HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 2:00 AM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post

If any of these cities were plopped down in the Midwest, without changing their actual metropolitan populations, I am sure they would all increase.
That’s because those places all have low density sprawl supported by ample resources to fresh water. Basically anyone can live anywhere because water is not an issue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 2:30 AM
JAYNYC JAYNYC is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimondpark View Post
I only did major cities, not suburbs.
Is Orlando, FL not "major"?

With a 50-mile radius pop. of 4,449,333 I would certainly think it qualifies (and yes, I did see that you listed Tampa).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 2:52 AM
dimondpark's Avatar
dimondpark dimondpark is offline
Pay it Forward
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Piedmont, California
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYNYC View Post
Is Orlando, FL not "major"?

With a 50-mile radius pop. of 4,449,333 I would certainly think it qualifies (and yes, I did see that you listed Tampa).
Well good for you. I just picked major cities I wanted to highlight.
__________________

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference."-Robert Frost
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 2:56 AM
softee's Avatar
softee softee is offline
Aimless Wanderer
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Downtown Toronto
Posts: 3,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laceoflight View Post
Using data from the canadian census of 2016 (census tract level), the list would go as follows, within a 100km radius around each city hall (pop. in millions) :

Toronto 8.63*
Montréal 5.06*
Vancouver 3.39* (including Victoria!)
Ottawa 1.70
Calgary 1.56
Edmonton 1.46
Québec 1.18
Winnipeg 0.98
* = doesn't include a part of the radius located in the USA.
So including the U.S. portion would bring Toronto to about 9 million.
__________________
Public transit is the lifeblood of every healthy city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 3:32 AM
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by softee View Post
So including the U.S. portion would bring Toronto to about 9 million.
A 25 mile radius around Imperial Beach, CA [plus Mexico cities] puts it at 5.5 million -- just shy of a 25 mile radius around Chicago, IL -- 6.1 million.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 6:49 AM
muertecaza muertecaza is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
at the largest 500 mile radius, the biggest number i could find was charleston, WV with 140,299,799 people.

you get all of the mid atlantic, all the urban midwest minus the plains, and most of the SE minus florida.

can anyone find any place with a bigger number?

at 500 miles, i think the circle has to include NYC, Chicago, and atlanta at a minimum. when i tried to push things further NE to capture boston, you start losing too much of the south.
Not bigger by much, but Parkersburg, WV is 142,575,922. I think you're right though that round about West Virginia is the place to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 4:52 PM
dubu's Avatar
dubu dubu is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: bend oregon
Posts: 1,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
That’s because those places all have low density sprawl supported by ample resources to fresh water. Basically anyone can live anywhere because water is not an issue.
its a good thing the nw keeps building wooden houses because of earquakes (wood frames wont fall as easy if its just a small house) and volcanos, you can only build so far up to a volcano\mountain so the flatter parts away from the mountains will get sprawl. except for seattle, theres a ocean to the west and already has sprawl that fills up that area. but if the sea level is rizing then floating cities would be the best way to build in portland and seattle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2018, 5:26 PM
edale edale is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
I just did Denver and it is near identical to Vancouver. 3.36 million. Compared to Vancouver’s 3.2 or 3.39 (not including the US area) numbers.

Same situation, Mountains.

Portland, Oregon is 2.6.

Salt Lake City is 2.02.

If any of these cities were plopped down in the Midwest, without changing their actual metropolitan populations, I am sure they would all increase.
LA and SF both have mountains and land that is either protected or inhospitable to development around them, so I don't buy this argument at all. Hong Kong is in a very challenging geographical area...wonder why it didn't see its growth capped at 3 million?

Not sure if you've ever been to Denver, but there are only mountains on one side of the city, so I'm really not sure what you're talking about in regard to sprawl ability or lack thereof. Denver could sprawl east all the way to Kansas City if it wanted. It, SLC, and Portland aren't smaller cities because of geography- at least not in current times. They might have grown slower back in the day due to challenges of geography, but that is certainly not an issue today.

BTW, 50 miles out from Cincinnati is basically just capturing the Cincinnati metro area (~2.2M) and Dayton (~1M). It's not picking up a bunch of satelite towns that make the numbers look larger, and even if it did, the rural areas around there are pretty sparsely populated, so it would not be a major contributor to the population of that 50 mile radius. Now, if you extend the radius to say 150 miles, you would pick up Columbus, Indianapolis, Louisville, and Lexington. Go up to 300 miles (or roughly a 4.5 hour drive) and you'd add Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Nashville, Knoxville, etc. t's a pretty urbanized part of the country.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Dec 2, 2018, 10:07 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,976
Sacramento 3,773,741
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2018, 7:27 AM
HurricaneHugo's Avatar
HurricaneHugo HurricaneHugo is offline
Category Five
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,994
Using the other website that includes international borders

San Diego is at 4.6 million which includes most of Tijuana
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Dec 3, 2018, 6:29 PM
ilcapo ilcapo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 213
If you measure from the city center and 25 miles north and 25 miles south its aound 2 million in Stockholm, Sweden.

Its all a part of of whats called metro stockholm.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Dec 4, 2018, 3:15 AM
Docta_Love's Avatar
Docta_Love Docta_Love is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Metropolitan Detroit
Posts: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by north 42 View Post
There are just over half a million people on the Canadian side of the border with Detroit within 50 miles, so this would bump Detroit’s numbers to about 5.17 million.
If you go by 100 km or 62.17 mi radius for Detroit you include Toledo, Flint & Port Huron - Sarnia not to mention Chatham - Kent - Lemington in Ontario you come up with ~6.4 million. I've always felt that Metro Detroit's population numbers have never been fairly calculated first and foremost is the international border. Although population across international borders isn't included anywhere in the US the example of the region being split almost in two is quite stark here San Degio - Tijuana is the other outlier being in a comparable situation.

Metro Detroit's in its own category when it comes to love of the automobile and it shows the building patterns of the region mirror the greater region and the Northeastern US as a whole the commuting and living patterns look much more like the LA or the Sunbelt. Detroit has a out sized influence on it's block. Lansing & London are stretches the latter much more so as there isn't a tendril of growth along the 401 like I-96 but Chatham - Kent is growing pretty and has strong ties with the two big cities of SW Ont. which it is about half way between.

With Lansing and London & Toledo included into the Detroit CSA there's a population of ~7.1 - 7.2 million for a greater metro area, it's a stretch now but in a decade or so I can see the need for a revaluation.

Here's a image that ties into what I'm talking about the first image below shows the dominate metro based on commuter patterns Detroit has one of the biggest areas of influence although geography plays a role.


http://www.city-data.com/forum/urban...-regional.html
__________________
“Mike, you got it? No f**king crazy talk from anybody in the administration.” (Trump to Pence on the eve of the US - DPRK Hanoi summit)

Says the pot to the kettle in a moment of self projection
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
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 9:28 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.