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.
Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum, but I have been on here reading with great interest for a while, and this will be my first post.
I have been wondering what metro areas have a continued urbanized built up area of at least 100 miles or more. Off the top of my head, I would say that the only metro areas that could truly qualify would be Miami going north to south, and Los Angeles going east to west. I think the Bay Area may also qualify, but not too sure.
Well, the NYC metro area sprawls out into northwest New Jersey, southwest Connecticut, and deep into Long Island. From west to east, Allamuchy Park in New Jersey to Calverton Airport in eastern Long Island is about 120 miles.
I would say that no "urban" area exists for 100 miles or more, however the MSAs in the northeast all tend to run together beginning from south of DC all the way up to Boston. The same thing is happening now as growth in the south fills in former farm and forest land along the I-85 corridor between Greenville, SC Richmond, VA. I'm guessing in another 20 years the drive from Atlanta all the way to Boston will be through mostly developed areas, whereas just 20 years ago the southern half of that drive passed quickly through some southern towns and cities and passed largely through rural areas in between.
There's a built up corridor from Kenosha Wisconsin, down through the suburbs on the north lakeshore in Illinois, down through the heart of Chicago, and then out to Chesterton, Indiana.
That's 110 miles.
There's roughly 3 miles of open land between Kenosha and Racine, and 4 miles of open land between Racine and the south areas of Milwaukee. That land is fairly rapidly being developed, but if you include those 7 miles, you can connect the north side of Milwaukee to Chesterton, Indiana.
That's about 155 miles from one end to the other - with around 148 miles of that being urban/suburban areas.
I would say that no "urban" area exists for 100 miles or more, however the MSAs in the northeast all tend to run together beginning from south of DC all the way up to Boston. The same thing is happening now as growth in the south fills in former farm and forest land along the I-85 corridor between Greenville, SC Richmond, VA. I'm guessing in another 20 years the drive from Atlanta all the way to Boston will be through mostly developed areas, whereas just 20 years ago the southern half of that drive passed quickly through some southern towns and cities and passed largely through rural areas in between.
Drive I 91 from North Haven to New Haven and then merge onto I 95 south in New Haven and take that all the way into NYC. That is roughly 100 miles of urbanized and developed area. And the corridor from NYC to Philly to Wilmington, DE along I 95 is also virtually a concrete jungle too.
Here is an example of the NYC area, by zip code. Those with over 1000 people per square mile are yellow, those over 5000 are orange, and over 15000, red. These three shades to me would comprise a metro area. That's how I altered this map, anyway. Someone else might have a different opinion, threshold wise, on what constitutes a metro area.
Thanks for all the replies. I'm pretty sure about Miami though. If you head say from Tequesta to the north to Homestead to the south, it's definitly uninteruppted solid development the entire stretch...easily over 100 miles.
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.