Would a population density of 16.5 be considered crowded? why or why not?

Question

I'm sorry i meant per square kilometer

Answer 1

You need units attached, or your question is meaningless.

Did you mean

16.5 people per square mile?

16.5 people per square kilometer?

16.5 people per square inch?

16.5 people per gallon?

16.5 limbs per tree?

16.5 trees per person?

16.5 calories per bite?

16.5 clarinets per music store?

Answer 2

16.5 per what? Square mile? Square kilometer?

If you are talking square kilometers, 16.5 people per square kilometer is not crowded. Sweden has 20.0 people per square kilometer and isn't very crowded at all.

16.5 people per square kilometer means each person has 60,606 square meters of space, or almost 15 acres!

Answer 3

There is no right or wrong answer to your question.  Ontario, Canada is a large province that has a population density of 13.9 /km².  Most of the people, however,  live within a 100 miles of the U.S. border.

For example, Toronto, Ontario has a population density of 3,972/km² in a province that has a population density of under 14/km².

Normally, with an even distribution, 16.5 would be considered very rural and uncrowded.  However, most states and countries with low population densities have vast areas of wilderness.

Answer 4

density of 16.5 per what?  

16.5 people per square mile would be pretty wide open.

16.5 people per acre would be about what a subdivision in a retirement community would be.  Not bad.  3 to 4 people per house.

16.5 people per apartment would be a bit crowded.

Answer 5

no.  16.5  per square mile is not crowded at all.   I  live in a small city and my apartment complex  has a few hundred people and it's less than a square mile.