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.
These are all based on 50-square-mile areas, right?
If so, then what's the ZIP code doing here? None of these areas would be contained entirely in one ZIP code.
That tool needs a place to center the circle. If it works the way I imagine it works, then it would find the geographic center of the zip code and then start measuring out from there. You can also use a longitude/latitude, but that seemed like more work.
I don’t know if the tool does anything to mitigate water (river, lake, or ocean) and I don’t really have time to investigate. Iirc, there’s a way to drill down and see what places are included and what aren’t in the total population. There may have also been a “actual vs estimated” land area that could be relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephi215
To the people asking what data is the chart based on, I believe it is based on 2010 MSA census tract data so yes, it is outdated. I would imagine a city like Seattle would show to be a lot denser with using updated data.
Besides the date, another issue is that the density of individual census tracts can get a little wonky, especially when the tract is very small. For example, a small tract that contains a residential mid- or high-rise will have very high population density, but the residents of that high-rise don’t necessarily live in a much denser, more urban environment than their neighborhoods in a brownstone across the street (who may fall in a different, less dense tract).
Sure, but job concentration, colleges, and other factors will vary a lot in those 50 square mile areas.
I’d be on your side if it was like 3 sq miles but 50 is big enough that other than NYC it’s basically the entirety of the “really urban” areas and includes semi suburban areas in a lot of cities.
I’d be on your side if it was like 3 sq miles but 50 is big enough that other than NYC it’s basically the entirety of the “really urban” areas and includes semi suburban areas in a lot of cities.
Not necessarily for longitudinal cities surrounded by water like Seattle or Miami. That's the problem with using a radius circle as a blunt instrument.
True, but chances are that if you took the densest 50 square miles of each of those cities, their rank order would be about the same as on that map based on citywide density. The density gradients don't vary so much among them as to give a less-dense city overall a significantly more dense 50-square-mile core.
Using that type of map, LA drops from a solid number 2 overall to 7 or 8 depending on whether recent Seattle data is used.
Anyhow, I'm curious as to what 50 square mile boundary you'd draw for LA (and including some reasonable amount of greenspace).
Unpossible. Nowhere in LA, outside of the Valley, has a reasonable amount of green space. If Griffith Park is eliminated, which isn't walking distance for all but a few, LA is near the very bottom for parkland.
Not necessarily for longitudinal cities surrounded by water like Seattle or Miami. That's the problem with using a radius circle as a blunt instrument.
I don't see this as a "problem". A person from Houston could argue that their city isn't as dense because there aren't geographical constraints.
In the end, the peak densities for every city, Seattle included, are what they are. The geographical constraint is at best a footnote to explain why the situation exists. In the end the population within a given radius really is the population that exists within that radius regardless of what anyone may think about how representative that may be. The compromise might be to use a 3 mile radius and see what that looks like. Or even 2 miles. I don't think that it would be all that different though.
Also, I don't see Miami being impacted as much as Seattle given the fact that we're discussing a 4 mile radius and Miami is more like 5 or 6 miles (11 miles across). Manhattan is more impacted because it has nearly a 1 mile gap with Brooklyn along the most densely populated areas of manhattan. So I see this as a Seattle and Manhattan footnote.
I think that Seattle, Miami, and many other cities next to large bodies of water definitely get their numbers undercounted using the radius method. I think the easiest way to get proper numbers is to add up neighborhoods and adjacent cities if necessary til it adds up to 50 sq miles. Even cities like Los Angeles and Philadelphia would benefit from it.
Unpossible. Nowhere in LA, outside of the Valley, has a reasonable amount of green space. If Griffith Park is eliminated, which isn't walking distance for all but a few, LA is near the very bottom for parkland.
Elysian Park if the massive parking lots were actually greenroofs / usable greenspace would do a pretty decent job. Some freeway caps where they're below grade and with some of the ramps eliminated would produce some pretty good parkspaces. So would conversion of some of those golf courses. The big one will be when the Inglewood Oil Field stops running.
Los Feliz Hills abutting Griffith Park certainly isn't the densest part of LA, but it is denser than average I think.
Unpossible. Nowhere in LA, outside of the Valley, has a reasonable amount of green space. If Griffith Park is eliminated, which isn't walking distance for all but a few, LA is near the very bottom for parkland.
LA Historical Park, Elysian Park. Small but nice is Vista Hermosa Park. Echo Park Lake, Grand Park, Lafayette Park, Grand Hope Park. All these parks are close by. Not saying LA is the park capital but it's decent.
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.
