Soooo, how is high-density looking to everyone now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Increasing density is an excellent way of spreading coronavirus, which we're likely to be dealing with for several more years.

Some of the highest rates of confirmed cases of covid in the US are in rural counties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasing density is an excellent way of spreading coronavirus, which we're likely to be dealing with for several more years.

Some of the highest rates of confirmed cases of covid in the US are in rural counties.

Where? I am simply curious. I read your statement and did some googling and could not find much good data outside of metro areas. Do you have any data to share? Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People will always want "something better." I remember as a child when my family moved from a small apartment to the suburbs into a rental house. And, then to the purchase of a tiny little house and then a bigger house that had three bedrooms and two bathrooms (No den, just a living room.)

And, i think people will be looking to move "out" more after being confined with the Covid.

Now is the wrong time to push for high density housing.

The mayor and Trueblood asset that high density is exactly what is needed and “even more critical” now, the magic elixir:

An updated Comprehensive Plan is even more critical now, given the current disruptions that the COVID-19 pandemic is causing for the District’s residents and businesses,” said Mayor Bowser. “As we move from response to reopening and recovery, this Comprehensive Plan will serve as an essential guide to ensure that the District not only recovers, but emerges stronger, healthier, more resilient, and more equitable than ever.”

I would be very interested to read any updated provisions that the mayor has added recently to the proposed Comp Plan amendments to respond specifically to the pandemic and the aftermath and to strengthen public health and resiliency. She says it, but I can’t find any substantive differences from the amendments and UP-FLUM map that the Office of Planning was pushing last fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasing density is an excellent way of spreading coronavirus, which we're likely to be dealing with for several more years.

Some of the highest rates of confirmed cases of covid in the US are in rural counties.

Where? I am simply curious. I read your statement and did some googling and could not find much good data outside of metro areas. Do you have any data to share? Thank you.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Increasing density is an excellent way of spreading coronavirus, which we're likely to be dealing with for several more years.

Some of the highest rates of confirmed cases of covid in the US are in rural counties.

Where? I am simply curious. I read your statement and did some googling and could not find much good data outside of metro areas. Do you have any data to share? Thank you.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map

This does not make any sort of corollary between rural areas and an increased rate of infection which is what the previous poster had mentioned.

"Some of the highest rates of confirmed cases of covid in the US are in rural counties"

Highest rates in the US. Which ones of those are rural?

Interestingly on an international basis the country with the highest number of COVID cases per capita is Switzerland.

But in the US COVID cases per capita:
1. New York
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Connecticut
5. Rhode Island
6. Louisiana
7. District of Columbia
8. Michigan
9. Delaware
10. Pennsylvania
12. Illinois
13. Maryland

I guess the previous poster may have information that those Delaware cases are in rural areas...

[Anonymous]

Click on the fatality rates tab and look at the map.

There are other data sources out there too. Google something like highest covid rates per county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Click on the fatality rates tab and look at the map.

There are other data sources out there too. Google something like highest covid rates per county.

Just not bearing out the rural place have some of the highest rates in the country statement.

Top 50:

4 confirmed

Queens

37,564 confirmed

Kings

32,124 confirmed

Nassau

31,911 confirmed

Bronx

29,567 confirmed

Suffolk

25,959 confirmed

Westchester

25,811 confirmed

Cook

17,803 confirmed

New York

17,537 confirmed

Los Angeles

14,994 confirmed

Wayne

14,049 confirmed

Bergen

12,681 confirmed

Hudson

11,811 confirmed

Essex

11,226 confirmed

Philadelphia

10,935 confirmed

Union

10,724 confirmed

Middlesex

10,588 confirmed

Miami-Dade

10,582 confirmed

Richmond

10,008 confirmed

Fairfield

9,874 confirmed

Passaic

9,828 confirmed

Rockland

9,739 confirmed

Suffolk

9,530 confirmed

Middlesex

6,816 confirmed

Orange

6,634 confirmed

Oakland

6,263 confirmed

Orleans

6,219 confirmed

Essex

6,064 confirmed

New Haven

5,929 confirmed

Jefferson

5,532 confirmed

King

5,444 confirmed

Ocean

5,330 confirmed

Harris

5,238 confirmed

Monmouth

4,862 confirmed

Macomb

4,680 confirmed

Morris

4,541 confirmed

Norfolk

4,431 confirmed

Broward

4,408 confirmed

Marion

4,350 confirmed

Providence

4,303 confirmed

Hartford

4,141 confirmed

Prince George's

3,798 confirmed

Worcester

3,529 confirmed

Plymouth

3,395 confirmed

Montgomery

3,361 confirmed

District of Columbia

3,314 confirmed

Clark

3,218 confirmed

Riverside

3,060 confirmed

Montgomery

2,991 confirmed

Mercer

2,970 confirmed

Maricopa

[Anonymous]

PP, that's numbers, not rates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, that's numbers, not rates.

Per capita as posted earlier.

1. New York
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Connecticut
5. Rhode Island
6. Louisiana
7. District of Columbia
8. Michigan
9. Delaware
10. Pennsylvania
12. Illinois
13. Maryland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, that's numbers, not rates.

Per capita as posted earlier.

1. New York
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Connecticut
5. Rhode Island
6. Louisiana
7. District of Columbia
8. Michigan
9. Delaware
10. Pennsylvania
12. Illinois
13. Maryland

Those are states, not counties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, that's numbers, not rates.

Per capita as posted earlier.

1. New York
2. New Jersey
3. Massachusetts
4. Connecticut
5. Rhode Island
6. Louisiana
7. District of Columbia
8. Michigan
9. Delaware
10. Pennsylvania
12. Illinois
13. Maryland

Those are states, not counties.

The guy never provided any counties. He just said rural counties have some of the highest rates. The counties maps I have seen are all Eastern Seaboard and Illinois counties.

Not sure where the rural counties statistics are. I would love to see them though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People will always want "something better." I remember as a child when my family moved from a small apartment to the suburbs into a rental house. And, then to the purchase of a tiny little house and then a bigger house that had three bedrooms and two bathrooms (No den, just a living room.)

And, i think people will be looking to move "out" more after being confined with the Covid.

Now is the wrong time to push for high density housing.

The mayor and Trueblood asset that high density is exactly what is needed and “even more critical” now, the magic elixir:

An updated Comprehensive Plan is even more critical now, given the current disruptions that the COVID-19 pandemic is causing for the District’s residents and businesses,” said Mayor Bowser. “As we move from response to reopening and recovery, this Comprehensive Plan will serve as an essential guide to ensure that the District not only recovers, but emerges stronger, healthier, more resilient, and more equitable than ever.”

I would be very interested to read any updated provisions that the mayor has added recently to the proposed Comp Plan amendments to respond specifically to the pandemic and the aftermath and to strengthen public health and resiliency. She says it, but I can’t find any substantive differences from the amendments and UP-FLUM map that the Office of Planning was pushing last fall.

Crickets.

[Anonymous]

Need a numerator, a denominator and a county-specific location and classification category (urban, suburban, township, rural, etc.). Then you can see the results. However, rates are also deceiving as the lower the denominator the easier mathematically to get a higher rate. I.e. if there are 100 people in a small town it is a lot easier to get a 50% rate (50 people) than in a city with 2,000,000 people (1M people).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Need a numerator, a denominator and a county-specific location and classification category (urban, suburban, township, rural, etc.). Then you can see the results. However, rates are also deceiving as the lower the denominator the easier mathematically to get a higher rate. I.e. if there are 100 people in a small town it is a lot easier to get a 50% rate (50 people) than in a city with 2,000,000 people (1M people).

If 50 people had confirmed covid in a town of 100 people, that wouldn't be a deceiving mathematical anomaly, it would be a public-health disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Need a numerator, a denominator and a county-specific location and classification category (urban, suburban, township, rural, etc.). Then you can see the results. However, rates are also deceiving as the lower the denominator the easier mathematically to get a higher rate. I.e. if there are 100 people in a small town it is a lot easier to get a 50% rate (50 people) than in a city with 2,000,000 people (1M people).

If 50 people had confirmed covid in a town of 100 people, that wouldn't be a deceiving mathematical anomaly, it would be a public-health disaster.

You don't know how stats work. Don't worry. They are hard.