What metropolitan areas feel significantly larger than similar-sized or even statistically larger metropolitan areas? (best city)
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.
To all the well-traveled city-data members out there: What metropolitan areas feel significantly larger than other similar-sized or even statistically larger metropolitan areas?
A few examples come to mind for me.
The first would be Los Angeles. -- The greater LA area, home to roughly 18.7 million people, feels significantly larger than the greater New York area, whether you're using the MSA definition, which reports a population of 20.3 million, or the CSA definition, which reports 23.7 million.
Of course when it comes to the city proper, New York feels much more populated, but LA metro, although smaller by several million, feels significantly larger.
I suspect this is partly due to the fact that the LA basin includes dozens of cities with a population of over 100,000, while New York only includes a handful. New Yorks suburban/exburban region is also far more bucolic in character than the LA basin, and development there isn't as visible as it is in LA because of the tree coverage.
Sao Paulo, which harbors roughly the same population in it's metropolitan area as New York (depending on which definition you use) feels about twice the size of New York.
The London and Istanbul metropolitan regions share roughly the same population as well...but having been to both places, I can tell you that Istanbul feels almost twice the size of London...
Miami and Atlanta are another example; with the Miami region feeling significantly larger, although it's roughly the same size as greater Atlanta.
The London and Istanbul metropolitan regions share roughly the same population as well...but having been to both places, I can tell you that Istanbul feels almost twice the size of London...
Discuss.
Istanbul is 994.93 sq mi
London is 671.0 sq mi
So Istanbul is a third bigger in area than London to start with, whilst in terms of Metro areas both have a population of around 15 million, although there are usually a number of different metro definitions.
Generally London has a smaller metro area than most cities, and a higher metro population per hectare, as a result.
However London is a relatively green city, as are many of it's suburbs and it is home to a green protective belt, in order to help prevent urban sprawl, so London might not be the best city with which to make a comparison.
Oslo and Dublin both feel larger than some US cities of the same size.
08-04-2021, 02:30 PM
Status:
"From 31 to 41 Countries Visited: )"
(set 12 days ago)
4,640 posts, read 13,924,923 times
Reputation: 4052
Essentially pretty much any Europe city town with 200,000 to 300,000 people. Especially when comparing that to other Continents like Asia. Probably hundreds of these in 30 Countries in final count.
So Istanbul is a third bigger in area than London to start with, whilst in terms of Metro areas both have a population of around 15 million, although there are usually a number of different metro definitions.
Generally London has a smaller metro area than most cities, and a higher metro population per hectare, as a result.
However London is a relatively green city, as are many of it's suburbs and it is home to a green protective belt, in order to help prevent urban sprawl, so London might not be the best city with which to make a comparison.
I am not 100% sure what the OP means by big, however having lived in London, and been to Istanbul 4 times I would certainly say Istanbul fees "Bigger" as in more dense with more people. London has all its green spaces, however they are spread all over the place, most of Metropolitan Istanbul is actually mountains and forests, so the population is far more concentrated in one area. London does indeed feel bigger, however as a figure of speech, in the endless suburbia type type way.
In this map the yellow green and red are what constitutes metropolitan Istanbul, the yellow area is almost entirely mountains and Forests.
I am not 100% sure what the OP means by big, however having lived in London, and been to Istanbul 4 times I would certainly say Istanbul fees "Bigger" as in more dense with more people. London has all its green spaces, however they are spread all over the place, most of Metropolitan Istanbul is actually mountains and forests, so the population is far more concentrated in one area. London does indeed feel bigger, however as a figure of speech, in the endless suburbia type type way.
In this map the yellow green and red are what constitutes metropolitan Istanbul, the yellow area is almost entirely mountains and Forests.
Firstly apologies to BNW, the areas he/she gave in square miles are actually the urban area in each metro, not the entire metro area. So as such my post is incorrect.
Though it would look like the urban area of London (671 square miles) is home to just under 10,000,000 people, to reach the 15,000,000 you need the entire metro area, which is closer to 3000 square miles. While virtually all of Istanbuls 15,000,000 people live in the 994 square mile urban area.
Last edited by danielsa1775; 08-05-2021 at 06:20 AM..
Firstly apologies to BNW, the areas he/she gave in square miles are actually the urban area in each metro, not the entire metro area. So as such my post is incorrect.
Though it would look like the urban area of London (671 square miles) is home to just under 10,000,000 people, to reach the 15,000,000 you need the entire metro area, which is closer to 3000 square miles. While virtually all of Istanbuls 15,000,000 people live in the 994 square mile urban area.
LOL - no need to apologise.
London is a very different city, and one with a green belt that helps stop urban sprawl, so in terms of such comparison it's not a good like for like city to compare with.
I am perfectly willing to concede that there are bigger cities out there than London.
As for London's metro area whilst smaller than many city metro areas, does have a higher population per hectare than many so called metro areas, and this was pointed out in the links in my previous posts.
Boston. 48sqmi with 700k people. It is an alpha city and leader in Healthcare, Education, Biotech and Life Sciences. Also a contender in Finance and Investment. The city feels like it should have a million or two people. But it doesn't. However, unlike most cities, ts very fragmented and neighboring cities are also really big and flow into the city. A city that ships 1.4mil people to London everywhere should theoretically have more people lol
Dublin. It feels bigger than it is for sure.
Madrid. 2.2 mil people? It feels larger for sure.
Miami. 400k people? With all those skyscrapers. You cappin'
San Francisco. 880k. Same as Boston.
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.
