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.
A great website that dispels the numerous myths about sprawl on city data (myths like ""only Southern cities and LA have sprawl", Northern cities have no sprawl" etc.)
NY, DC and Philly more sprawling than Dallas
I LOVE this. Of course people are gonna argue weather or not it's a credible source. It's called SPRAWL CITY.com!!!
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,994,819 times
Reputation: 7333
After reading through this thread, I see once again that people are confusing the effects of sprawl (tract housing, strip malls, Walmart, low density) with what sprawl actually is. Sprawl is simply the massive consumption of land for human settlements. As such, EVERY major American city sprawls and sprawls bad:
I LOVE this. Of course people are gonna argue weather or not it's a credible source. It's called SPRAWL CITY.com!!!
The problem isn't so much whether it's a credible source...but that the data used to rank the sprawl of the cities is from 1970-1990. It's 20 years old, and a lot has changed in 20 years. That's the only reason I question the validity (not the credibility) of the ranking.
After reading through this thread, I see once again that people are confusing the effects of sprawl (tract housing, strip malls, Walmart, low density) with what sprawl actually is. Sprawl is simply the massive consumption of land for human settlements. As such, EVERY major American city sprawls and sprawls bad:
If Houston is America's worst sprawl than so is LA. Once Houston is as populated as LA is now; it will have similar density.
Los Angeles:
Population: 3,833,995
Density: 8,205/sq m
Land size: 469.1 sq mi
Houston:
Population: 2,242,193
Density: 3,828/sq mi
Land size: 579.4 sq mi
Los Angele has the mountians and Houston has the flood plains stopping them from building on certain areas in their city limits.
Lol, that's really reaching. Who knows if Houston will ever be as populated as L.A. Just because it's in the sunbelt doesn't mean it will experience ever lasting growth.
This comparison is not that drasitic and the Houston highest area of density is 17,000 people per sq. mile. Los Angeles is going to have higher higher density because it's more population and does inculde more multi-family homes.
L.A is larger than Chicago, but Chicago is more dense.
Why is everyone so fixated on density? Density is not always a good thing. Sprawl is treated like a dirty word on here. Chicago metro is one of the most sprawling there is
Why is everyone so fixated on density? Density is not always a good thing. Sprawl is treated like a dirty word on here. Chicago metro is one of the most sprawling there is
I've heard it's sort of an American(U.S.) thing. It's good to have an urban core, I think, but I don't think that the suburbs are that bad or anything.
I've heard it's sort of an American(U.S.) thing. It's good to have an urban core, I think, but I don't think that the suburbs are that bad or anything.
They aren't seen as sustainable communities, but the truth of the matter is that the majority of Americans have chosen to live in the suburbs.
We also have to keep in mind that city-data is not representative of the majority of Americans.
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.
