Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA, or anywhere directly connected to Los Angeles.
Some others:
Las Vegas
Phoenix
Denver
Sacramento
Huh? Las Vegas doesn't have much sprawl at all. Las Vegas is very confined to a small area in the middle of Clark County. If Las Vegas really had a lot of sprawl, it would spill over into Arizona since it's so close to the Arizona border.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunjee
Here's "A Comprehensive Look at Sprawl in America", a USA Today article from 2001 that includes a complete rated list of cities and analysis of "sprawl" per several criteria. It should answer a lot of the questions posed here.
What I found most interesting about the article is Portland's relatively low rating as opposed to its image. The cause is that regions beyond Portland's urban management have been developed, jumping their jurisdiction and spreading out. That's the fluidity of market forces at work that can't be easily contained.
That's a very interesting article, but I was frustrated by the fact that it never posted the list it kept referring to!
All cities have sprawl issues very bad. It's just that the older cities have larger, more establish, higher density, and more vibrant urban cores to counter it. The sunbelt cities have not established that yet but are well on their way.
Charlotte, Atlanta San Diego, Seattle, Miami, DC, Philadelphia, Boston, New York, Phoenix, Tucson, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Chicago, Kansas City, Saint Louis, Denver, Oklahoma City, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas.
yes it is. The density level of OKC is 871.5/sq mile. The population is over 550,000. In fact, inside the city, it's probably worse. OKC doesn't have the suburbs that the other larger cities though. But inside the city is a different story. Houston has it's problems. But at least inside the loop it's approaching 6000/ sq mile and for the city as a whole it is approaching 4000/ sq mile That city defintely sprawls.
Quote:
L.A is strangely sprawled. I think its just the way its built.
The easy ones are:
Houston
Atlanta
Phoenix
D/FW
S.F metro
Here are some more easy ones.
Chicago
New York
Washington DC
San Antonio
Austin
Detroit
Location: Concrete jungle where dreams are made of.
8,900 posts, read 15,937,156 times
Reputation: 1819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spade
yes it is. The density level of OKC is 871.5/sq mile. The population is over 550,000. In fact, inside the city, it's probably worse. OKC doesn't have the suburbs that the other larger cities though. But inside the city is a different story. Houston has it's problems. But at least inside the loop it's approaching 6000/ sq mile and for the city as a whole it is approaching 4000/ sq mile That city defintely sprawls.
Here are some more easy ones.
Chicago
New York
Washington DC
San Antonio
Austin
Detroit
That's all the density OKC has?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
