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.
It's also worth noting that the three cities north of Boston (Cambridge, Somerville, and Chelsea) are all denser.
Yes but that’s only one part of Boston, and even in West Roxbury there’s plenty of duplexes. All around downtown, backbay; it’s filled with packed neighborhoods whether it be the fens, South End, Beacon Hill, North end, etc, while Miami has blocks with suburban sfh homes right next to its downtown area.
Not a diss towards Miami or anything, it’s just crazy to think that a city with a somewhat suburban feeling throughout a lot of it maintains such high population densities, especially compared to a lot of rust-belt cities that have a relatively urban feel throughout the city limits, the effects of population decline make it so there are few census blocks in places like Cleveland or Cincinnati that gave population densities above 20,000.
Yes but that’s only one part of Boston, and even in West Roxbury there’s plenty of duplexes. All around downtown, backbay; it’s filled with packed neighborhoods whether it be the fens, South End, Beacon Hill, North end, etc, while Miami has blocks with suburban sfh homes right next to its downtown area.
Not a diss towards Miami or anything, it’s just crazy to think that a city with a somewhat suburban feeling throughout a lot of it maintains such high population densities, especially compared to a lot of rust-belt cities that have a relatively urban feel throughout the city limits, the effects of population decline make it so there are few census blocks in places like Cleveland or Cincinnati that gave population densities above 20,000.
Boston has a area of very large lots in the southern portions in the city. But they’re usually multi family properties, not always. Then there’s also 20% of the city that’s just airport or protected park land. So it’s really 695k people in ~38 square miles.
I would love to see city and county breakdowns, since city limits in American cities tend to be smaller (primarily with newer cities) which does skew the numbers heavily.
The county Seattle is in, King, covers largely empty land of the Cascade mountains, land that is prohibited from development by the urban growth boundary as well as part of the national forest. County boundaries skew just as much if not more.
It is interesting that Philadelphia is on the verge of taking over Chicago as being more dense.
They are literally neck and neck with one another. Philadelphia development is on fire so I can see it overtaking Chicago by 2030.
DC has seen lots of solid growth, and I do not see it stopping anytime soon, but the fact it has height restrictions, I see its density peaking at a certain point and staying in the 6th spot unless certain new zoning overalys can come into play to allow for taller development.
For example. Just this past month. Two 600 foot apartment projects have been proposed in Philadelphia. With some 1,000 units combined. DC just can't match that with the height restrictions.
LA does well for being so large. NYC of course does ridiculously well given its size. But it's not really useful to compare based on municipal city boundaries. Technically Long Beach is more densely populated than LA, but no one really thinks of it like that.
On the other end you have places like Jersey City, Hoboken, Union City, Gutenberg, etc that are really small individually, but have much higher contiguous population densities than any of the places on this list.
It is interesting that Philadelphia is on the verge of taking over Chicago as being more dense.
They are literally neck and neck with one another. Philadelphia development is on fire so I can see it overtaking Chicago by 2030.
DC has seen lots of solid growth, and I do not see it stopping anytime soon, but the fact it has height restrictions, I see its density peaking at a certain point and staying in the 6th spot unless certain new zoning overalys can come into play to allow for taller development.
For example. Just this past month. Two 600 foot apartment projects have been proposed in Philadelphia. With some 1,000 units combined. DC just can't match that with the height restrictions.
Philadelphia managing to increase population vs Chicago.... does bode well for it to increase density on Chicago. Just very difficult to claim neck and neck just yet..... in coming years and not sure how many? Yet it could if Chicago continues to show a loss in population. Chicago is clearly the go-too city to claim gonna overtake on C-D by those in other cities/metros. Population a key aspect and here you are for density. Still such a larger population has Philly fit into all of the densest parts of the city easily.
This link does say 2021. Yet some stats are previous years also.
Moderator cut: link removed, competitor site
From the link places density as.
Philly ---- 11,693.5
Chicago - 11,974.4
C-D and another link with other stats.
Philly - city-data has density at 11,702 c-d is probably using 2017 #s
Chicago - city-data density is - 11,960 another link has it at - 11,953
Philly - is Americans row-home city with 60% fully attached rows and many blocks solid on both sides.
Chicago - is 60% not row-housing with other singles to 2-3 flat homes and of course apartment buildings.
Philly - has alleys seen in its core yet many actually have homes on and many though the city or rows as allesy -size streets.
Chicago - has 90% of its blocks and housing with a utility alley behind every street. Creating a perfect place for its power-line poles, trash and pickup to garages,
Philly- had the first planned street-grid in the Nation and remains one of the narrowest street-grids in the Nation.
Chicago - actually adapted the Philly grid in its evolution and added the alleys as standard with a 8-blocks to a mile with then the main streets and of course wider in general overall.
Philadelphia- city size is 142 sq/mi.
Chicago- the city size is 234 sq/mi.
Basically, Chicago was able to keep its density level despite far less narrow streets and row-housing. These cities do differ much in housing styles and street-grid with noticably more in Chicago off main streets. Just how the city's chose their grids. Philly of course is older.... yet still both cities had their high-growth periods in the last decades of the 19th century and first half of the 20th century. Chicago though has less housing left pre-its 1871 fire. I do understand there are some though with homes still intact dating from before the city war raised showing homes appearing a bit sunken in with a lower-level that once were probably the first floor near street-level originally. Raising the city took 20 yrs and gave way to a new sewer system of that time.
Both cities have areas of lost housing. I know Chicago clearly does and seen where homes were removed and now empty grass lots again. That can be land for future growth when the city and Midwest might grow again.... Philly removed less of its housing even if it is not inhabited. Still lost residents and family sizes have played a roll in both cities densities and current claim of trends. New stats will probably come out this summer?
Philly - can claim to be growing overall in population though not great.... it is a change from a few years ago.
Chicago - cannot boast it is growing overall in population and still is expected go loose population this past year.
Philly - claims and is aided in growth returned by relocating from NYC. This is claimed clearly in the forum.
Chicago - has no city it can claim migrating from to it as it is the largest city already in the region overall.
Sometimes I really struggle with understanding how Miami is close to being more dense than Boston. Like on paper, the population density ofc is close to the same, but in the real world, Miami is still relatively suburban in a lot of the city, with plenty of just single family homes on blocks. Some of the most dense areas like little Havana still feel far more suburban than seemingly more urban feeling areas like Pilsen in Boston.
I think all this really shows is that population density in of itself doesn’t often count for things. I mean, plenty of suburbs in America have big clumps of apartment complexes that probably have high density on paper but are still incredibly suburban.
I think a big part of the discrepancy on Miami’s part is that a lot of its apartment buildings have this motel style to them(as well as places like LA) and it really takes away from the street feel of the location.
I just think it’s shocking to see how dense the populations are of places like Miami when there are plenty suburban style blocks right next to the downtown area.
You can get pretty close to Downtown and have SFH in Boston.
Sometimes I really struggle with understanding how Miami is close to being more dense than Boston. Like on paper, the population density ofc is close to the same, but in the real world, Miami is still relatively suburban in a lot of the city, with plenty of just single family homes on blocks. Some of the most dense areas like little Havana still feel far more suburban than seemingly more urban feeling areas like Pilsen in Boston.
I think all this really shows is that population density in of itself doesn’t often count for things. I mean, plenty of suburbs in America have big clumps of apartment complexes that probably have high density on paper but are still incredibly suburban.
I think a big part of the discrepancy on Miami’s part is that a lot of its apartment buildings have this motel style to them(as well as places like LA) and it really takes away from the street feel of the location.
I just think it’s shocking to see how dense the populations are of places like Miami when there are plenty suburban style blocks right next to the downtown area.
Lack of parkland, military bases, university campuses, etc. in city limits.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,537,276 times
Reputation: 6671
The mostly inland—and, yes, suburban—areas you reference are countered by the miles and miles of high rises along the coast (mainland and the beach). Keep in mind Miami does have the 3rd largest skyline in the country with the overwhelming majority of these high rises being residential as opposed to a more balanced mix of commercial/residential elsewhere and going south-north, rather than being consolidated in a more compact 4 direction manner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeasterner1970
Yes but that’s only one part of Boston, and even in West Roxbury there’s plenty of duplexes. All around downtown, backbay; it’s filled with packed neighborhoods whether it be the fens, South End, Beacon Hill, North end, etc, while Miami has blocks with suburban sfh homes right next to its downtown area.
Not a diss towards Miami or anything, it’s just crazy to think that a city with a somewhat suburban feeling throughout a lot of it maintains such high population densities, especially compared to a lot of rust-belt cities that have a relatively urban feel throughout the city limits, the effects of population decline make it so there are few census blocks in places like Cleveland or Cincinnati that gave population densities above 20,000.
Last edited by elchevere; 01-29-2021 at 06:41 AM..
I would love to see city and county breakdowns, since city limits in American cities tend to be smaller (primarily with newer cities) which does skew the numbers heavily.
Yeah, no. San Diego County is the size of Rhode Island, so that would indicate nothing.
If anything, a comparison of Urbanized Area (UA) densities, the size of the UA (pop. and geographic), and the portion of the MSA population that lives in the UA would be a better point of comparison for regions. County boundaries are more useless than city boundaries.
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.
