but it's not even close to a measure of real urban area
While it is by no means perfect... It's by far the most accurate way to measure a cities functional population.
Legacy cities like NYC/Chicago/LA/Boston/Seattle/Baltimore/DC/SF/Philly etc.. will have the largest expanses of consistent classic urbanism due to their age & pre-automobile growth for the foreseeable future due to their
While it is by no means perfect... It's by far the most accurate way to measure a cities overall population rather than how built up the city is.
Legacy cities like NYC/Chicago/LA/Boston/Seattle/Baltimore/DC/SF/Philly etc.. will always have the largest expanses of consistent classic urbanism due to their age for the foreseeable future due to their pre-automobile growth.
Logically, and most of the time, where there is more population, there are more amenities available which is why radius population provides a decent picture of what's usable to me.
There can be places with large populations and not much amenities, OKC is reputed to be one of those places. Asheville is a small place with lots to do.
Someone who is relocating will chose a place with what they want to do. As well as jobs in their field if they have a specialty. I expect a Cambodian will choose a city/town with an existing Cambodian population.
As for general comparisons, I would vote for urban area.
That's what "urbanized" means in that context--built up or developed. The minimum density threshold is on the low side though.
Yeah. they should call it semi-urbanized area or something. I guess that might confuse even more though. Still the fact is most of the areas they call urbanized are not what most people would consider 'urban', especially people in the northeast.
Yeah. they should call it semi-urbanized area or something. I guess that might confuse even more though. Still the fact is most of the areas they call urbanized are not what most people would consider 'urban', especially people in the northeast.
I don't think most people think of the word "urban" in the specialized way we use it on this forum and in planning circles; I think most use it in the general sense of being built up or developed, even in the Northeast. In any case, it's possible that the word "urbanized" is specifically used to sidestep the specialized usage so that it is inclusive of both prewar and postwar development.
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.
