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 tool on google maps. Go to google maps and put a city in, then put one of the red markers on a spot. After that, scroll down about an inch and click on the measure distance tool. It’s an option on google maps.
No, I just went right to the coast line and drew a line each way. You can go up, down, diagonal etc. It’s great!
I see what you're saying now. You're talking about the distance tool, though if you make a closed polygon it yields the area as well, is that right? I know about that, but that doesn't yield stats like population density does it?
The reason I'm going for well-defined divisions is basically it's generally easier to pull up stats including the most basic one of population, though sometimes it can also help pull up other things.
Which measurement tool? Are you cutting on specific streets?
I mean, I have friends there and I've visited, but haven't been in about three years. There was a lot of new and ongoing construction which I thought made a pretty solid street wall, though the streets, as such a thoroughly planned city, were a bit wide to my tastes.
So I did San Fran for 4.8 miles X 4.8 miles to get 23 sq. miles:
North: Marina District
East: Mission Bay
West: Inner Sunset
South: Glen Park
Please feel free to change the boundaries by moving them to whatever shape you like, but this is 23 sq. miles for San Fran.
Here is Toronto 4.8 miles X 4.8 miles for 23 sq. miles:
North: Midtown Toronto
East: Greektown
West: Bloordale Village
South: Bathhurst Quay
Again, feel free to change the boundaries and shape as you see fit.
But how are you using this tool to grab stats, I don't understand where this would go from here as I can't see how doing this would make it easy to round up stats like population density for this. With Chicago, I can at least pull community area stats pretty easily with taking the neighborhoods in and around the Loop and then going mostly north from there to get ~22 square miles or so and those are generally pretty cohesive neighborhoods anyhow. How does that work with just making these blocks?
But how are you using this tool to grab stats, I don't understand where this would go from here as I can't see how doing this would make it easy to round up stats like population density for this. With Chicago, I can at least pull community area stats pretty easily with taking the neighborhoods in and around the Loop and then going mostly north from there to get ~22 square miles or so and those are generally pretty cohesive neighborhoods anyhow. How does that work with just making these blocks?
Population density would need an overlay of census tracts. That’s how you find all stats. The point of this was to look at the built environment over a real distance versus a perceived one. In fact, if people start looking into these neighborhoods that actually cover the real distance apples to apples, they will get an understanding of just how urban these places are compared to each other. This is the only real data using measurements throughout this thread.
The comparison is for the built environment. What does it look like throughout this footprint? Which places are the most urban across this entire footprint? You didn’t have census tract ranking before, how did you and everyone else rank these cities before?
NYC
CDMX
Chicago
Toronto
Philly/SF/Montreal
DC/Vancouver (see below lmao)
Panama City
LA/Boston
Baltimore
No comment on Guatemala, Monterrey, Guadalajara, Havana, Port au Prince, and Santo Domingo since I'm not familiar enough.
It's not the most impressive, but it's highly underrated. Also, when you see a modern skyscraper skyline like Panama City, you often assume it is not actually that urban on the ground (unless it's Vancouver). But it's quite walkable in the tropical region sense. As in, it's not so much the mixed-use historic town center style; however, it has a lot of urban outdoor malls like Southeast Asia is known for. They're not classically European-style urban, but they're urban nonetheless. I think part of this is due to its population size, as well as more recently population growth. It's a very old city, but even just a quick overhead Google Maps view shows its footprint of older historic streets is much smaller than a city like Havana or Guadalajara. Therefore, more of its newer development has been influenced by the car somewhat. Latin America as a whole doesn't have the suburbanization like the US, but it definitely has more car-centric neighborhoods. Panama City has some car-centric urban zones with the Southeast Asian style mall urbanity.
P.S. I know I'll get a lot of crap for Boston, but I'm just not all that impressed with its urbanity.
Great list overall but I don’t think Baltimore belongs at #10. Guadalajara is far more urban. You could even make a case for Quebec City or Seattle being above Baltimore. I have t been to Monterrey or Havana but it’s hard to imagine they are less urban than Baltimore either.
Population density would need an overlay of census tracts. That’s how you find all stats. The point of this was to look at the built environment over a real distance versus a perceived one. In fact, if people start looking into these neighborhoods that actually cover the real distance apples to apples, they will get an understanding of just how urban these places are compared to each other. This is the only real data using measurements throughout this thread.
The comparison is for the built environment. What does it look like throughout this footprint? Which places are the most urban across this entire footprint? You didn’t have census tract ranking before, how did you and everyone else rank these cities before?
How are you going to pull up stats for built environment on this? I still don't quite get how this goes towards your wish to have an objective measurement.
I think it makes sense to try to work off divisions that are closest to 22 square miles that have these kinds of resources available. What is the equivalent of something like this in DC?
These are the breaks I’m talking about. They break the street wall.
This is a ridiculous comparison. The "breaks" you're talking about is just how the city is designed.
Vancouver pioneered tower on a podium with a highrise residential tower on a low rise commercial podium interacting with the street. This is going to give you "breaks" between the buildings, but that is by design. It's to minimize shadowing, maintain unobstructed view cones, etc...
At street level it's still wall to wall for each block, it's just not for the entire height of the building which would be ridiculous.
This has nothing to do with the level of urbanity of the city and indeed the street views you posted of DC still absolutely pale in comparison to the previously posted dense high rise forest of Vancouver's core and it's rather quite ugly to boot which is why we have set backs for buildings and tower on a podium.
Here is Boston for 4.8 miles X 4.8 miles for 23 sq. miles:
North: North End
East: City Point
West: Mission Hill
South: Dorchester
Again, please feel free to change the neighborhoods and boundaries how you see fit. I only used city proper to keep it apples to apples.
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.
