Five Largest U.S Cities in 2050 (living, state, better, versus)
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 dosen't get more specific than what I just said. Houston is built dense everywhere. Compare the suburbs of Atlanta to Houston. Houston builds on much smaller lots, same within the inner loop.
It MAY be dense compared to Atlanta, I'm not even sure if that's true, but its not dense at all compared to other cities. I don't even want to know what some of its suburbs densities are...
It dosen't get more specific than what I just said. Houston is built dense everywhere. Compare the suburbs of Atlanta to Houston. Houston builds on much smaller lots, same within the inner loop.
That's not high density though. It's medium at best and that density is equal to that of older suburbs of the Northeast and Midwest at best. So to people that lives in density, they would not be impressed with the density anywhere in Houston especially outside the loop.
Quote:
It MAY be dense compared to Atlanta, I'm not even sure if that's true, but its not dense at all compared to other cities. I don't even want to know what some of its suburbs densities are...
It is. Houston area is more denser than Atlanta mostly because of what he said. Atlanta build it's homes on large lots while Houston builds theres on small lots. This is true in just about all cities west of the Mississippi.
That's not high density though. It's medium at best and that density is equal to that of older suburbs of the Northeast and Midwest at best. So to people that lives in density, they would not be impressed with the density anywhere in Houston especially outside the loop.
I totally agree with you. Here is some further evidence below.
It is a medium density city in the inner loop and low density outside the loop. Many of the "most dense" areas of Houston aren't that dense compared to other cities.
A sample of inner loop Houston zip codes population densities:
77006: 9396 people per square mile
77098: 7696
77004: 5572
77003: 3922
77005: 6402
This is just a sample of zip codes in Houston Inner Loop, and non have a density close to that of the "most urban and dense" areas of other cities.
Compare Houston most dense areas to samples of the dense areas of these cities:
Boston
02114: 27059 people per square mile
02115: 33107
02118: 21185
Philadelphia:
19134: 16483 people per square mile
19141: 19078
19130: 17241
Chicago:
60614: 20438 people per square mile
60616: 13645
60647: 24976
Los Angeles:
90004: 22974 people per square mile
90019: 17742
90011: 24061
Even Houston's most dense area doesn't match other city's dense areas in population. The inner loop is moderately dense, but not as dense as other places.
I totally agree with you. Here is some further evidence below.
It is a medium density city in the inner loop and low density outside the loop. Many of the "most dense" areas of Houston aren't that dense compared to other cities.
A sample of inner loop Houston zip codes population densities:
77006: 9396 people per square mile
77098: 7696
77004: 5572
77003: 3922
77005: 6402
This is just a sample of zip codes in Houston Inner Loop, and non have a density close to that of the "most urban and dense" areas of other cities.
Compare Houston most dense areas to samples of the dense areas of these cities:
Boston
02114: 27059 people per square mile
02115: 33107
02118: 21185
Philadelphia:
19134: 16483 people per square mile
19141: 19078
19130: 17241
Chicago:
60614: 20438 people per square mile
60616: 13645
60647: 24976
Los Angeles:
90004: 22974 people per square mile
90019: 17742
90011: 24061
Even Houston's most dense area doesn't match other city's dense areas in population. The inner loop is moderately dense, but not as dense as other places.
Are you sure those numbers are right? It kind of seems off that L.A has areas with 22,000+ people per square mile yet the density now is something like 8,000. Boston with 33,000+? That's a lot for a city of only 560,000.
Are you sure those numbers are right? It kind of seems off that L.A has areas with 22,000+ people per square mile yet the density now is something like 8,000. Boston with 33,000+? That's a lot for a city of only 560,000.
I got the population density data from city data's website, so if its wrong, I'm sorry. I have no problem being wrong.
Its a zip code, hence representative of just one neighborhood or a few neighborhoods. The inner loop is the most dense area of Houston, but its most dense area aren't as dense as the most dense areas of other cities. In a place like Los Angeles, you have some very very dense places like Mid-Wilshire and areas around downtown. More sprawling areas of the city like the San Fernando Valley brining the AVERAGE population density of the city down to 8,000 or so. The same with Boston: Areas surrounding downtown can be very very dense, but then less dense areas are more numerous and bring the average down.
Houston residents often argue if the city limits were just the inner loop, the population density would be much higher. Well if places like Chicago didn't have its less dense industrial areas, Los Angeles didn't have the San Fernando Valley, NYC didn't have Staten Island, Pittburgh didn't have its hilly areas, etc... these cities would have even higher population densities.
If you want to check, the population densities come from city data's own website. Just type a zip code in and its in the data.
Are you sure those numbers are right? It kind of seems off that L.A has areas with 22,000+ people per square mile yet the density now is something like 8,000. Boston with 33,000+? That's a lot for a city of only 560,000.
Those look right, LA is actually pretty dense; keep in mind the city has a mountain range cutting through the city (takes up a lot of land w/out people living on the mountain)
That depends on which way the city builds new housing. Houston has lots of land left inside it's borders. They are also infilling the inner loop pretty fast. The only reason why people keep sticking to the argument is because estimates show that Chicago's population is stagnant while Houston's is steady increasing and until that changes, people will continue to talk about this. So this is more on Chicago than it is on Houston.
But isnt CHicagos city Limits Alot smaller than Houstons? What would be the population of Chicago if it was 600 square miles ?
But isnt CHicagos city Limits Alot smaller than Houstons? What would be the population of Chicago if it was 600 square miles ?
Somewhere around 3.8-4.2 million
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.
