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.
boston is measurably denser than philly (the others are subjective and most people would assume boston to have more than philly for most of them).
Are you accounting for the much larger city area of Philadelphia that encompasses areas that are equivalent to Boston's sfh suburbs driving down much of the density numbers for Philadelphia?
Are you accounting for the much larger city area of Philadelphia that encompasses areas that are equivalent to Boston's sfh suburbs driving down much of the density numbers for Philadelphia?
i dont think so. i just did a quick check on city-data. can you please add up the numbers for all the cities you think are applicable so we can compare ? (places like somerville, cambridge are actually denser than boston so they would pull the average up if anything).
i would do it but i am trying to finish some stuff at work and a few folks took today friday off to maximize their presidents day weekend so i have to catch up.
i'll have to look but i think metro boston is denser than metro philly.
boston is measurably denser than philly (the others are subjective and most people would assume boston to have more than philly for most of them).
For a more apples to apples comparison, if you shrink Philly down to Bostons 48 sq miles in area, then Philly is significantly denser than Boston. Philly roughly fits 1 million people in Boston stands land area. Also going by your logic, Cambridge, MA "is measurably denser" than Boston.
For a more apples to apples comparison, if you shrink Philly down to Bostons 48 sq miles in area, then Philly is significantly denser than Boston. Philly roughly fits 1 million people in Boston stands land area.
i can probably get creative and find an oblong contiguous tract of land in boston that is somewhat more dense than philly (the same way they gerrymander electoral districts); it would probably be easier to grow boston into 142 square miles and include places like somerville, cambridge, chelsea, ... and ignore less dense places just to prove i'm rite ?
my original response was to a one time poster that printed something that was factually wrong and easily corrected (i dint even have to leave this site on my cellular-telefone during my long lunch) the other stuff they posted is debatable opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nephi215
Also going by your logic, Cambridge, MA "is measurably denser" than Boston.
i dont think so. i just did a quick check on city-data. can you please add up the numbers for all the cities you think are applicable so we can compare ? (places like somerville, cambridge are actually denser than boston so they would pull the average up if anything).
i would do it but i am trying to finish some stuff at work and a few folks took today friday off to maximize their presidents day weekend so i have to catch up.
i'll have to look but i think metro boston is denser than metro philly.
what does sfh mean ?
The nutshell explanation: Boston has higher peak density, but Philly has more consistent, widespread density. I know this has been pointed out in several past threads based on a very interesting analysis by poster nei. I'd also argue that because Boston is ridiculously chock full of college students that it's pop. density numbers are higher than its structural density would indicate (think crowded off-campus housing).
Overall, they're very similar, and certainly within the same tier, particularly at the metro level (they are both structured very similarly with very dense cores that quickly transition into leafy, much lower-density suburbs with very strict zoning).
i can probably get creative and find an oblong contiguous tract of land in boston that is somewhat more dense than philly (the same way they gerrymander electoral districts); it would probably be easier to grow boston into 142 square miles and include places like somerville, cambridge, chelsea, ... and ignore less dense places just to prove i'm rite ?
my original response was to a one time poster that printed something that was factually wrong and easily corrected (i dint even have to leave this site on my cellular-telefone during my long lunch) the other stuff they posted is debatable opinion.
yup, i edited my previous post.
1. Philadelphia's land area is not 142 square miles. The area is 134.1 square miles.
2. You cannot find a continuous 134.1 square miles of land of Boston and surrounding areas that is more dense than Philly.
3. As I said before, Philly is a significantly larger city than Boston both in population and area. So, if you shrink Philly down to Boston's 48 sq miles of land, Philly is significantly more dense than Boston.
4. You are factually wrong and not the poster that you were responding to. He said that Philly has more density Boston which is factually accurate.
1. Philadelphia's land area is not 142 square miles. The area is 134.1 square miles.
2. You cannot find a continuous 134.1 square miles of land of Boston and surrounding areas that is more dense than Philly.
3. As I said before, Philly is a significantly larger city than Boston both in population and area. So, if you shrink Philly down to Boston's 48 sq miles of land, Philly is significantly more dense than Boston.
4. You are factually wrong and not the poster that you were responding to. He said that Philly has more density Boston which is factually accurate.
fair enough. i understand where you are coming from. mite you have any stats from census.gov or something ?
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.
