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.
I personally would like high density like 25,000 people per square mile average in a core city like Manhattan. Around it, I think it would go down to around 16,000 ppsm which is like San Fran. The "suburbs" would be a MINIMUM of 7000 ppsm but it should never go lower than that, and even that I would consider semi-sprawl and obviously there can only be a small number of that and a limited supply. With 7000 ppsm, you would still have single family detached homes, but they'd be like Chicago's inner city neighborhoods. Not the bungalows, but the sorta brownstone/rowhouse type things that are detached do you know what I mean? They would be spacious if they had 3 floors plus a basement, and even have a small background and front lawn away from the road. Maybe it'd be 25x100 or 35x100 plot of land per house. Anyways I hope the density would be quite high because we need people to use less land so as not to destroy the enviornment yet they will still want to be comfortable without being too scrunched up.
I think you have a skewed perception of population density. Manhattan is way, way denser than 25,000 people per square mile -- more than twice as dense -- even accounting for large business districts and a huge park in the middle of the island. Hell, even Brooklyn beats 25,000 ppsm by a comfortable margin. Also, you equate Chicago's inner city neighborhoods with a suburb of 7,000 ppsm. The neighborhood I live in isn't even an "inner city" neighborhood -- I'm twice as far from the Loop as I am from the city/suburb border -- and my neighborhood is still 18,000 ppsm.
Oh opps. Yes I remember that Manhattan has like a density of around 60,000 ppsm, and places like the Upper West side has like 100,000 ppsm. I think New York City has a population density of around 25,000 ppsm or so average. Anyways, what does your inner city neighborhood of 18,000 ppsm look like? Are they mostly single family detached homes, apartments or are they a mixture of both single family and apartments?
^^ It's a mixture. I live in a two-flat, and there's a lot of them on my block and in the immediate area. Down the street from me is a courtyard building with about 20 units but it only takes up 3 lots, and the block across the street is mostly single-family houses. People are actually quite surprised to find out how dense this neighborhood is. Honestly I was a little surprised myself when I looked up the population density.
The density of the city of Dallas is about 3700 ppsm- Just a little over low density on my scale.
NYC has a density of 27 000 ppsm, and urban density of 5400ppsm
DC has a city density of about 9800 ppsm (the land areas is about 6 times smaller than that of Dallas)- approaching high density on my scale.
I think City Data uses a similar scale to mine
The density numbers in cities is often lower than the neighborhoods because empty space lowers down the averages.
I think city data's scale on the high is not descriptive. 10,000 per square mile is lower than density of some suburbs in western Long Island. These should not be labeled under extremely high. I think it should be further subdivided into high 10,000 -25,000 people per square mile and very high (25000). The high range always very dense single family homes and multi-family homes (triple-decker, semi-detached, etc). A neighborhood of row houses (such as Caroll Gardens in Brooklyn), especially tall ones would be around 30,000 or a bit higher. 7,000 per square mile is not the density of row houses, as someone mentioned. It's lower than the density of Levittown (one of the first postwar suburbs), which is 7700 per square mile.
My wife is Singaporean and I frequently visit this 272 square mile island nation. Currently the population is 4.9 million and growing. The population density is now about 18,000 people per square mile.
The density numbers in cities is often lower than the neighborhoods because empty space lowers down the averages.
lol, everyone knows that.
Quote:
I think city data's scale on the high is not descriptive. 10,000 per square mile is lower than density of some suburbs in western Long Island.
These should not be labeled under extremely high. I think it should be further subdivided into high 10,000 -25,000 people per square mile and very high (25000). The high range always very dense single family homes and multi-family homes (triple-decker, semi-detached, etc). A neighborhood of row houses (such as Caroll Gardens in Brooklyn), especially tall ones would be around 30,000 or a bit higher. 7,000 per square mile is not the density of row houses, as someone mentioned. It's lower than the density of Levittown (one of the first postwar suburbs), which is 7700 per square mile.
we are talking about average cities on a whole. In some places the density spikes too high to base anything on. And Long Island o anywhere in New York is a ****ty example because there is no comparable city to New York in the US.
since 95% of cities are below 5000ppsm the city data scale is beyond adequate. Only NY, Chicago, Philly, SF, Boston and Miami are the only cities that are above 10 000ppsm
so when people say that 10 000ppsm is not high, that is pure nonsense because very few big cities get that high. again if you go by neighborhoods then you can find high ones in any city, but because they are often small then they are not descriptive.
Houston on a city scale has medium density, but if you go by neighborhood then you run into the Greenway plaza area where the density is over 100 000ppsm. but what good does that do, it is a tiny zip code
we are talking about average cities on a whole. In some places the density spikes too high to base anything on. And Long Island o anywhere in New York is a ****ty example because there is no comparable city to New York in the US.
since 95% of cities are below 5000ppsm the city data scale is beyond adequate. Only NY, Chicago, Philly, SF, Boston and Miami are the only cities that are above 10 000ppsm
so when people say that 10 000ppsm is not high, that is pure nonsense because very few big cities get that high. again if you go by neighborhoods then you can find high ones in any city, but because they are often small then they are not descriptive.
Houston on a city scale has medium density, but if you go by neighborhood then you run into the Greenway plaza area where the density is over 100 000ppsm. but what good does that do, it is a tiny zip code
The question didn't say we are talking about cities as a whole, just what densities would you feel like living in. For a large city, the average density doesn't where people live. One could choose a neighborhood of single family houses or one of mostly apartment buildings. Many western cities boundaries have annexed recent low-density suburbs around them while northeastern ones haven't. While agree that using a very small neighborhood would be silly, a neighborhood of 30000 people or so. I wouldn't care about how dense parts of a city 5 or 10 miles away from me are, I care about the density of where I live.
A lot of people were saying I want this house type so that means XX density. I think they were talking about neighborhood density not for the whole city.
The question didn't say we are talking about cities as a whole, just what densities would you feel like living in. For a large city, the average density doesn't where people live. One could choose a neighborhood of single family houses or one of mostly apartment buildings. Many western cities boundaries have annexed recent low-density suburbs around them while northeastern ones haven't. While agree that using a very small neighborhood would be silly, a neighborhood of 30000 people or so. I wouldn't care about how dense parts of a city 5 or 10 miles away from me are, I care about the density of where I live.
A lot of people were saying I want this house type so that means XX density. I think they were talking about neighborhood density not for the whole city.
nah, it has always been about CITY density since I started the thread. Original Post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove
People always argue that city A isn't as good as City B because City A is not dense, but haven't people been running away from excessively dense cities?
Over the last 50 years, haven't the denser cities rate of growth been slowing down while the cities which offer more space have been steadily increasing?
I think more people find having a house with a yard for the kids and dogs to run around in more attractive than being packed in like sardines in a townhome or high rise complex.
I know density may be ideal for the younger more fast paced individuals, but some people act like that is everyone's ideal.
what do y'all think?
the convo may haver changed a couple of times, but the density scale intent has always been city, and there are only a about 5 major cities that meet the high density list.
there are about 15 that meet the medium scale,
and all the rest would be lower.
If I had set the high level at 25K like some people have suggested, then only New York would be dense
There was further discussion about homes.
and I think the question is right, yes, people have been moving from Densities of over 10K and moving to the medium density cities.
The top 5 fastest growing big cities are all below 10k ppsm
The post also talks about the density to have a yard or a density with lots of townhomes. This implies neighborhood densities, as the average density is close to meaningless in telling you what type of houses there are. And again, you could change the density number easily with different city boundaries.
Since you made up the question, I can't argue with what you meant, but different people are going to take its meaning different ways.
The post also talks about the density to have a yard or a density with lots of townhomes. This implies neighborhood densities, as the average density is close to meaningless in telling you what type of houses there are. And again, you could change the density number easily with different city boundaries.
Exactly, the question is the density of the city, and people also talk about their yards and what they are looking for.
but that does not escape the fact that in the last 70 years, the more dense cities took a severe hit.
Some cities densities have even decreased without the metro losing population by people migrating out of the city to burbs.
but anyway that was beyond my point.
if you read into the rant, I made the poll to show density freaks that not everyone gets a woody for high density. some say "but your city is not dense" like that is an insult. lol, I just wanted to show them that don't you think some people might want it that way.
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.
