Densest cities in a first world country (houses, neighbourhood)
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.
Jacksonville, Florida, with 836,000, is larger than two of the cities on the list so it qualifies. It's density is 1,100 / sq.km., which is much lower than any listed. That's Jacksonville city proper, not metro. Your "mayor's list" is absolutely meaningless, because it counts "metro area" which is arbitrarily defined, differently in each country, usually with a subjective goal of artificially enhancing some economic benefit associated with the urbanity.
No, it is correct to leave Los Angeles off. I'm the OP of the thread and the suburb called Los Angeles you are boosting will never be urban. NEXT!
And? Starting a thread doesn't give you magic powers where you can invent your own facts. This thread is about density, not "urbanity", so you don't have your usual subjective criteria to fall back on.
By virtually all metrics, Los Angeles ranks second to NYC in the US/Canada for density. This is fact.
Jacksonville, Florida, with 836,000, is larger than two of the cities on the list so it qualifies. It's density is 1,100 / sq.km., which is much lower than any listed. That's Jacksonville city proper, not metro. Your "mayor's list" is absolutely meaningless, because it counts "metro area" which is arbitrarily defined, differently in each country, usually with a subjective goal of artificially enhancing some economic benefit associated with the urbanity.
The figures for French cities are not metro areas, but "urban areas", a much more restrictive definition matching the footprint of the contiguous built-up area. As for the metro areas, they may be arbitrarily defined, but not more than city limits.
And? Starting a thread doesn't give you magic powers where you can invent your own facts. This thread is about density, not "urbanity", so you don't have your usual subjective criteria to fall back on.
By virtually all metrics, Los Angeles ranks second to NYC in the US/Canada for density. This is fact.
How the hell Are you going to tell me what the thread is about when I created it?
Like how you invent facts trying to pass LA as urban
You have tried to convince me LA is urban since day one but you are not going to. Why keep trying?
The figures for French cities are not metro areas, but "urban areas", a much more restrictive definition matching the footprint of the contiguous built-up area. As for the metro areas, they may be arbitrarily defined, but not more than city limits.
The American cities are for urban areas as well, though the population and density don't match the census number exactly (assuming the wikipedia reports them correctly). Still very similar:
The US census defines urban area by contiguous built-up area as well, though likely with a different definition than the French cities, so the cities of different countries may not be comparable. Of course, the overall urban area density says very little about how the typical neighborhood is. San Jose, California and New York City have roughly the same urban area density but in San Jose everyone lives at similar densities while for New York City a large fraction of the population lives at much higher than average densities, using up little land while a small fraction of the population lives at lower than average densities, using up a lot of land.
If density is very uneven amongst the urban area, the average density number will be more affected by those living at low densities, even if that's not how most live. I saw somewhere that Marsielle has a similar skewed density, does that sound accurate?
Have you considered reading your thread title? This is incredible--a total meltdown.
I repeat--I am not trying to convince you of anything. You posted something that is factually incorrect, thus I am correcting you. You're welcome.
Again, reread my thread title
Yes, you hAve been trying to convince me Lis Angrles is urban since I first joined this site. Going around the forum everywhere quoting me and posting your urban area link. You can post whatever you want but it is not changing my opinion
La is not dense
La is not Urban
La does have good transit
Again, you are not going to convince me otherwise
Last edited by Rozenn; 07-08-2013 at 06:29 PM..
Reason: Off topic
Yes, you hAve been trying to convince me Lis Angrles is urban since I first joined this site. Going around the forum everywhere quoting me and posting your urban area link. You can post whatever you want but it is not changing my opinion
La is not dense
La is not Urban
La does have good transit
Again, you are not going to convince me otherwise
Los Angeles is dense but its not urban.
Last edited by Rozenn; 07-08-2013 at 06:29 PM..
Reason: Orphaned
I thought this thread was about density? By most metrics, Los Angeles stands #2 among US/Canadien cities. Its urbanized area is literally twice as dense as Chicago's, with a larger population to boot.
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.
