Entry-Level Mega Cities

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Here's something worth mentioning though, lest everyone think I'm one of those expats who likes to shit on home: NYC is still, in my opinion, the grandest city on the planet. Nothing - nothing - is as impressive to me as the Midtown skyscraper canyons. The only city in Asia which has hints of NYC's grandeur is Shanghai.

How about Hong Kong? I've never been, but Manhattan and HK Island/Kowloon are the two places I think as epitomizing "the city". Urbanity at its grandest and most intense.

[mrnyc]

versus threads suck -- so are we off the rails here yet?

[Yuri]

"Megacity" has a straighforward (and quite old) definition: any urban area above 10 million people. Today there are already 37-38 areas in the world that reached this threshold.

I believe this should be updated to reflect better this imposing title. Maybe we should lift the bar to 20 million inh.?

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by yuriandrade

"Megacity" has a straighforward (and quite old) definition: any urban area above 10 million people. Today there are already 37-38 areas in the world that reached this threshold.

I believe this should be updated to reflect better this imposing title. Maybe we should lift the bar to 20 million inh.?

Maybe a different name for 20M+

[dimondpark]

imo it shouldnt be based on metro area but urban area population.

I think contiguous population is more pertinent than commuting patterns in this regard.

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Tokyo felt larger and more intense than LA and NY combined. Just insane and never ending

That's odd... What struck me about Tokyo was how comfortable it felt. Language barrier notwithstanding, Tokyo and Yokohama were the homiest, most comfortable places I've ever traveled. Not "insane" at all. I got the same feeling, but a little less so, in London and Paris. By contrast New York was just okay.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Maybe a different name for 20M+

Or just move up the bar. When UN made the "megacity" expression popular, there were only 7 or 8 cities in this club. Today, it's almost became a common place, losing the original sense.

Originally Posted by dimondpark

imo it shouldnt be based on metro area but urban area population.

I think contiguous population is more pertinent than commuting patterns in this regard.

Also, it's a bit weird to call "megacity" a 10 million people polycentric metro area (e.g. Rhine-Ruhr).

[pj3000]

If Toronto is being included in this group, then Jacksonville, FL has every damn right to be included too.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's odd... What struck me about Tokyo was how comfortable it felt. Language barrier notwithstanding, Tokyo and Yokohama were the homiest, most comfortable places I've ever traveled. Not "insane" at all. I got the same feeling, but a little less so, in London and Paris. By contrast New York was just okay.

I only meant insane in its intensity and vastness. The people were great and it felt like home to me as well

[llamaorama]

Houston and Dallas are forecasted to break 10 million, but they’ll never feel like a “megacity”

If American cities have any unique trait it’s how they can look and feel much smaller than they really are, I suppose.

[SFBruin]

Dallas felt pretty big to me when I was there. But, admittedly, I haven't been to many major cities outside of the United States, so I don't have that rate of comparison.

[mhays]

I'd say a number like 20 million for today vs. 30 years ago. And it would feel non-mega if there wasn't an area of 10 million at 20,000 per square mile at the core.

[Will O' Wisp]

Los Angeles feels most like a "mega-city" when you're flying above it at night. No city can quite compete with LA on sprawl. In Shanghai after 20 miles development is scattered and broken up by farmland, in Tokyo things start to peter out after 30 miles even along the major rail lines. LA sprawls a good 60 miles to the south and east, 30 miles to the north, solid blocks of windows and streetlamps and cars further than the eye can see. When you live there the city feels inescapable, like it goes on forever with no end.

[hauntedheadnc]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

I only meant insane in its intensity and vastness. The people were great and it felt like home to me as well

If you want to talk about insane in the sense of actually being somewhat insane... London. I loved London, could easily live there, but you definitely get the feeling in London that just out of sight, people are getting up to some weird shit.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

That's odd... What struck me about Tokyo was how comfortable it felt. Language barrier notwithstanding, Tokyo and Yokohama were the homiest, most comfortable places I've ever traveled. Not "insane" at all. I got the same feeling, but a little less so, in London and Paris. By contrast New York was just okay.

Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc

If you want to talk about insane in the sense of actually being somewhat insane... London. I loved London, could easily live there, but you definitely get the feeling in London that just out of sight, people are getting up to some weird shit.

Haha I did have similar sense when I was there too. Paris as well. Could be the historic that blends in with the new so well

[McBane]

Originally Posted by Will O' Wisp

Los Angeles feels most like a "mega-city" when you're flying above it at night. No city can quite compete with LA on sprawl. In Shanghai after 20 miles development is scattered and broken up by farmland, in Tokyo things start to peter out after 30 miles even along the major rail lines. LA sprawls a good 60 miles to the south and east, 30 miles to the north, solid blocks of windows and streetlamps and cars further than the eye can see. When you live there the city feels inescapable, like it goes on forever with no end.

Basically what you're saying is that LA has that same "mega city" feeling except stretched out and diluted over a larger geographic area, whereas in Tokyo and Shanghai, development is more intense and concentrated? I suppose that's another perspective on the mega city. I don't personally agree but I get what you're saying.

[Yuri]

Originally Posted by McBane

Basically what you're saying is that LA has that same "mega city" feeling except stretched out and diluted over a larger geographic area, whereas in Tokyo and Shanghai, development is more intense and concentrated? I suppose that's another perspective on the mega city. I don't personally agree but I get what you're saying.

I believe he meant from the air and at night only. On street level, Tokyo and Shanghai certainly look more a mega city than Los Angeles.

[maru2501]

Chicago could settle in somewhere as a large boutique city, like SF

[Zapatan]

"World's smallest Megacity" would be a good way to describe Chicago.

[Yuri]

If Chicago had kept the healthy growth rates of the 1990’s, it would be above 11 million inh. by now as opposed to be stuck at 9.8 million for the entire decade.