[WesternGulf]

.....according to city-data. I found that city-data had some updated information on population densities for various neighborhoods. In order to find the data, google: city-data---> (neighborhood name) followed by the word neighborhood then population density and the city name. With the data posted, maybe I can make the first post into the most densely populated neighborhoods for each city.

Toronto: St. Jamestown - 166,659 ppsm
New York: Little Italy - 98,651 ppsm
San Francisco: Little Saigon - 84,559 ppsm
Chicago: Near North Side - 72,811 ppsm
Vancouver: West End - 56,574 ppsm
Hamilton: North Durand - 38,034 ppsm
Oakland: Oaktree - 34,748 ppsm
Detroit: Springwell - 15,407 ppsm

[Reverberation]

Montrose - Houston (77006): Population density: 9396 people per square mile

[CGII]

The densest I could find. Really, in New York, it's not clear where the densest part would be, because there are old tenement neighbourhoods with people crammed in every corner and then there are highrise neighbourhoods with people spaciously placed vertically. Here are the top three in my search:

Little Italy-98,651 people per square mile
Gramercy Park-90,732 people per square mile
Upper East Side-89,722 people per square mile
New York City Average-26,403 people per square mile

[MonkeyRonin]

Toronto's densest neighbourhood would be St. Jamestown, with 64,636 people per square km/166,659 per square mile (14,666 in 0.23 sqkm).

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2386/2251136902_4cb20e8465_b.jpg[
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emangrooving/

[WesternGulf]

Montrose - Houston (77006): Population density: 9396 people per square mile
you are mixing zip code with neighborhood. Montrose the neighborhood has totally different numbers from 77006. By the way I found a neighborhood in Houston denser than Montrose which is Gulfton which has a density of 14,493 ppsm.

[mhays]

For Seattle: I don't know from City Data, but it terms of census tracts... 130-acre Tract 74 on Capitol Hill was 44,500/sm in 2000, and 128-acre Tract 53.01 next to the University of Washington was 42,500/sm in 2000.

[Gordo]

Densest I found for SF was the Tenderloin at 72,429/sqmi. Chinatown looks to be second at 61,409/sqmi. Quite a few in the 45,000-55,000 range. I know that there are pretty huge differences from block to block, as both the Tenderloin and Chinatown have individual census tracts approaching 100,000/sqmi.

[pip]

how about a neighborhood that is at least one square mile

[WesternGulf]

there are numerous census tracts in a neighborhood, so they do not justify or represent a neighborhood's density as a whole. mhays, there are actual population density numbers for the capitol hill neighborhood as a whole on city-data.

[fflint]

City Data seems to have taken liberties with naming certain census tracts ("Mastro?" "Intermission?"), and draws erratic borders for established neighborhoods, but here goes:

"Little Saigon": 84,559 people per square mile
The Tenderloin: 72,429 people per square mile
Chinatown: 61,409 people per square mile
Nob Hill: 51,585 people per square mile
"Downtown": 49,049 people per square mile

[Gordo]

how about a neighborhood that is at least one square mile

Tough to find, as some of their "neighborhoods" combine parts of one another. I tried to do that with SF with Chinatown, Lower Nob Hill (54,733/sqmi), Nob Hill (51,585/sqmi), and the Tenderloin (all contiguous, roughly 1.3 square miles), but the boundaries overlap in several places (their totals come to 1.35 sqmi, but it's less than that if you subtract the overlapping parts). My guess is that it would be somewhere in the 60,000/sqmi range over the full 1.3 sqmi.

[blade_bltz]

At least for Boston, the neighborhood boundaries/neighborhoods they use are totally screwy and don't make sense. LOL @ having separate entries for Longwood (LMA) and Medical Center Area. Also, they leave out most of the outer neighborhoods like JP, Allston-Brighton, Hyde Park, etc, considering them to be separate municipalities or something...

[suga]

Westlake MacArthur Park and Mid Wilshire- Ktown neighborhoods in LA have densities over 92k per sqaure mile. Those neighborhoods cover several square miles apiece and are also filled with undocumented residents who avoid census countings at all costs so they are bound to actually be much higher.

Ive worked with other working class areas (that i'd assume have less illegal folks than the McArt Park community) such as South Gate and Maywood who have used water utility usage calculations to estimate population (supposedly it is more accurate, specifically in areas with a lot of folks not counted) and their populations jumped severely. Maywood went from 28k (the densest municipality west of mississip at 1 square mile) to 58k, Southgate went from 107k (in 3.5 square miles) to over 160k. I could just imagine what places like East LA(16-45k), South LA(15-40k) or Pico Union would look like.
What is city data?

[giallo]

Gotta be either the Xujiahui district or the Jingan district in Shanghai.

[WesternGulf]

OAKLAND - oak tree: 34.748 ppsm, adams point: 25.974 ppsm, ivy hill: 23.199 ppsm, st elizabeth: 21.345 ppsm

[J. Will]

Toronto's densest neighbourhood would be St. Jamestown, with 64,636 people per square km/166,659 per square mile (14,666 in 0.23 sqkm).

That's the official population. In reality it's probably higher with undocumented people.

[raggedy13]

The densest neighbourhood in Vancouver is the West End which covers about 0.8 square miles. As of 2006 it had a population density of 56,574 ppsm.

Source: http://vancouver.ca/commsvcs/planning/census/2006/localareas/westend.pdf

The West End:
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g296/raggedy13/westendpano-1.png
photos by freedryk (http://www.flickr.com/photos/freedryk/153445728/in/photostream/) at flickr.com, stitched together by me

[hudkina]

how about a neighborhood that is at least one square mile

In 2000, Detroit's Springwells neighborhood had 16,798 people in an area of 1.09 sq. mi. for a density of 15,407.2 ppsm.

[staff]

Gotta be either the Xujiahui district or the Jingan district in Shanghai.
Maybe the newly developed areas in Putuo on the "inside" of the highway ring? Some insanely dense developments there.


As for Malmö, I know the most dense inner-city neighhbourhoods have something like 30.000 inhabitants per km2 (roughly 75-80.000 inh/sqm), but I'd guess the most dense districts are in commieblock suburban areas such as the Toronto one posted. Don't have any numbers though.

For Copenhagen I don't know where to find statistics on smaller districts/neighbourhoods. The most dense borough is Outer Nörrebro with a pop. density of around 20.000 inh/km2 (~50.000 inh/sqm) for that whole part of the city, but surely there are districts and neighbourhoods within Outer Nörrebro that are far more dense than that. Copenhagen doesn't have an abundance of suburban commieblock areas like Swedish major cities, so I'm not there there's any of these areas that would be more dense than any inner-city area.

[flar]

Back in Hamilton it was North Durand with 38,034 ppsm
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/mountainbrow/100063.jpg
Corktown is a close second.



In Ottawa, it is Centretown but I don't have pics or stats.

[Mr Roboto]

Greater than 1 sq mile:

Chicago's census defined hoods (Census 2000):
Neighborhood /Population /Area (Sq Miles) /Density(ppl/sq mile)
Near North Side - 72,811 - 1.5 - 48,541
Edgewater - 62,198 - 1.7 - 36,587
Rogers Park - 63,484 - 1.8 - 35,269
Lake View - 94,817 - 3.1 - 30,586
Albany Park - 57,655 - 1.9 - 30,345



Traditionally defined neighborhoods: (can be less than 1 sq mile)
Neighborhood/ Area/ Density (ppl/sq mile)
Gold Coast - 0.3 sq miles - 64,627
East Lakeview - 0.25 sq miles - 55,918


Densest census tracts (parts of traditional neighborhoods):
Census Tract/ Population/ Area (sq mile)/ Density (ppl/sq mile)
811, Cook County, Illinois- 3,718- 0.041- 90,614
315, Cook County, Illinois- 10,184- 0.122- 83,322
301, Cook County, Illinois- 13,456- 0.168- 80,011
608, Cook County, Illinois- 5,241- 0.071- 74,229
813, Cook County, Illinois- 5,834- 0.083- 70,412
802, Cook County, Illinois- 7,205- 0.111- 64,986

(800s are in gold coast/mag mile area, 300s are in east lakeview, or east north shore hoods like Uptown)

[dimondpark]

OAKLAND - oak tree: 34.748 ppsm, adams point: 25.974 ppsm, ivy hill: 23.199 ppsm, st elizabeth: 21.345 ppsm

Awesome.

[dimondpark]

how about a neighborhood that is at least one square mile

1 square mile is huge for an urban neighborhood imo.


But I digress. Another interesting question would be 'your city's densest square mile'.

[Steely Dan]

1 square mile is huge for an urban neighborhood imo.


i guess that depends on your frame of reference and the size of your city. in chicago, a city of 227 sq. miles, most of our neighborhoods are in the 1-3 sq. mile range. i would imagine though in a city of only 40 sq miles that neighborhoods of that size would seem rather large.

[Gordo]

i guess that depends on your frame of reference and the size of your city. in chicago, a city of 227 sq. miles, most of our neighborhoods are in the 1-3 sq. mile range. i would imagine though in a city of only 40 sq miles that neighborhoods of that size would seem rather large.

I would say that generally speaking the more dense an area becomes, the smaller "neighborhoods" within that area will become. It's pretty rare anywhere to find a neighborhood of 50,000/sqmi or more that takes up an entire square mile (even if density of that level extends over a contiguous square mile). Even if an area is originally developed as one neighborhood, if the area becomes extremely dense people will rename smaller portions of it (as certain areas become more or less desirable or different based on stores, demographics, etc). The more dense an area, the higher the likelihood that things will change block to block.

[Puggy]

The Most Densely Populated Neighborhood in my city is Neustadt-Süd.
This part is 2,8km² big and there live 13.566 people on one km²

My city is named Cologne and located in the west of Germany, it is the 4th biggest city of Germany with 1 million inhabitants.
(For those who didnt know it)

[Steely Dan]

I would say that generally speaking the more dense an area becomes, the smaller "neighborhoods" within that area will become. It's pretty rare anywhere to find a neighborhood of 50,000/sqmi or more that takes up an entire square mile (even if density of that level extends over a contiguous square mile). Even if an area is originally developed as one neighborhood, if the area becomes extremely dense people will rename smaller portions of it (as certain areas become more or less desirable or different based on stores, demographics, etc). The more dense an area, the higher the likelihood that things will change block to block.

yeah, that's true in a casual sense, but in chicago we have "neighborhoods" with a small "n", and "Neighborhoods" with a large "N". the latter are city-defined community areas with hard and fixed geographical boundaries. within that macro level system there are the small "n" neighborhoods which are casually created by residents or real estate agents and have much more nebulous and variable definitions.

if we take where i live, what you say is true. i live in the "near north side", which is 1.5 sq. miles and has roughly 48,000 ppsm. however, within that larger hood, i live more specifically in "river north", which is a sub-hood of the larger hood. however "river north" is just a realtor invention and is not a neighborhood that is geographically defined by the city. i still live in the "near north side" neighborhood, which is 1.5 sq. miles, and i also live in the "river north" neighborhood which is a sub set of it. perhaps chicago is just weird for having a two-tiered neighborhood system, but a city neighborhood with a density of 50,000 ppsm that is 1 or 2 sq. miles in area doesn't seem "huge" to me, but as i said, it's all about perspective.

[pip]

I would say that generally speaking the more dense an area becomes, the smaller "neighborhoods" within that area will become. It's pretty rare anywhere to find a neighborhood of 50,000/sqmi or more that takes up an entire square mile (even if density of that level extends over a contiguous square mile). Even if an area is originally developed as one neighborhood, if the area becomes extremely dense people will rename smaller portions of it (as certain areas become more or less desirable or different based on stores, demographics, etc). The more dense an area, the higher the likelihood that things will change block to block.

right but anyone could take a highrise which takes up a block then multiply it out to a square mile. The geographical sizes of these areas being compared are all over the place.

[edmontonenthusiast]

Edmonton

It would be the Oliver neighbourhood just west of the downtown core. It is usually considered apart of the downtown core due to it's density. It's a high rise residential neighbourhood and West Oliver is the densest area in all of Alberta. Lots of condos, apartments, and small offices. It is approximately half of Edmonton's "downtown" skyline. It's is home to over 20,000 people.

I don't know the density per Sq Km.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/3154054727_2ff540ef0f.jpg?v=0
credit - by me.

[WesternGulf]

right but anyone could take a highrise which takes up a block then multiply it out to a square mile. The geographical sizes of these areas being compared are all over the place.

yeah, that is why i said a census tract is not representative of a neighborhood's density. a census tract could be a mixed use development that stretches for only 3-4 blocks.

edit: Puggy, forgive my ignorance but do you know what the density is in square miles for Neustadt-Süd?

[hudkina]

^I know! The densest block in Detroit (Block 3017 of Census Tract 5208) supposedly has a density of 2,753,566.3 people per square mile. In 2000, the block supposedly had a population of 303 but was only 0.00011 sq. mi. in area (that's less than 1/10th of an acre).

Granted, when I looked on a map that block didn't technically exist and the population living within that block was probably meant to be included in a much larger block (0.1 sq. mi.) with a population of 1,047 and a more traditional density of about 11,000 ppsm.

[MonkeyRonin]

If we want to look at slightly larger areas, then Toronto's densest square kilometre (1.08 sqkm) of adjacent census tracts has 35,298 inhabitants, and thus a density of 32,683/sqkm (86,092/sqmi), which would comprise this area:

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/103/40794138.jpg


yeah, that is why i said a census tract is not representative of a neighborhood's density. a census tract could be a mixed use development that stretches for only 3-4 blocks.

I can't speak for everywhere, but here at least, "neighbourhoods" usually fit into 1 or 2 census tracts, 3 at most.

[Gordo]

right but anyone could take a highrise which takes up a block then multiply it out to a square mile. The geographical sizes of these areas being compared are all over the place.

That's true. I like the idea of either comparing population density in like-sized geographic areas OR like-sized population sizes and the amount of geographic space that they take up.

[BTinSF]

right but anyone could take a highrise which takes up a block then multiply it out to a square mile. The geographical sizes of these areas being compared are all over the place.

From what I've seen here, highrise areas aren't necessarily all that dense, especially if they are like Vancouver's West End and the highrises with spacious upscale units are set in park-like spaces. What makes neighborhoods like New York's Little Italy and SF's Little Saigon dense is the crowding of large families into small apartments, many people to a room.

[pip]

you sure about that? I would have gussed a highrise to be a very densley populated.

ok then "right but anyone could take an old crowded lowrise building which takes up a 1/4 block then multiply it out to a square mile. The geographical sizes of these areas being compared are all over the place." :)

[Crawford]

From what I've seen here, highrise areas aren't necessarily all that dense, especially if they are like Vancouver's West End and the highrises with spacious upscale units are set in park-like spaces. What makes neighborhoods like New York's Little Italy and SF's Little Saigon dense is the crowding of large families into small apartments, many people to a room.

There are barely any large families in Manhattan's Little Italy. I would bet those Census tracts have almost no children nowadays.

But yeah, your point stands that tall buildings do not necessarily mean high density, and small buildings do not becessarily mean low density.

Even seemingly low density areas can have high population densities. Look at parts of LA or outer neighborhoods of Queens. Semi-suburban but very high densities.

[Crawford]

you sure about that? I would have gussed a highrise to be a very densley populated.


The building itself, yes, but often highrises are in a "tower in the park" format or interspersed with low-density uses.

[dave8721]

Miami doesn't really have any super dense neighborhoods, it just has very large continuous area of pretty dense neighborhoods (~10,000 ppsm).

Miami's neighboorhoods like Little Havana that are almost exclusively populated by immigrants (many to most of them undocumented) are probably wildly undercounted.

The densest large areas I could find:
--West Avenue (Western South Beach): 33,163 per square mile
--North Bay Village (a city not a neighborhood): 23,909 per square mile
--Riverside (NE Little Havana): 21,362 per square mile (probably 5 times that if you count un-counted undocumented immigrants)
--Lago Grange (Hialeah): 20,285 per square mile
--East Little Havana (3 square miles): 19,649 per square mile
--Flamingo (Central/East South Beach including large unpopulated tourist district): 19,508 per square mile
--Normandy Isles (Northern Miami Beach): 17,443 per square mile
--El Prado (Hialeah): 17,133 per square mile
--Little Havana (4.2 square miles): 17,117 per square mile
--North Shore (Northern Miami Beach/Surfside): 16,828 per square mile

[Gordo]

you sure about that? I would have gussed a highrise to be a very densley populated.

Depends on how they're built and how the rest of the neighborhood is built. A lot of highrises (especially those built 1950-today) are separated from other buildings by quite a bit with room for parking garages, greenspace, etc. Certainly highrise neighborhoods like those lining Central Park in NYC are extremely dense.

A lot of newer highrises are built like Vancouver where the tower itself only takes up a small percentage of the total lot, with a podium of retail or townhouses taking up most of the lot. There's nothing wrong with that, but it often leads to lower density than just a line of six story buildings.

[BTinSF]

There are barely any large families in Manhattan's Little Italy. I would bet those Census tracts have almost no children nowadays.


Well then, lots of singles sharing flats--or whatever. Little Italy isn't an especially highrise neighborhood and neither are the densest areas of SF.

The point is you don't necessarily get more density stacking spacious apartments occupied by one or two people to the sky than you do crowding people into small apartments in midrise structures.

[fflint]

SF neighborhoods are almost uniformly smaller than 1 square mile. We've got larger "districts" (e.g. the Mission, the Sunset, the Richmond) but they have many distinct neighborhoods within them.

I agree we should be trying to get at larger geographical areas, but City Data is the source for the stats in comparison here and--as noted--they take liberties.

A few years back, many forumers spent a great deal of time and effort putting together a "Your City's Manhattan" comparison, using census tracts to round out to the densest ~25 contiguous square miles that included a given city's downtown--it's "Manhattan" if you will. After Manhattan, Chicago, SF and LA had the densest cores. I have the stats on my laptop at home--I can post them tonight after work if someone else can't provide them.

[CGII]

The arbitrary placement of standard neighborhood size is troublesome, if at least superficially for how difficult it is to decide this standard of measurement.
But neighborhoods, like the cities they comprise, are unique microcosms identifiable from a certain building stock and demographic makeup. This, obviously, varies from city to city and from neighborhood to neighborhood, so it is unquestionably silly to put a '1 square mile or more' designation on defining a neighborhood. The question was, 'what is the most densely populated neighborhood in your city?' and if you can make a good argument for why 1 block in Detroit is an entire neighborhood, then who is to say boo? When we start putting size guidelines in play we are no longer comparing neighborhood densities but overall city densities. So instead of instituting an arbitrary guide limit, why don't we concede that there is a somehow democratic designation and acceptance of what is and isn't a neighborhood?

For example, Little Italy in New York is only a few blocks but its location and boundaries are clear, and its small size is part of what defines it as a neighborhood. When you say you can't judge Little Italy as a valid neighborhood because it is too small and must instead count all of NoHo and Chinatown to cover the square mileage requirement, you are now spanning multiple neighborhoods to fulfill a more regional quantification, which is besides the point as it then neglects Little Italy's legitimacy as a neighborhood.

[ardecila]

edit: dp

[ardecila]

Most Densely Populated Neighborhoods in New Orleans (the boundaries are terrible, btw)

Iberville Project: 34,570 ppsm
Florida Project: 22,407 ppsm
Calliope Project: 12,587 ppsm
St. Bernard: 15,291 ppsm
Seventh Ward: 12,584 ppsm

The inclusion of projects as seperate neighborhoods gives me pause, but New Orleans' projects are often located along neighborhood boundaries or surrounded by industrial lands that prevent a strong connection to nearby neighborhoods.

Also, the definition of upriver neighborhoods in New Orleans is frustrating. Generally, people will orient to St. Charles Avenue, with Uptown being near the end of St. Charles, and the Garden District being what you pass through to get there. Where the dividing line is, though, everybody will tell you something different.

Neighborhoods closer to the lake tend to have stronger correlation between the 'official' boundaries and the ones that people actually refer to. In New Orleans East, neighborhoods are usually set up suburban style, with each area having been developed in subdivisions and named by individual developers. In downriver neighborhoods, there's also a stronger correlation between official and colloquial neighborhood boundaries.

[danwxman]

Midtown Harrisburg: 10,172 people per square mile

[Lecom]

The densest I could find. Really, in New York, it's not clear where the densest part would be, because there are old tenement neighbourhoods with people crammed in every corner and then there are highrise neighbourhoods with people spaciously placed vertically. Here are the top three in my search:

Little Italy-98,651 people per square mile
Gramercy Park-90,732 people per square mile
Upper East Side-89,722 people per square mile
New York City Average-26,403 people per square mile

Yea, I would imagine the UES belongs on the list. Wherever there isn't a 20-50 story apartment tower, there are lowrises that are probably more densely populated than the towers.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

its funny how this thread topic comes up like clockwork once every 6 months!

[Crawford]

The Upper East Side is the densest neighborhood in NYC.

Manhattan Community District 8.

[edsas]

I'd really love to know where the single most densely populated square mile on Earth is.

[Crawford]

^
I would guess somwhere in Southern Asia. Slums of Calcutta, maybe?

In the developed world, maybe Mongkok, Hong Kong?

[edsas]

^
I would guess somwhere in Southern Asia. Slums of Calcutta, maybe?

In the developed world, maybe Mongkok, Hong Kong?

Yeah, I'm sure. Any guess what the number range would be?

[BarbaricManchurian]

I'd guess around 500,000 people/square mile in the developed world, and about 2 million people/square mile for the slums (remember that Kowloon Walled City was 5 million people/square mile, so 2 million/square mile for the current world doesn't seem like much of a stretch).

[Jarrod]

Edmonton

It would be the Oliver neighbourhood just west of the downtown core. It is usually considered apart of the downtown core due to it's density. It's a high rise residential neighbourhood and West Oliver is the densest area in all of Alberta. Lots of condos, apartments, and small offices. It is approximately half of Edmonton's "downtown" skyline. It's is home to over 20,000 people.

I don't know the density per Sq Km.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/3154054727_2ff540ef0f.jpg?v=0
credit - by me.

Yuppers. I currently live in Oliver.

[Minato Ku]

Paris
11th arrondissement
152,436 inhabitants (2006)
3.67 km² - 41,536 per square kilometer
1.415 sq mile - 107,728 per square mile

[dimondpark]

i would imagine though in a city of only 40 sq miles that neighborhoods of that size would seem rather large.


Or a little island that's a wee 2 miles wide and 13 miles long.:D

[mhays]

Seattle's densest mile-plus is mostly the east side of I-5 across from the CBD, plus some additional land to the east. Two tracts include parts of the CBD west of I-5. It's tracts 74, 75, 82, 83, 84, 85.

In 2000: 693.7 acres, 29,732 people, or 27,428/sm.

Using new 2008 estimates for five of those tracts (DSA got from ?), it became 31,238, or 28,817/sm.

[Thundertubs]

Union City, NJ has 67,000 in 1.27 sq.mi, for almost 53,000/sq.mi.

West New York, NJ has 46,000 in 1 sq.mi of land.

Hoboken, NJ has 39,000 in 1.3 Sq.mi. In 1910 the population was 70,000.

Guttenburg, NJ has 10,800 in 0.2 sq.mi for 56,000/sq.mi.

All of these cities (which really function more like neighborhoods) are predominantly low-rise brownstones/walkups/rowhouses. They are all located in Hudson County, which itself is denser and more populous than the city of Boston.

[Reverberation]

you are mixing zip code with neighborhood. Montrose the neighborhood has totally different numbers from 77006. By the way I found a neighborhood in Houston denser than Montrose which is Gulfton which has a density of 14,493 ppsm.

Nothing like SF, NY, or Europe, but I just checked 77081 and came up with 17,506 people per square mile. Neighborhoods in Houston are hard to measure though. The boundaries are hard to agree on.

The Greenway Plaza neighborhood makes 36,701 people per square mile. I think that's the highest density of any zip code in the city.
http://cbtcws.cityofhouston.gov/zipcodes/maps/77046.jpg
http://cbtcws.cityofhouston.gov/zipcodes/maps/77046.jpg

[dfane]

Philadelphia is most likely South Philly
There is approx 163,000 people in 9.7 square miles
16,771 people per square mile
This is according to wikipedia (not sure how accurate that is)
But having a hard time believing alot of these numbers people are posting here

[dimondpark]

I have the stats on my laptop at home--I can post them tonight after work if someone else can't provide them.
Please do.:yes:

[Gava]

Barcelona

District 2 Eixample
262,485 inhabitants
7.46 square km - 35,585 per square kilometer
2.9 square mile - 92,592 per square mile

The densest neighborhood that I have reliable data for is the Sagrada família one:

53,000 inhabitants
1.08 square kilometer
0.41 square mile - 127,592 per square mile


In the "suburb" of L'Hospitalet one find the densest square mile in the Barcelona metropolitan area.

Districts 2-4-5 combined
137,718 inhabitants
2.66 square km - 51,773 per square kilometer
1.02 square mile - 134,609 per square mile

Inside this area you find the neighborhoods of La Florida with 200,000 per square mile and La Torrassa with 160,000 per square mile.

[Ex-Ithacan]

In Ithaca, the neighborhood where I grew up - Collegetown. 28,715 /sqmile


http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Collegetown-Ithaca-NY.html



http://farm1.static.flickr.com/155/355198689_a748a50e71.jpg?v=0



Well, hey, it's just a small town. ;)

[J. Will]

In addition to St. Jamestown, Toronto has some other (albeit geographically small) neighbourhoods with around 100k+ per square miles. St. Lawrence is around there. Harbourfront was around 100k/sm several years ago, and it's easily higher now with the new towers that have risen on surface parking lots.

[dktshb]

Well according to citydata.com some of the densest zip codes in LA appears to be:


Zip code 90057 statistics:
Population density: 51576 people per square mile

Zip code 90020 statistics:
Population density: 40351 people per square mile

Zip code 90005 statistics:
Population density: 38832 people per square mile

Zip code 90006 statistics:
Population density: 33292 people per square mile

Zip code 90029 statistics:
Population density: 31808 people per square mile

http://www.city-data.com/zipmaps/Los-Angeles-California.html#90010

[The Chemist]

Most densely populated district in Shanghai is Huangpu District, with a population of 574500 (as of 2002, the number is probably higher now) and an area of 12.4 square kilometres. This works out to 45,293 people per square kilometre (118,511 people per square mile). I'm sure there are individual neighbourhoods with a higher density, though.

[hunser]

vienna, 8th district ("josefstadt"): 25,000 ppl / square kilometer. not quite dense, but for an european it's ok :)

[SLO]

So....now Im wondering about those Toronto numbers. Based on what others have posted about their cities Toronto has the most dense neighborhood of them all, is this correct?

[tdawg]

I'm skeptical of those TO numbers, too. Only about 17,000 people live in all of St. Jamestown. In all the times I've been to Toronto, i've yet to experience any neighborhood that matched the residential density of the UES. As of the 2000 census, there were 207,543 people residing in the Upper East Side. The population density was 118,184 people per square mile (45,649/km²)

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/09vS7Ho9tYd7c/610x.jpg

[MonkeyRonin]

Here is the data for the Jamestown tract:
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-597/P3.cfm?Lang=E&CTCODE=1076&CATYPE=CMA

And for the other 4 census tracts that comprised the densest square kilometre:
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-597/P3.cfm?Lang=E&CTCODE=6097&CATYPE=CMA
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-597/P3.cfm?Lang=E&CTCODE=3987&CATYPE=CMA
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-597/P3.cfm?Lang=E&CTCODE=3988&CATYPE=CMA
http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/prof/92-597/P3.cfm?Lang=E&CTCODE=1075&CATYPE=CMA

This is the area in question, Jamestown is highlighted in green:
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/1928/57300255.jpg

[tdawg]

thanks for posting that.

[J. Will]

I'm skeptical of those TO numbers, too. Only about 17,000 people live in all of St. Jamestown.

And if you bothered doing the math, you'd see that 17,000 people over an area that size is over 160k /square mile. You don't even need to do the math actually, someone else already did it.

I'm skeptical of those TO numbers, too. Only about 17,000 people live in all of St. Jamestown.

It was already mentioned that St. Jamestown is only 0.23 square km. So if your 17,000 number is correct, that is over 180,000/square mile.

But I'm just as skeptical of your New York numbers.

[dktshb]

The Greenway Plaza neighborhood makes 36,701 people per square mile. I think that's the highest density of any zip code in the city.

http://cbtcws.cityofhouston.gov/zipcodes/maps/77046.jpg

Considering the fact that there are only 525 people living in that zip code it is hardly worth mentioning.

Zip code 77046 statistics:

Estimated zip code population in 2007: 525

Land area: 0.0 sq. mi.
Water area: 0.0 sq. mi.
Population density: 36701 people per square mile

http://www.city-data.com/zipmaps/Houston-Texas.html

[SuburbanNation]

Nothing special, 14,000 people per square mile down in Tower Grove East in South St. Louis, and not much over 2 stories...and its not much different than any other near/mid south side nabe as far as composition (moderate intensity streetcar scale with scattered intra neighborhood commercial) other than not having expressways, projects, urban renewal, or much large industrial and rail spurs. I don't know what the density of the "loft district" or individual apartment blocks of the West End are but I'm sure they are higher, as central corridor neighborhoods are considered to be the higher density areas of the City by look and feel. Neighborhood to neighborhood, present day St. Louis might be fairly comparable to central New Orleans City, although New Orleans only has 100,000 more people on 3x the land (not counting all the water). Like New Orleans, we get a good "bang for the buck" with the scattered, ped scale neighborhood commercial drawing people out on foot.

[tdawg]

So what you have there in Toronto, is a few densely populated blocks. Congratulations. Just look at the picture I posted or walk the 2 square miles of the Upper East Side if you're skeptical.

Upper East Side Demographics

The following Upper East Side demographic information was taken from the 2000 U.S. Government census.

Total Population
Zip Code Total Population
10022 30,642
10128 59,856
10021 102,078
10028 44,987

Looking strictly at zip code 10021:
Land area: 1.2 sq. mi.
Water area: 0.0 sq. mi.
Population density: 88364 people per square mile

[CGII]

So what you have there in Toronto, is a few densely populated blocks. Congratulations. Just look at the picture I posted or walk the 2 square miles of the Upper East Side if you're skeptical.


Nobody was comparing Toronto to New York until you did, the snobbery is not appreciated here.

[SLO]

^^^No, it goes both ways. No reason to be offended. I didnt realize how small an area the Toronto neighborhood was. This makes this thread question really useless, because everyone is using different sample size areas. You could go into any city and find the densest 3 blocks in the city and have some crazy density numbers that really mean nothing.

[CGII]

^^^No, it goes both ways. No reason to be offended. I didnt realize how small an area the Toronto neighborhood was. This makes this thread question really useless, because everyone is using different sample size areas. You could go into any city and find the densest 3 blocks in the city and have some crazy density numbers that really mean nothing.

The thread question is not at all useless, the thread question was 'what is your city's densest neighbourhood' not 'comparison of 1 square mile sample areas of your city.' Neighbourhoods are defined by things other than arbitrary size boundaries.

[J. Will]

So what you have there in Toronto, is a few densely populated blocks. Congratulations. Just look at the picture I posted or walk the 2 square miles of the Upper East Side if you're skeptical.

Upper East Side Demographics

The following Upper East Side demographic information was taken from the 2000 U.S. Government census.

Total Population
Zip Code Total Population
10022 30,642
10128 59,856
10021 102,078
10028 44,987

Looking strictly at zip code 10021:
Land area: 1.2 sq. mi.
Water area: 0.0 sq. mi.
Population density: 88364 people per square mile

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. You say you're skeptical of St. Jamestown population density, yet expect no one to have a problem with that. If that's the case, why do you have a problem with me being skeptical of the UES' population density? I'm skeptical for the same reason you're skeptical - I've been to NY and there's no way the UES is as densely populated. Individual blocks might be, but the neighbourhood on the whole? Not a chance.

I could say the exact same thing to you. If you are skeptical of St. Jamestown population density, than you have obviously never spent any time there - no one who has spent even a little time there would question the numbers. In which case why did you comment it on the first place? But if you are skeptical, "just look at some pictures or walk around St. Jamestown". (BTW, I have walked around the UES, and there's no way it is as densely populated as St. Jamestown).

No one would have mentioned NY's population density if you hadn't questioned St. Jamestown's first. Had you not made a silly comment about being "skeptical" even AFTER the numbers were posted, nor would I have.

No, it goes both ways. No reason to be offended. I didnt realize how small an area the Toronto neighborhood was.

MonkeyRonin said clearly right on the first page that it is 0.23 square kilometres. I guess you missed that. St. Jamestown is a neighbourhood though, and it's not really part of a larger neighbourhood (unless you consider all of downtown to be one "neighbourhood" at about 4 square miles).

[SlidellWx]

New Orleans post-Katrina highest density neighborhoods.

Data from June 2008.

Iberville Development = 2,456 people in 0.072 sq. mi.
34,111 ppsm

St. Thomas Development = 4,731 people in 0.308 sq. mi.
15,360 ppsm

East Riverside neighborhood = 3,398 people in 0.289 sq. mi.
11,758 ppsm

East Carrollton neighborhood = 4,355 people in 0.434 sq. mi.
10,035 ppsm

Milan neighborhood = 5,906 people in 0.604 sq. mi.
9,778 ppsm

[SLO]

The thread question is not at all useless, the thread question was 'what is your city's densest neighbourhood' not 'comparison of 1 square mile sample areas of your city.' Neighbourhoods are defined by things other than arbitrary size boundaries.

Thats exactly right, but everyone is posting density per square mile, its very deceiving.

[PLANSIT]

Thats exactly right, but everyone is posting density per square mile, its very deceiving.

How else would you quantify density? :sly:

[J. Will]

Thats exactly right, but everyone is posting density per square mile, its very deceiving.

Density per square mile doesn't mean a minimum one square mile. A neighbourhood could have 20,000 people on 0.1 square mile and it has a density of 200,000 per square mile.

It was mentioned though about the neighbourhood in question that it is only 0.23 square km in the same post as it's density was mentioned. It cannot possibly be "deceiving".

[SLO]

Density per square mile doesn't mean a minimum one square mile. A neighbourhood could have 20,000 people on 0.1 square mile and it has a density of 200,000 per square mile.

It was mentioned though about the neighbourhood in question that it is only 0.23 square km in the same post as it's density was mentioned. It cannot possibly be "deceiving".

It is deceiving if you dont know the sample size, yes that one was clearly posted, but I wasnt even specifically talking about Toronto. Just glancing at the numbers in most of the posts you dont know neighborhood size, and even if you do, they are all different. Not the point though, I know.
What do you want me to say? Wow, Toronto is the densest city on earth.

[J. Will]

What do you want me to say? Wow, Toronto is the densest city on earth.

:jester:

I never said I wanted you to say anything. You're the one who started complaining about "sample sizes" and sizes of neighbourhoods, not me. :jester:

And I know this may be hard to believe, but in real life neighbourhood sizes are all different. The OP said nothing about neighbourhood sizes. It wasn't even an issue until a couple posters started whining about it and saying it made comparisons useless.

[Mr Roboto]

I would agree that it would be easier to compare the densities of a sample size of 1 square mile, but unfortunately neighborhoods are all different sizes and so are census tracts. Census tracts can vary a whole lot in terms of content as well. Some include parks, or railroad tracks, etc which may lower density.

The densest areas in Chicago are usually all along Lincoln park, and census tracts add these park areas into the total area, thereby decreasing the overall density. There really is no exact science.

[J. Will]

I would agree that it would be easier to compare the densities of a sample size of 1 square mile, but unfortunately neighborhoods are all different sizes and so are census tracts. Census tracts can vary a whole lot in terms of content as well. Some include parks, or railroad tracks, etc which may lower density.

The densest areas in Chicago are usually all along Lincoln park, and census tracts add these park areas into the total area, thereby decreasing the overall density. There really is no exact science.

The "1 square mile" comparison though has already been done on this forum.

[Mr Roboto]

^half the threads created in city discussions have been done on this forum at one time or another anyways.

[llamaorama]

I dunno, I think out of fairness stating the population along with the density would be good.

More people might equate more intensity even the density is less because not every part of that square mile is where the non-residential activity is

[J. Will]

:haha:

It's funny that the whiners who complained about St. Jamestown being too small had no problem with the inclusion of New York's Little Italy in this list, which covers even less land.

:haha:

The hypocrisy around here is unbelievable.

No, it goes both ways. No reason to be offended. I didnt realize how small an area the Toronto neighborhood was.

:haha: It says clearly 0.23 square kilometres, which is larger than Little Italy in New York. Yet I didn't see either of you whining about that being included. Why is that?

[ARMR]

I would agree that it would be easier to compare the densities of a sample size of 1 square mile, but unfortunately neighborhoods are all different sizes and so are census tracts. Census tracts can vary a whole lot in terms of content as well. Some include parks, or railroad tracks, etc which may lower density.

The densest areas in Chicago are usually all along Lincoln park, and census tracts add these park areas into the total area, thereby decreasing the overall density. There really is no exact science.

are u seriously saying lincoln park is the densest area??? have u been anywhere else in the city?? been to uptown???????????? the near north side??????? lincoln park is an open football field compared to those two areas.

[CGII]

:haha:

It's funny that the whiners who complained about St. Jamestown being too small had no problem with the inclusion of New York's Little Italy in this list, which covers even less land.


Because this is about neighbourhoods, you idiot, not land area.


This thread should be closed. Nobody seems to understand the datum for the discussion and besides that it's come to giddy argument.

[J. Will]

Because this is about neighbourhoods, you idiot, not land area.


This thread should be closed. Nobody seems to understand the datum for the discussion and besides that it's come to giddy argument.

Apparently you can't read, you idiot.

They were complaining that St. Jamestown was too small thus shouldn't be counted. Yet they never whined about the inclusion of Little Italy, which covers even less land area. I never said Little Italy wasn't a neighbourhood or shouldn't be included (which you'd know if you could read). I was pointing out the hypocrisy of complaining because one neighbourhood was "too small" or "only three blocks", yet having no problem with the inclusion of an even smaller neighbourhood.

If you still don't understand, can I suggest some remedial reading classes. You certainly need them.

Do you get it now?

[Mr Roboto]

are u seriously saying lincoln park is the densest area??? have u been anywhere else in the city?? been to uptown???????????? the near north side??????? lincoln park is an open football field compared to those two areas.

You do realize Lincoln Park is, well, a park?(?????) Hence, my usage of the word 'along'. Lincoln Park stretches from the neighborhood of Lincoln Park all the way just past Hollywood Ave in Edgewater, and is also adjacent to Lakeview and Uptown. And the densest census tracts, besides those in the gold coast, are primarily along Lincoln Park either in Uptown or east Lakeview.

BTW, this thread is pretty much dead. Reduced to name-calling etc.

[miketoronto]

Those St. Jamestown numbers for population could be lower than the actual number. The census may have counted something like 17,000 people, however many people peg the population of that area at 25,000-30,000 people, as alot of families do not list that they have another family living with them in the apartments.

[MolsonExport]

The King of Density. The Walled City of Kowloon (destroyed in the 1990s), Hong Kong. Population estimated between 35,000 and 50,000. Density: 1.9 million per square kilometer. The most dense concentration of humanity in a neighborhood.

http://shii.org/mediawiki/images/f/f8/1175880451416.jpg
^shii.org

My thread on topic is here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=55357

[MolsonExport]

KWC: At that time, it had 50,000 inhabitants on 26 000 m² (31 000 sq. yards), and therefore a very high population density of 1,923,077/km², making it one of the most densely populated urban areas on Earth.[wikipedia]

I see that Wikipedia now has an external link to my Walled city thread:
Skyscraperpage.com forum thread devoted to Kowloon Walled City, information, pictures and videos

[MolsonExport]

As calculated by urban areas. I live in Canada, hence boldface.

http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-125.html

Largest cities in the world ranked by population density (1 to 125)
Rank City / Urban area Country Population Land area
(in sqKm)
Density
(people per sqKm)

1 Mumbai India 14,350,000 484 29,650
2 Kolkata India 12,700,000 531 23,900
3 Karachi Pakistan 9,800,000 518 18,900
4 Lagos Nigeria 13,400,000 738 18,150
5 Shenzhen China 8,000,000 466 17,150
6 Seoul/Incheon South Korea 17,500,000 1,049 16,700
7 Taipei Taiwan 5,700,000 376 15,200
8 Chennai India 5,950,000 414 14,350
9 Bogota Colombia 7,000,000 518 13,500
10 Shanghai China 10,000,000 746 13,400
11 Lima Peru 7,000,000 596 11,750
12 Beijing China 8,614,000 748 11,500
13 Delhi India 14,300,000 1,295 11,050
14 Kinshasa Congo 5,000,000 469 10,650
15 Manila Philippines 14,750,000 1,399 10,550
16 Tehran Iran 7,250,000 686 10,550
17 Jakarta Indonesia 14,250,000 1,360 10,500
18 Tianjin China 4,750,000 453 10,500
19 Bangalore India 5,400,000 534 10,100
20 Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam 4,900,000 518 9,450
21 Cairo Egypt 12,200,000 1,295 9,400
22 Baghdad Iraq 5,500,000 596 9,250
23 Shenyang China 4,200,000 453 9,250
24 Hyderabad India 5,300,000 583 9,100
25 Sao Paulo Brazil 17,700,000 1,968 9,000
26 St Petersburg Russia 5,300,000 622 8,550
27 Mexico City Mexico 17,400,000 2,072 8,400
28 Santiago Chile 5,425,000 648 8,400
29 Singapore Singapore 4,000,000 479 8,350
30 Lahore Pakistan 5,100,000 622 8,200
31 Recife Brazil 3,025,000 376 8,050
32 Istanbul Turkey 9,000,000 1,166 7,700
33 Dalian China 2,750,000 389 7,100
34 Khartoum Sudan 4,000,000 583 6,850
35 Rio de Janeiro Brazil 10,800,000 1,580 6,850
36 Monterey Mexico 3,200,000 479 6,700
37 Bangkok Thailand 6,500,000 1,010 6,450
38 Osaka/Kobe/Kyoto Japan 16,425,000 2,564 6,400
39 Guadalajara Mexico 3,500,000 596 5,900
40 Athens Greece 3,685,000 684 5,400
41 Ankara Turkey 3,100,000 583 5,300
42 Madrid Spain 4,900,000 945 5,200
43 London UK 8,278,000 1,623 5,100
44 Tel Aviv Israel 2,300,000 453 5,050
45 Sapporo Japan 2,075,000 414 5,000
46 Buenos Aires Argentina 11,200,000 2,266 4,950
47 Moscow Russia 10,500,000 2,150 4,900
48 Barcelona Spain 3,900,000 803 4,850
49 Porto Alegre Brazil 2,800,000 583 4,800
50 Tokyo/Yokohama Japan 33,200,000 6,993 4,750
51 Belo Horizonte Brazil 4,000,000 868 4,600
52 Fortaleza Brazil 2,650,000 583 4,550
53 Warsaw Poland 2,000,000 466 4,300
54 Tashkent Uzbekistan 2,200,000 531 4,150
55 Naples Italy 2,400,000 583 4,100
56 Katowice Poland 2,200,000 544 4,050
57 Leeds/Bradford UK 1,499,000 370 4,050
58 Manchester UK 2,245,000 558 4,000
59 CapeTown South Africa 2,700,000 686 3,950
60 Fukuoka Japan 2,150,000 544 3,950
61 Taichung Taiwan 2,000,000 510 3,900
62 Baku/Sumqayit Azerbaijan 2,100,000 544 3,850
63 Curitiba Brazil 2,500,000 648 3,850
64 Birmingham UK 2,284,000 600 3,800
65 Berlin Germany 3,675,000 984 3,750
66 Riyadh Saudi Arabia 4,000,000 1,101 3,650
67 Campinas Brazil 1,750,000 492 3,550
68 Jeddah Saudi Arabia 2,750,000 777 3,550
69 Paris France 9,645,000 2,723 3,550
70 Durban South Africa 2,900,000 829 3,500
71 Vienna Austria 1,550,000 453 3,400
72 Accra Ghana 1,500,000 453 3,300
73 Glasgow UK 1,200,000 368 3,250
74 Nagoya Japan 9,000,000 2,875 3,150
75 Quito Ecuador 1,500,000 479 3,150
76 Donetsk Ukraine 1,400,000 451 3,100
77 Goiania Brazil 1,475,000 479 3,100
78 Munich Germany 1,600,000 518 3,100
79 Stuttgart Germany 1,250,000 414 3,000
80 Dublin Ireland 1,075,000 365 2,950
81 Kuwait Kuwait 1,600,000 544 2,950
82 Nizhni Novgorod Russia 1,500,000 505 2,950
83 Rome Italy 2,500,000 842 2,950
84 Phnom Phen Cambodia 1,500,000 518 2,900
85 Beirut Lebanon 1,800,000 648 2,800
86 Brasilia Brazil 1,625,000 583 2,800
87 Essen/Düsseldorf Germany 7,350,000 2,642 2,800
88 Lumumbashi Congo 1,200,000 427 2,800
89 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia 4,400,000 1,606 2,750
90 Los Angeles USA 11,789,000 4,320 2,750
91 Milan Italy 4,250,000 1,554 2,750
92 Pretoria South Africa 1,850,000 673 2,750
93 Stockholm Sweden 1,400,000 518 2,700
94 Turin Italy 1,350,000 500 2,700
95 Dubai UAE 1,900,000 712 2,650
96 Porto Portugal 1,035,000 389 2,650
97 Toronto Canada 4,367,000 1,655 2,650
98 Budapest Hungary 1,800,000 702 2,550
99 Lisbon Portugal 2,250,000 881 2,550
100 Johannesburg/East Rand South Africa 6,000,000 2,396 2,500
101 Rotterdam Netherlands 1,325,000 531 2,500
102 Harare Zimbabwe 1,750,000 712 2,450
103 Cologne/Bonn Germany 1,960,000 816 2,400
104 San Francisco/Oakland USA 3,229,000 1,365 2,350
105 Frankfurt Germany 2,260,000 984 2,300
106 Hamburg Germany 1,925,000 829 2,300
107 San Jose USA 1,538,000 674 2,300
108 Arabia Saudi 1,525,000 673 2,250
109 Brussels Belgium 1,570,000 712 2,200
110 Lille France 1,050,000 474 2,200
111 Helsinki Finland 1,000,000 479 2,100
112 Port Elizabeth South Africa 900,000 427 2,100
113 Sydney Australia 3,502,000 1,687 2,100
114 New York USA 17,800,000 8,683 2,050
115 Auckland New Zealand 1,050,000 531 2,000
116 New Orleans USA 1,009,000 512 1,950
117 Copenhagen Denmark 1,525,000 816 1,850
118 Montreal. Canada 3,216,000 1,740 1,850
119 Honolulu USA 718,000 399 1,800
120 Las Vegas USA 1,314,000 741 1,750
121 Miami USA 4,919,000 2,891 1,700
122 Ottawa/Hull Canada 828,000 490 1,700
123 Vancouver Canada 1,830,000 1,120 1,650
124 Antwerp Belgium 915,000 596 1,550
125 Denver USA 1,985,000 1,292 1,550
126 Chicago USA 8,308,000 5,498 1,500
127 Melbourne Australia 3,162,000 2,080 1,500
128 Salt Lake City USA 888,000 598 1,500
129 Aachen Germany 585,000 401 1,450
130 Sacramento USA 1,393,000 956 1,450
131 Lyon France 1,349,000 954 1,400
132 Phoenix/Mesa USA 2,907,000 2,069 1,400
133 Winnipeg Canada 627,000 446 1,400
134 Adelaide Australia 1,002,000 729 1,350
135 Riverside/San Bernardino USA 1,507,000 1,136 1,350
136 Portland USA 1,583,000 1,228 1,300
137 San Diego USA 2,674,000 2,026 1,300
138 Washington USA 3,934,000 2,996 1,300
139 Calgary Canada 879,000 702 1,250
140 Nice France 889,000 721 1,250
141 San Antonio USA 1,328,000 1,056 1,250
142 Vereeniging South Africa 600,000 479 1,250
143 Concord USA 553,000 457 1,200
144 Detroit USA 3,903,000 3,267 1,200
145 El Paso USA 675,000 568 1,200
146 Perth Australia 1,177,000 964 1,200
147 Baltimore USA 2,076,000 1,768 1,150
148 Dallas/Fort Worth USA 4,146,000 3,644 1,150
149 Houston USA 3,823,000 3,355 1,150
150 Nantes France 545,000 476 1,150
151 Austin USA 902,000 824 1,100
152 Columbus USA 1,133,000 1,030 1,100
153 Gold Coast Australia 422,000 383 1,100
154 Marseille France 1,350,000 1,204 1,100
155 Philadelphia USA 5,149,000 4,661 1,100
156 Seattle USA 2,712,000 2,470 1,100
157 Albuquerque USA 598,000 580 1,050
158 Buffalo USA 977,000 950 1,050
159 Cleveland USA 1,787,000 1,676 1,050
160 Douai/Lens France 519,000 489 1,050
161 Milwaukee USA 1,309,000 1,261 1,050
162 Minneapolis/St. Paul USA 2,389,000 2,316 1,050
163 Omaha USA 627,000 586 1,050
164 Orlando USA 1,157,000 1,174 1,000
165 Tampa/St Petersburg USA 2,062,000 2,078 1,000
166 Virginia Beach USA 1,394,000 1,364 1,000
167 Brisbane Australia 1,508,000 1,603 950
168 Memphis USA 972,000 1,036 950
169 Quebec Canada 635,000 669 950
170 San Juan Puerto Rico 2,217,000 2,309 950
171 Scranton USA 385,000 411 950
172 St. Louis USA 2,078,000 2,147 950
173 Toledo USA 503,000 524 950
174 Toulouse France 761,000 808 950
175 Tucson USA 720,000 755 950
176 Boston USA 4,032,000 4,497 900
177 Colorado Springs USA 466,000 511 900
178 Edmonton Canada 782,000 850 900
179 Kansas City USA 1,362,000 1,514 900
180 Ogden USA 418,000 466 900
181 Oklahoma City USA 747,000 835 900
182 Providence USA 1,175,000 1,304 900
183 Rochester USA 694,000 764 900
184 Spokane USA 335,000 371 900
185 Wichita USA 422,000 465 900
186 Cincinnati USA 1,503,000 1,740 850
187 Dayton USA 703,000 838 850
188 Indianapolis USA 1,219,000 1,432 850
189 Jacksonville USA 882,000 1,063 850
190 Louisville USA 864,000 1,013 850
191 Syracuse USA 402,000 465 850
192 Grand Rapids USA 539,000 667 800
193 Pittsburgh USA 1,753,000 2,208 800
194 Sarasota/Bradenton USA 559,000 700 800
195 Tulsa USA 558,000 677 800
196 Albany USA 559,000 736 750
197 Allentown/Bethlehem USA 576,000 750 750
198 Bridgeport/Stamford USA 889,000 1,205 750
199 St Catharines Canada 300,000 389 750
200 Toulon France 520,000 713 750
201 Abu Dhabi UAE 550,000 777 700
202 Akron USA 570,000 797 700
203 Atlanta USA 3,500,000 5,083 700
204 Bordeaux France 754,000 1,057 700
205 Canton USA 267,000 372 700
206 Charleston USA 423,000 598 700
207 Durham USA 288,000 406 700
208 Hartford USA 852,000 1,216 700
209 Jackson USA 293,000 417 700
210 Little Rock USA 360,000 532 700
211 New Haven USA 531,000 739 700
212 Palm Bay USA 393,000 569 700
213 Richmond USA 819,000 1,131 700
214 Shreveport USA 275,000 401 700
215 South Bend USA 276,000 404 700
216 Springfield USA 574,000 800 700
217 Tours France 298,000 421 700
218 Valenciennes France 357,000 507 700
219 Youngstown USA 417,000 591 700
220 Baton Rouge USA 479,000 727 650
221 Bethune France 259,000 390 650
222 Birmingham USA 664,000 1,016 650
223 Cape Coral USA 330,000 497 650
224 Charlotte USA 759,000 1,126 650
225 Fayetteville USA 276,000 433 650
226 Harrisburg USA 363,000 540 650
227 Lancaster USA 324,000 517 650
228 McAllen USA 523,000 813 650
229 Nashville USA 750,000 1,116 650
230 Raleigh USA 542,000 828 650
231 Worcester USA 430,000 648 650
232 Columbia USA 421,000 697 600
233 Flint USA 365,000 599 600
234 Mobile USA 318,000 546 600
235 Port St Lucie USA 271,000 438 600
236 Augusta USA 336,000 600 550
237 Bonita Springs / Naples USA 221,000 389 550
238 Pensacola USA 324,000 568 550
239 Aguadilla Puerto Rico 299,000 620 500
240 Avignon France 254,000 508 500
241 Greenville USA 302,000 587 500
242 Huntsville USA 213,000 407 500
243 Poughkeepsie USA 352,000 686 500
244 Knoxville USA 420,000 879 500
245 Chattanooga USA 344,000 751 450
246 Winston/Salem USA 299,000 651 450
247 Asheville USA 222,000 536 400
248 Pau France 181,000 450 400
249 Barnstable Town USA 244,000 741 350
250 Hickory USA 188,000 546 350

[flar]

^^some of those numbers for Canada are slightly off and a few Canadian cities are missing. The following table uses data directly from the 2006 census. The last column shows the densities for urban areas as defined by Statistics Canada.

The first column lists the density of the top 10% of highest density census tracts for each city's CMA. The second column is the density of the first quartile (25%), then the second quartile (50%), third quartile (75%), and finally density of the entire urban area (not CMA!) All figures are per square km.

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k28/segaert/oddstuff/desnity5.jpg

[McBane]

that list looks like it goes by metro area.

San Jose (CA) more dense than NYC?
LA more dense than Toronto?
Las Vegas more dense than Miami?
Any city in Texas more dense than Philadelphia?
Orlando over Boston?

I wouldn't lend much credence to that list.

[mhays]

The list is very misleading. For example, Hong Kong includes incredibly dense urban districts interspersed by large areas of complete wilderness. The definition of "urban area" is also pretty arbitrary...the ranking changes dramatically if your cutoff is 2,000/sm instead of 1,000/sm for example. Also, since each country counts itself by different standards, it's impossible to truly compare cities in two countries without a ton of caveats and context.