10 most and 10 least densely populated American cities

[Dariusb]

10 most and least densely populated American cities
https://www.moneytalksnews.com/slide...es-in-america/

Are you shocked by any of the cities on either list?

[MolsonExport]

[Steely Dan]

density by municipality and non-weighted is one of the worst ways to compare densities between different "cities", IMO.

weighted MSA (or better yet UA) density is the way to go!

not that it changes much at the very top end here, where the usual suspects still appear.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by Dariusb

10 most and least densely populated American cities
https://www.moneytalksnews.com/slide...es-in-america/

Are you shocked by any of the cities on either list?

The methodology is trash, the article is trash. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting it.

[SunDevil]

On the contrary, I think going by municipality can give people some idea of how their daily life be by living in the city limits. It won't give the whole picture, but it is a data point. Like, is it more likely that I can walk for some things like a haircut/styling, basic groceries, libraries, and restaurants.

[Steely Dan]

^ it's not that the average or weighted density figure of a city proper doesn't tell you anything interesting about a given city, it's just that it's a pretty meaningless data point for comparison purpose due the extremely arbitrary and wildly variable nature of municipal limits.

I mean, by weighted density, the city proper density of 47 sq. mile San Francisco is roughly double that of 470 sq. mile Los Angeles, but when we zoom out to the MSA level, their weighted densities are MUCH closer to each other.

If you carved out just the 48 sq. miles of urban core LA, you'd likely get a density figure a lot closer to SF's city proper.

Generally speaking, it's a lot easier for small little boutique cities like SF or Boston to put up impressive density numbers because they have a much smaller percentage of their streetcar suburbia within their city limits compared to larger land area cities like LA or Chicago that encompass hundreds of square miles.

[TimCity2000]

Originally Posted by Dariusb

Are you shocked by any of the cities on either list?

The methodology seems to imply they looked at hundreds of US cities... there's no way New Orleans is among the 10 least dense cities over 100,000. What am I missing?

Methodology & Detailed Findings

To find which cities have the highest and lowest population density, researchers at Filterbuy collected population and land area figures for every U.S. city with a population above 100,000 to calculate the population density per square mile. The researchers also pulled population data from 2010 to show how density has changed in these cities over the last decade.

[Dariusb]

Originally Posted by Obadno

The methodology is trash, the article is trash. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting it.

Post a better one then.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Generally speaking, it's a lot easier for small little boutique cities like SF or Boston to put up impressive density numbers because they have a much smaller percentage of their streetcar suburbia within their city limits compared to larger land area cities like LA or Chicago that encompass hundreds of square miles.

To be fair to Boston, a whole bunch of truly urban cities with densities higher than Boston itself are also outside of the city limits.

Somerville: 81,045 (19,671 pp sq mile)
Cambridge: 118,403 (18,529 pp sq mile)
Chelsea: 40,787 (18,456 pp sq mile)
Everett: 49,075 (13,582 pp sq mile)
Malden: 66,263 (13,147 pp sq mile)
Revere: 62,186 (10,909 pp sq mile)
(all Census 2020 numbers)

Center Boston's geography on Downtown (instead of DT being the very northeastern tip of the city as it is today) and all of the above cities are within Boston's municipal borders, while comparatively low-density outer Boston neighborhoods in the city's south like Hyde Park and West Roxbury are on the outside looking in.

Or, if you doubled Boston's land area to include the above cities it borders, Boston's density might actually increase.

Massachusetts' anti-annexation laws have been a mixed blessing.

EDIT: So I did the math. Somerville, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Malden, and Revere add up to 26.8 sq miles in total, with a combined population of 417,762. Add those to Boston's numbers and you get 1,093,409 people living in 75.1 sq miles. That's 14,559 pp sq mile, which is about 4% more than Boston's current 13,989 pp sq mile.

[SlidellWx]

Originally Posted by TimCity2000

The methodology seems to imply they looked at hundreds of US cities... there's no way New Orleans is among the 10 least dense cities over 100,000. What am I missing?

Methodology & Detailed Findings

To find which cities have the highest and lowest population density, researchers at Filterbuy collected population and land area figures for every U.S. city with a population above 100,000 to calculate the population density per square mile. The researchers also pulled population data from 2010 to show how density has changed in these cities over the last decade.

A large portion of the land area in the city of New Orleans is a federally protected national wildlife refuge, and that always skews the density numbers lower. https://www.fws.gov/refuge/bayou-sauvage-urban


By Mr. Bill Lang


nola.com

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by TimCity2000

The methodology seems to imply they looked at hundreds of US cities... there's no way New Orleans is among the 10 least dense cities over 100,000. What am I missing? ]

Looks like the list is from just the top 50 cities in the 2019 estimates, not the 320 or so over 100k.

The actual top 12 and bottom 12 for the cities over 100k in the 2020 Census:

1. New York, NY
2. Jersey City, NJ
3. Paterson. NJ
4. San Francisco, CA
5. Cambridge, MA
6. Boston, MA
7. Daly City, CA
8. Newark, NJ
9. Miami, FL
10. Chicago, IL
11. Berkeley, CA
12. Philadelphia, PA

315. Oklahoma City, OK
316. Athens, GA
317. Peoria, AZ
318. Rio Rancho, NM
319. Columbia, SC
320. Huntsville, AL
321. Columbus, GA
322. Chesapeake, VA
323. Norman, OK
324. Augusta, GA
325. Macon, GA
326. Anchorage, AK

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by SlidellWx

A large portion of the land area in the city of New Orleans is a federally protected national wildlife refuge, and that always skews the density numbers lower.

A prime example of why weighted density numbers are a million times more useful than average density figures, IMO.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Shawn

To be fair to Boston, a whole bunch of truly urban cities with densities higher than Boston itself are also outside of the city limits.

Yes, Boston has a decently broad swath of higher density "suburbia" outside of city proper limits.

Which is yet another example of why using city proper figures for comparison is kinda dumb, IMO.

[JManc]

I've been to Anchorage many times and the city limits is absolutely massive but the vast majority of it is wilderness and probably protected from development while the actual 'city' part is tiny in comparison though it is not dense.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by Dariusb

Post a better one then.

No.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by JManc

I've been to Anchorage many times and the city limits is absolutely massive but the vast majority of it is wilderness and probably protected from development while the actual 'city' part is tiny in comparison though it is not dense.

The parkland in Anchorage is mostly Chugach State Park:



That's a typical state park landscape up here.

Anchorage city: 3,852.2 ppsm for weighted density.

[Dariusb]

Originally Posted by Obadno

No.

Then stop complaining.

[Dariusb]

Originally Posted by ChiSoxRox

Looks like the list is from just the top 50 cities in the 2019 estimates, not the 320 or so over 100k.

The actual top 12 and bottom 12 for the cities over 100k in the 2020 Census:

1. New York, NY
2. Jersey City, NJ
3. Paterson. NJ
4. San Francisco, CA
5. Cambridge, MA
6. Boston, MA
7. Daly City, CA
8. Newark, NJ
9. Miami, FL
10. Chicago, IL
11. Berkeley, CA
12. Philadelphia, PA

315. Oklahoma City, OK
316. Athens, GA
317. Peoria, AZ
318. Rio Rancho, NM
319. Columbia, SC
320. Huntsville, AL
321. Columbus, GA
322. Chesapeake, VA
323. Norman, OK
324. Augusta, GA
325. Macon, GA
326. Anchorage, AK

Thanks for posting this updated list and not making smart aleck comments. Much appreciated.