Posted Jun 8, 2026, 5:26 PM
|
 |
Volatile Pacivist
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,191
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck
The highest I got was 350,523 if you centre it at Harbord and Brunswick. I get that these are imperfect and are based on census geographies, but you still have to move west to cut off natural features like Rosedale valley and the lake, but also low density rich areas like Rosedale and Rathnelly.
Some of these cities I don't know too well, but here are some other "highest scores" I got for other cities:
NYC - 638,000 (centered just south of Sheep Meadow in Central Park)
Los Angeles - 349,000 (centered at Lafayette Park)
San Francisco - 337,000 (centered somewhere in the Western Addition)
Montreal - 321,003 (centered at Masson and De Lorimier)
Boston - 261,000 (near MIT)
Vancouver - 250,000 (somewhere near the southern foot of the Cambie Bridge)
Chicago - 245,000 (forgot exactly where, but somewhere near Clybourn Metra station). Chicago was in a "lower" tier than I was expecting.
Philly - 237,000 (somewhere near Rittenhouse Sq)
DC - 222,000 (near Howard U)
|
I'm surprised that LA is so high. DT Toronto looks so much denser because of the highrises, but I suppose it isn't too surprising for a 3km radius since density drops off quickly once you leave the immediate downtown. It doesn't become low density like some cities, but the area of high density is very limited. So the downtown residential highrises sort of subsidize the rest of the inner city in terms of density.
__________________
"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.
|
Threaded Mode