3 ms·
I don't like these sort of comparisons, because the density (and a lot of other things) depends a lot on where you place the boundaries of the city, and that's
by Xixi 10y ago
I don't like these sort of comparisons, because the density (and a lot of other things) depends a lot on where you place the boundaries of the city, and that's very arbitrary.
For instance your figure for Paris is only the actual city of Paris, which doesn't include its own suburbs: it's really just the center. The subway extends a fair bit beyond the actual city boundaries. As an example "La Défense", the business district of Paris, isn't even inside Paris.
So of course it's very dense. The equivalent for NYC would be Manhattan without the 4 boroughs. Maybe even a subset of Manhattan.
- ghaff 10y agoAnd yet the density of "Paris" gets trotted out in pretty every one of these discussions to show that you don't need skyscrapers. The density of the Paris Urban area--which is about 1/6 the size of the Paris Metro area but about 20x the area of the "City"--is about 10,000/sq. mi. (10m people in about 1,000 sq. mi.
- sampo 10y agoThe point is that a density comparable to Paris or Manhattan does not turn a place into a hellhole. A lot of people love living in central Paris, or Manhattan, and pay a lot of money for the privilege.