5 ms·

NYC density: 26,403 people per square mile (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Profile https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogr

NYC density: 26,403 people per square mile (source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_City#Profile https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_York_Cit...) Hollywood density: 22,193 people per square mile Koreatown density: 42,611 people per square mile Source: https://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/population/density/neighborhood/list/ https://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/population/density/ne... Yes, greater LA area also has a lot of what people like to call “sprawl”, but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. You also don’t need high rises for density - Paris is not all that tall, but at 53k people per square mile, it’s denser on average than NYC…

hnav 4y ago
NYC is a whole city of five boroughs with different densities, Hollywood and K-town are neighborhoods. Manhattan which is what most think of as NYC is 70k+/sqmi
- thrdbndndn 4y ago
  Even with five boroughs, I'm still surprised NYC is this low. In addition to the obvious Staten Island, apparently Queens "only" has 22,125! I always thought it would be close to Brooklyn etc.
  - vikingerik 4y ago
    Well, Queens is about 75% cemeteries by land use. (Population figures don't include dead people, I assume.) Kidding, but there is more land for industrial and commercial use in Queens that isn't residential. Including two airports and three sizable sports facilities. Brooklyn by contrast has almost no interruptions to the edge-to-edge residential street grid.
    - etblg 4y ago
      And then even after all the non-residential space being eaten up, more than half of Queens (the parts after the subway ends) is single family suburban homes akin to Long Island or Staten Island. Really throws the population density off for the city, throws the density off even for Queens itself -- the western part near manhattan is dense, especially compared to most of LA.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    When you get out there in Queens (it’s a huge landmass) it’s single family homes.
eganist 4y ago
> but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. That's called sprawl.
- sologoub 4y ago
  Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these. You’d realize that Santa Monica is very different from West Hollywood, which is also different from Hollywood, K-town, etc. Even in the valleys, Sherman Oaks is very different from Agoura. OC would take years to really get to know as well. When you look at areal/satellite imagery, Santa Barbara to San Diego is basically connected by different towns and neighborhoods, with very little breaks. Yet, no one will say that it’s all the same or somehow homogeneous. The scale in itself is breathtaking from the plane.
  - eganist 4y ago
    > Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these. Instead of dismissing an objective truth as derogatory, you should get to know the word. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl Los Angeles is the most infamous example, and you can look at its evolution here: https://la.curbed.com/2014/4/3/10121264/los-angeles-sprawl-history-map-animation https://la.curbed.com/2014/4/3/10121264/los-angeles-sprawl-h... Sprawl isn't a derogatory term, it's a descriptive one. Likewise just because enclaves have a unique character and governance doesn't mean they're not the outcome of sprawl. Please don't find yourself so easily offended. (I've got almost three years of experience in the LA area largely in a box comprised of Encino, Venice, DTLA, and Burbank, if it adds any credibility to the point. Certainly not a lifetime resident but enough to have my way memorized pretty much everywhere and know why my favorite little place is Sawtelle. Everything in that box is unique, but nevertheless... it's still sprawl) Hope this helps.
    - sologoub 4y ago
      If you look up the term “infamous”, you’ll quickly see it’s not a positive one. Neither is urban sprawl. Factual terms can have positive, neutral or negative connotations. The ones used happen to be negative. If you are still in LA, try exploring more than your commute and routine life afford. You’ll be surprised. While not as much Victorian-era architecture has survived as in say San Francisco, there are many interesting pockets to see and neighborhoods to understand. Many generations of immigrants left their marks, with neighborhoods passing from one group to the next, yet their traces remain (such as ethnically specific churches/houses of worship or other long-lived institutions). And if it’s not for you in the end, that’s great too - not everyone enjoys every part of the world. Explore and find what you like best.
smcl 4y ago
They're not saying "LA sucks" they're just saying that LA as a whole is low-density. Koreatown has ~130k inhabitants, Hollywood has less than 100k - these are two, small but relatively-dense areas in a city with a population in the millions, whose density works out at ~8.5k/sq mile.

hnav 4y ago

NYC is a whole city of five boroughs with different densities, Hollywood and K-town are neighborhoods. Manhattan which is what most think of as NYC is 70k+/sqmi

thrdbndndn 4y ago
Even with five boroughs, I'm still surprised NYC is this low. In addition to the obvious Staten Island, apparently Queens "only" has 22,125! I always thought it would be close to Brooklyn etc.
- vikingerik 4y ago
  Well, Queens is about 75% cemeteries by land use. (Population figures don't include dead people, I assume.) Kidding, but there is more land for industrial and commercial use in Queens that isn't residential. Including two airports and three sizable sports facilities. Brooklyn by contrast has almost no interruptions to the edge-to-edge residential street grid.
  - etblg 4y ago
    And then even after all the non-residential space being eaten up, more than half of Queens (the parts after the subway ends) is single family suburban homes akin to Long Island or Staten Island. Really throws the population density off for the city, throws the density off even for Queens itself -- the western part near manhattan is dense, especially compared to most of LA.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  When you get out there in Queens (it’s a huge landmass) it’s single family homes.

eganist 4y ago

> but it’s a big place and has many different neighborhoods. That's called sprawl.

sologoub 4y ago
Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these. You’d realize that Santa Monica is very different from West Hollywood, which is also different from Hollywood, K-town, etc. Even in the valleys, Sherman Oaks is very different from Agoura. OC would take years to really get to know as well. When you look at areal/satellite imagery, Santa Barbara to San Diego is basically connected by different towns and neighborhoods, with very little breaks. Yet, no one will say that it’s all the same or somehow homogeneous. The scale in itself is breathtaking from the plane.
- eganist 4y ago
  > Instead of dismissing with derogatory terms, you should try to actually get to know these. Instead of dismissing an objective truth as derogatory, you should get to know the word. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl Los Angeles is the most infamous example, and you can look at its evolution here: https://la.curbed.com/2014/4/3/10121264/los-angeles-sprawl-history-map-animation https://la.curbed.com/2014/4/3/10121264/los-angeles-sprawl-h... Sprawl isn't a derogatory term, it's a descriptive one. Likewise just because enclaves have a unique character and governance doesn't mean they're not the outcome of sprawl. Please don't find yourself so easily offended. (I've got almost three years of experience in the LA area largely in a box comprised of Encino, Venice, DTLA, and Burbank, if it adds any credibility to the point. Certainly not a lifetime resident but enough to have my way memorized pretty much everywhere and know why my favorite little place is Sawtelle. Everything in that box is unique, but nevertheless... it's still sprawl) Hope this helps.
  - sologoub 4y ago
    If you look up the term “infamous”, you’ll quickly see it’s not a positive one. Neither is urban sprawl. Factual terms can have positive, neutral or negative connotations. The ones used happen to be negative. If you are still in LA, try exploring more than your commute and routine life afford. You’ll be surprised. While not as much Victorian-era architecture has survived as in say San Francisco, there are many interesting pockets to see and neighborhoods to understand. Many generations of immigrants left their marks, with neighborhoods passing from one group to the next, yet their traces remain (such as ethnically specific churches/houses of worship or other long-lived institutions). And if it’s not for you in the end, that’s great too - not everyone enjoys every part of the world. Explore and find what you like best.

smcl 4y ago

They're not saying "LA sucks" they're just saying that LA as a whole is low-density. Koreatown has ~130k inhabitants, Hollywood has less than 100k - these are two, small but relatively-dense areas in a city with a population in the millions, whose density works out at ~8.5k/sq mile.