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.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,192 posts, read 7,651,953 times
Reputation: 5824
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanmyth
You're joking, right? Atlanta, Georgia's Urban Area density is pitiful. Owensboro, KY, and Burlington, VT and about 100 other Urban Areas are denser. The Atlanta "urban area" is massive: the second largest in the US -- between New York and Chicago. The "density" of the Urban Area is 1706 per square mile.
The US Census Data in the link below is from 2016.
Did you read what I said? I said it's the "least" most dense major UA. In other words yes, it's pitiful regarding what is considered the UA it over extends and represents a huge land area with so little density therefore as a total population "over representing" how big the actual urbanity stretch is by comparison. Most other major UA's have a much smaller land area with much higher density than Atlanta's and probably under represent their total UA population.
Last edited by the resident09; 01-21-2021 at 06:32 AM..
I'm not a fan of combining cities with distinct, historical cores and referring to it as one thing.
I will never feel comfortable with referring to Baltimore as DC. DMV area sounds better.
Same with the Bay.
When I refer to SF I'm referring to SF.
People say things like SF has 8 million people and I say "Since when?"
I'm not a fan of combining cities with distinct, historical cores and referring to it as one thing.
I will never feel comfortable with referring to Baltimore as DC. DMV area sounds better.
Same with the Bay.
When I refer to SF I'm referring to SF.
People say things like SF has 8 million people and I say "Since when?"
Baltimore is NOT part of the DMV area. The DMV refers to DC and its MD, and VA suburbs.
I did not say that it was, I said I might accept calling whatever possible combinations of the two to be called that instead of simply calling the possible combo DC.
Using "metro" populations to determine "biggest" cities is bogus. How much of "metro Atlanta, GA" is an anit-urban wasteland? It's also twice the land area of Boston, Charlotte, heck, almost anywhere else. That doesn't make it a "city". Use Urban Area or actual city population.
Both Boston and Charlotte are built like Atlanta in the outer areas with acreage lots being dominant in some suburban regions. It’s not as bad as Atlanta but their isn’t much room to talk. Especially because Charlotte is heading in that direction and If it wasn’t for the city of Boston and a few inner suburbs it would already be there. Even suburban New York and Philly have a few areas like that but it’s outpaced by the cities and denser suburbia.
Status:
"‘But who is the land for? The sun and the sand for?’"
(set 1 day ago)
Location: Medfid
6,841 posts, read 6,115,253 times
Reputation: 5287
Quote:
Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare
Especially because Charlotte is heading in that direction and If it wasn’t for the city of Boston and a few inner suburbs it would already be there.
As someone who’s down there fairly often, the Charlotte area is a long way from matching the Boston area. Like, there are no Worcesters, Manchesters, or Providences around Charlotte.
I'm not a fan of combining cities with distinct, historical cores and referring to it as one thing.
I will never feel comfortable with referring to Baltimore as DC. DMV area sounds better.
Same with the Bay.
When I refer to SF I'm referring to SF.
People say things like SF has 8 million people and I say "Since when?"
Where do you draw the line though?
Even within DC Alexandria is a distinct historical core.
In New York, Brooklyn had a population of a million in 1898 when it merged into New York City. There are numerous other lesser cities with large populations in metro NY that have distinct historical cores.
Distinct as in wholly developed independent from.
Yes Brooklyn had a large population back then but functionally the Burroughs operated as a unit.
Alexandria may have a distinct core add in a discernable core but that core is still an extension of DC.
Baltimore developed wholly independent from DC, it was a major independent thing before the suburbs started exchange commuters and unlike Brooklyn,Baltimore will never be so wholly intertwined that it shares CITY services.
Highways, airports, even commuters are regional aspects of major cities being near each other.
The situation in New York is different. New York is more along the lines of adjacent cores coming together. There's no Brooklyn Bridge where you can simply walk across from Baltimore into DC. They are world's apart. Manhattan on the other had is smaller than some cities airports
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.
