Quote:
Originally Posted by Muta
Just for comparison's sake... here's some population densities of similar-sized cities (in terms of population), and their city area (just the city; not any metro areas and densities):
Area: 1. Ottawa: 2,778.64 kmē
2. Jacksonville: 2,264.5 kmē
3. Phoenix: 1,334.1 kmē
4. San Antonio: 1,067.3 kmē
5. Dallas: 997.1 kmē
6. San Diego: 963.6 kmē
7. Calgary: 726.50 kmē
8. Edmonton: 684.37 kmē
9. San Jose: 461.5 kmē
10. Detroit: 370.2 kmē
Population Density: 1. Detroit: 2,647/kmē
2. San Jose: 2,014.4/kmē
3. San Diego: 1,494.7/kmē
4. Dallas: 1,391.9/kmē
5. Calgary: 1,360.2/kmē
6. Phoenix: 1,188.4/kmē
7. Edmonton: 1,099.4/kmē
8. San Antonio: 1,084.4/kmē
9. Jacksonville: 409.89/kmē
10. Ottawa: 219.8/kmē
Keep in mind, the only thing similar about these cities are their populations.
First off, completely disregard Ottawa, as it is the capital city of Canada and due to the sheer number of federal and government buildings, it understandably is a large area in size; however, it is the exception and not the rule.
Other than that, it appears that Calgary is middle of the pack when it comes to area and density; metro area and desnity, however, may be another story. |
The thing about comparing Calgary to other cities, is that you have to compare us to their Metro versions.
Where cities like Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal etc have a clearly defined city proper and clearly defined external suburbs... Calgary does not. Calgary is one gigantic city proper.
Rocky Ridge is not a suburb. It is a community within the Calgary city limits.
Mackenzie Town is not a suburb. It is a community within the Calgary city limits.
Forest Lawn is not a suburb. It is a community within the Calgary city limits.
etc etc etc.
So, you have to compare the pop density of Calgary vs the pop density of Metro TO or Metro Vancouver... not TO City or Van City.