HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 2:42 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,300
I wonder if Toronto city proper will have passed any major NA cities proper in density since the last census? It seems to be on the verge of passing Chicago and Philadelphia so I guess we'll have to wait and see...
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 5:01 AM
GreaterMontréal's Avatar
GreaterMontréal GreaterMontréal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,058
Montréal city proper has a density of 4,926/km² or 12,773/mi². The city of Boston and San Francisco are really small compared to Montréal. They are the size of Vancouver (city).

Montréal is 2x the size of San Francisco. 1.8 million /141 mi²
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 5:39 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,300
^^ Interesting when looking at the figures online such as Wikipedia, they list density as much lower for Montreal. This is due to them using the total city area which includes both land and some water rather than just the land component. However, for other cities I've checked including Toronto and Vancouver it doesn't specify whether or not the area includes any water.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 7:10 AM
softee's Avatar
softee softee is offline
Aimless Wanderer
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Downtown Toronto
Posts: 3,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I wonder if Toronto city proper will have passed any major NA cities proper in density since the last census? It seems to be on the verge of passing Chicago and Philadelphia so I guess we'll have to wait and see...
The 2019 statcan estimate for the City of Toronto was 2,965,713, which was an increase of 46,000 from 2018, so the city is likely at (or slightly above) 3000,000 as of this year, which would give it a population density of at least 4,760 pp sq km or 12,330 pp sq mi.

Chicago's 2018 population estimate of 2,705,994 would give it a density of 11,888 pp sq mi (land area only), and Philly's 2018 estimate of 1,584,138 gives it a density of 11,797 pp sq mi. I don't think Chicago or Philly would have grown enough from 2018 to 2019 to breach 12,000 pp sq mi.
__________________
Public transit is the lifeblood of every healthy city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 7:18 AM
GreaterMontréal's Avatar
GreaterMontréal GreaterMontréal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
^^ Interesting when looking at the figures online such as Wikipedia, they list density as much lower for Montreal. This is due to them using the total city area which includes both land and some water rather than just the land component. However, for other cities I've checked including Toronto and Vancouver it doesn't specify whether or not the area includes any water.
The territorial limits of Montreal, Brossard, Longueuil, Boucherville, La Prairie and Sainte-Catherine meet halfway in the middle of the St. Lawrence River.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 1:32 PM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I do get the point about Boston's suburbs though. A huge proportion of its suburbia looks like this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2145...7i16384!8i8192

Whereas Toronto's suburbia typically looks like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8657...7i13312!8i6656
Canadian metros are clearly more compact and have lots more packed-in suburbia, kinda LA style. Probable factors are central planning vs local planning, age of suburbia, and wealth differences. The Boston example is no doubt a much older, wealthier area with local zoning control.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 7:11 PM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 7,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Wait, I had no idea of this. London, ON is considered a posh, uppity town? Kinda like a Santa Barbara or Connecticut of Ontario? I thought is was a mildly pleasant typical university town, overall pretty unremarkable.

And Hamilton doesn't strike me as U.S.-style Rustbelt. It's more like a behind-the-times, uncool feel. Where grandma lives. Like stuck in 1995 compared to Toronto.
London, probably more than any other Canadian city, was considered Canada's old wealth city. Western remains an old establishment university and use to be one of 2 schools {the other being Queens in Kingston} where the rich parents from Toronto and Montreal use to send their kids so they could "mingle with the right crowd".

London being on the Thames was the last city in Southern Ontario to get a factory in the late 1920s and it was for making cookies as the city is on a non-navigable waterway and survived on it's university and large insurance companies. This is why London is choke full of inner city neighbourhoods with big brick Victorians and Edwardians on tree lined streets. Now the city is much more industrial and the 1990s and early 200s wreaked havoc on the city's economy surging it's unemployment rate to nearly 10% and decimating the downtown. Now the city is enjoying a massive renewal with huge condo/apts going up downtown and a resurging downtown.

London never had urban freeways nor any empty brownfields by decaying industry so the pleasant, connected, and walkable inner city neighbourhoods remain intact. Due to these reasons, London is still seen as a refuge from the Toronto urban blob and is still viewed as the nicest city in SO as it's tony reputation remains.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 7:59 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister F View Post
The post you're responding to was about suburban growth and density. New York's urban area density (2053/sq km) is lower than that of both Toronto (3028/sq km) and Montreal (2720/sq km). And the big California cities. New York City itself is obviously hyper dense, but the urban area as a whole isn't.

Doady isn't wrong. There's nothing in Canada that has the kind of sprawl so common in the U.S.
No, it isn't just the city that is dense. Most people who live in the New York metropolitan area live in environments that are several times more dense than Toronto.

Quote:
New York and Los Angeles are good examples of the differences between these two density measures. While they are close in the average density — 2,826 for New York versus 2,646 for L.A. — the New York metro has much higher levels of concentrated or population-weighted density, 31,251 versus 12,114 people per square mile. San Francisco, which has lower average density than L.A. (1,755 people per square mile), tops L.A. on population-weighted density with 12,145 people per square mile.

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2012/...t-metros/3450/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Feb 22, 2020, 9:16 PM
dc_denizen's Avatar
dc_denizen dc_denizen is online now
Selfie-stick vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York Suburbs
Posts: 7,596
as I said above, by my estimate around 16.5 million New Yorkers live in a built environment that averages 7,800 ppl/square mile, which is denser than the GTA.

hopefully this oft-repeated chestnut about new york's supposed lack of MSA density outside the city can be put to rest
__________________
Joined the bus on the 33rd seat
By the doo-doo room with the reek replete
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #210  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 12:15 AM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_denizen View Post
as I said above, by my estimate around 16.5 million New Yorkers live in a built environment that averages 7,800 ppl/square mile, which is denser than the GTA.

hopefully this oft-repeated chestnut about new york's supposed lack of MSA density outside the city can be put to rest
Why go so far? NYC has over 8 million people at a population density of 27,000 per square mile. Take out Staten Island and you hardly lose any population while increasing the density. Take out the airports too.

How many people in Canada live at a population density of 27,000 per square mile? I think not 8 million.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #211  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 12:19 AM
park123 park123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_denizen View Post
as I said above, by my estimate around 16.5 million New Yorkers live in a built environment that averages 7,800 ppl/square mile, which is denser than the GTA.

hopefully this oft-repeated chestnut about new york's supposed lack of MSA density outside the city can be put to rest
I wouldn't be surprised if "urban" Northern NJ has more people living at or above 20,000 people per square mile than the GTA. Meanwhile people in Manhattan don't even consider those parts of NJ to be urban.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #212  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 1:26 AM
lio45 lio45 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 28,659
No need for data to know that NYC is denser than Mtl, you just have to have visited the two. Buildings in NYC neighborhoods have typically 1-2 stories more.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5151...7i16384!8i8192

vs

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6860...7i16384!8i8192

(I dropped these pins randomly, but knew what I'd find and wasn't surprised.)

Toronto is likely even less dense, at first sight.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #213  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 2:08 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 6,300
It seems what people are trying to describe is "weighted density" which is definitely important in terms of both function and aesthetics. Official density stats is mostly just relevant in terms of the municipality's economics and for the gratification of urban hobbyists like us.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Don't ask people not to debate a topic. Just stop making debatable assertions. Problem solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #214  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 2:23 AM
lio45 lio45 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 28,659
I'm wary of "official density stats" because they inevitably include stuff like Staten Island or a huge chunk of St. Lawrence or Lake Ontario surface area, while my very rough method (explained above) does not have that flaw.

Your own city has pathetic official density, you should be more sympathetic to my method (and I stand by it - I'd sooner take a few random Google Street Views of various neighborhoods and extrapolate from that than take HRM pop divided by HRM area).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #215  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 2:25 AM
isaidso isaidso is online now
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I wonder if Toronto city proper will have passed any major NA cities proper in density since the last census? It seems to be on the verge of passing Chicago and Philadelphia so I guess we'll have to wait and see...
NYC is in its own category when it comes to density. That I'm sure everyone can agree on. Mexico City is 2nd densest, then it gets rather murky. The difficulty lies in trying to make an apples to apples comparison. Some city boundaries are tiny while others far more expansive. In 1998, City of Toronto density plummeted but only because it amalgamated with lots of neighbouring municipalities with far lower population densities (Scarborough, Etobicoke, North York, East York, York). The 'Old City of Toronto' is much denser than the present City of Toronto. Using 'city' boundaries can be problematic. What city is 2nd densest in North America depends on what one includes and what one leaves out. Is it Vancouver, San Francisco, Toronto, or some other city?

I'd like to see figures for land area of roughly the same size.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams

Last edited by isaidso; Feb 23, 2020 at 3:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #216  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 2:53 AM
isaidso isaidso is online now
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by park123 View Post
How many people in Canada live at a population density of 27,000 per square mile? I think not 8 million.
Is that going to clarify things any though. 8 million would require 21% of all Canadians to be living at that density or higher.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #217  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 3:10 AM
Mister F Mister F is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,527
You guys are hilarious. Nobody said that Toronto or Montreal are denser than New York. Obviously. What was said is that New York's extensive sprawl makes its overall urban area density relatively low. That doesn't take anything away from the city itself. Clearly I touched a nerve.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #218  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 3:14 AM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister F View Post
You guys are hilarious. Nobody said that Toronto or Montreal are denser than New York. Obviously. What was said is that New York's extensive sprawl makes its overall urban area density relatively low. That doesn't take anything away from the city itself. Clearly I touched a nerve.
But that isn't correct. New York isn't as sprawly as Toronto, or any other city in the U.S. or Canada. It just has a lot of rural and sparsely populated land included in the metro area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #219  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 3:21 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 20,727
NYC has very little typical North American sprawl. It has a shitload of dense urbanity, and a shitload of ruralesque backcountry.

But giant tract home subdivisions separated by big box arterials are pretty atypical. Westchester, with a million people, has no such areas, really. Fairfield, Nassau, Bergen, Hudson, Essex and Union have very few such areas. The stuff you see in 90% of Orange County, CA, or suburban GTA, or anywhere in Texas, with 200 mass-built homes, and an adjacent highway, is pretty unusual.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #220  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2020, 3:22 AM
isaidso isaidso is online now
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
New York isn't as sprawly as Toronto, or any other city in the U.S. or Canada. It just has a lot of rural and sparsely populated land included in the metro area.
A lot of metros can say the exact same thing though. Metropolitan areas across Canada/US take in lots of rural and sparsely populated land. I'm not sure you can argue that NY is the least sprawly. First one has to agree on what constitutes sprawl. Is Surrey in the Vancouver CMA sprawl, for instance?
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:09 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.