View Single Post
  #26  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2012, 9:29 PM
memph memph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Segun View Post
Got figures for Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Los Angeles?
No, at least not yet. I did all of SF's urban area (doesn't not include Vallejo, Concord and Pleasanton areas, nor San Jose's MSA) since there is a fair bit of density outside SF proper in places like Oakland, Berkeley and Daly City.

2010 Population: 3,306,927
2010 Weighted Density: 14,740 ppsm

So the weighted density went down a little in the past decade, falling just below Toronto's UA weighted density of 14,853 ppsm and making it #3 in North America.

Population above:

100,000 ppsm: 20,725 (0.63%)
75,000 ppsm: 51,254 (1.55%)
50,000 ppsm: 93,803 (2.84%)
40,000 ppsm: 141,171 (4.27%)
30,000 ppsm: 328,494 (9.93%)
25,000 ppsm: 492,259 (14.89%)
20,000 ppsm: 746,826 (22.58%)
15,000 ppsm: 1,083,584 (32.77%)
10,000 ppsm: 1,742,547 (52.69%)
5,000 ppsm: 2,587,600 (78.25%)

edit: ok calculated DC and Old Toronto (pre-amalgamation of a bunch of suburbs). Old Toronto has 736,775 people and a weighted density of 30,792 ppsm, so it's basically like San Francisco.


New York City: 64,025 ppsm (8.008 million)**
San Francisco: 30,005 ppsm (0.805 million)
Montreal: 22,064 ppsm (1.648 million)
Vancouver: 20,397 ppsm (0.618 million)
Toronto: 20,124 ppsm (2.615 million)
Chicago: 19,826 ppsm (2.703 million)*
DC: 17,459 ppsm (0.602 million)
Mississauga :12,736 ppsm (0.712 million)


*I think I added an extra census tract but it doesn't make much of a difference and would take too long to find
**2000 values for NYC, Canadian cities use 2011 census values and SF, Chicago and DC use 2010 census values

Last edited by memph; Mar 4, 2012 at 10:40 PM.
Reply With Quote