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.
I agree with Atlanta but I think Houston, Miami, and Dallas aren't nearly as bad as Chicago, Boston, and yes Atlanta.
I don't see how Chicago is bad at all. I look at sprawl differently from most people. Chicago has the third densest metro at any level of say 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4,000 sq miles. The only two denser in those metrics are LA and NY of course so I don't see how they sprawl. Boston has a good core, they just get rural quick. I would rather have a good core like Boston but get rural quick over not having a core (Miami, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta) but keeping medium density for longer periods. This is just me though.
Given the above numbers, wouldn't Boston beat out Miami?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dispo4
Boston is a major sprawlville metro, how it always seems to fly under the radar for sprawl is a mystery.
Like I said, I look at sprawl differently than most and have my own beliefs on it. I don't get caught up in the whole thing of a metro being 8, 10, 12, 15, 18 or whatever thousand square miles. I guess in a way I look at this as the European way. I look for extremely high density around 2,000 sq miles from the core and don't really care about the rest of what goes on in the metro. Anything outside of the 2,000 sq mile is more than likely sprawl anyways unless we are talking about the mega cities (Tokyo, NY, London, Seoul, HK, etc)
Last edited by The Lunatic & A Therapist; 02-09-2014 at 07:54 PM..
The largest continuous urban sprawl is the 430-mile stretch between Washington, DC and Boston. It spans 8 states. Sure, there are metros like Phoenix and Atlanta with crazy sprawl, but it's contained into a more defined area with no more than a 50-mile diameter, and it has clearly identifiable boundaries.
The largest continuous urban sprawl is the 430-mile stretch between Washington, DC and Boston. It spans 8 states. Sure, there are metros like Phoenix and Atlanta with crazy sprawl, but it's contained into a more defined area with no more than a 50-mile diameter, and it has clearly identifiable boundaries.
More like contiguous cities. I'd rather not pass off Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York City as "sprawl."
The largest continuous urban sprawl is the 430-mile stretch between Washington, DC and Boston. It spans 8 states. Sure, there are metros like Phoenix and Atlanta with crazy sprawl, but it's contained into a more defined area with no more than a 50-mile diameter, and it has clearly identifiable boundaries.
Dense sprawl is still sprawl...I'm not sure what these other folks are talking about with the density thing as if it's not sprawl because it's dense. I think there is a lack of understanding about sprawl here.
I don't see how Chicago is bad at all. I look at sprawl differently from most people. Chicago has the third densest metro at any level of say 250, 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4,000 sq miles. The only two denser in those metrics are LA and NY of course so I don't see how they sprawl. Boston has a good core, they just get rural quick. I would rather have a good core like Boston but get rural quick over not having a core (Miami, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta) but keeping medium density for longer periods. This is just me though.
"...not having a core"? What are you talking about? The cities you listed all have pretty large cores. Maybe you aren't familiar with those cities? That's I all I can think of that would cause you to say that.
You should probably take a look at the definitions of sprawl (development onto previously undeveloped land) because it has nothing to do with density. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_sprawl
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.
Dense sprawl is still sprawl...I'm not sure what these other folks are talking about with the density thing as if it's not sprawl because it's dense. I think there is a lack of understanding about sprawl here. 
