Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-01-2012, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Shaw.
2,226 posts, read 3,855,226 times
Reputation: 846

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycjowww View Post
Jacksonville is bigger then nyc in land size?
Yep:
NYC 468.48 sq mi (302.64 sq mi land)
Jacksonville 885 sq mi (767 sq mi land)

It's not that close.

Obviously, CSA is different, but that's a different question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:10 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,414,249 times
Reputation: 6288
By urbanized area:

New York: 3450 sq miles, 18,351,295
Atlanta: 2645 sq miles, 4,515,419
Chicago: 2442 sq miles, 8,608,208
Philadelphia: 1981 sq miles, 5,441,567
Boston: 1873 sq miles, 4,191,019
Dallas: 1779 sq miles, 5,121,892
Los Angeles: 1736 sq miles, 12,150,996
Houston: 1660, 4,944,332
Detroit: 1337 sq miles, 3,734,090
Washington DC: 1321 sq miles, 4,586,770
Miami: 1239 sq miles, 5,502,379
Phoenix: 1146 sq miles, 3,629,114
Seatte: 1010 sq miles 3,059,393
San Francisco: 523 sq miles, 3,281,212

A few observations:

1. The New York UA is a behomoth. Even if you completely remove NYC's city limits from the equation, it remains the largest UA in physical size in the United States. The city is the antithesis of sprawl, but the suburbs consume land like a m'fer.

2. San Francisco is the least sprawly UA in the United States, half the size of the next city on this list (Seattle). It remains the smallest footprint even when combined with San Jose's UA ( AKA: The Bay Area).

3. Despite its poster child status, Los Angeles is only middle-of-the-pack as far as sprawl goes, and it has the highest population density of any UA on this list. It sprawls because...dude, it's a population of 12 million. Unless you're Dhaka or something, sprawl is inevitable when you're taking in that many people. There are worse offenders on this list. Which brings us to...

4. Atlanta. The most sprawly "city" in the U.S. All the elements are there: A relatively undense core, low density suburbs, gaps in continuity, and a monstrous footprint--2645 sq miles . It is a nearly 1,000 sq miles larger than Houston's UA (another city that dodges darts for its sprawl) with less population. Not a knock on Atlanta, but it is should be #1 for most sprawl.

Last edited by RaymondChandlerLives; 09-02-2012 at 01:40 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:27 AM
 
Location: Shaw.
2,226 posts, read 3,855,226 times
Reputation: 846
If you use the urban area as the measure, you're not measuring the sprawl of the city, but the sprawl of the suburbs. That said, I'm not sure it would be fair to call all of NY's urban area as its suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:53 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,078 posts, read 15,853,364 times
Reputation: 4049
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgm123 View Post
If you use the urban area as the measure, you're not measuring the sprawl of the city, but the sprawl of the suburbs. That said, I'm not sure it would be fair to call all of NY's urban area as its suburbs.
Ray's post is great and very informative, but this is a good point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:53 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,414,249 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgm123 View Post
If you use the urban area as the measure, you're not measuring the sprawl of the city, but the sprawl of the suburbs. That said, I'm not sure it would be fair to call all of NY's urban area as its suburbs.
You're measuring the sprawl of both. City limits are arbritary and vary wildly in size, population, and density, doesn't really work. What do you suggest? Comparing the density of cities over a 50/100/200 sq mile area? That still takes in suburban land for most cities.

UA seems best suited for this discussion, moreso than city limits, MSA or CSA.

Last edited by RaymondChandlerLives; 09-02-2012 at 01:06 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 12:58 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
13,966 posts, read 24,156,607 times
Reputation: 14762
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachael84 View Post
Suburbs of any major city outside of Boston, NYC, and LA feel rural to me.
That's a huge generalization IMO.
There are burbs of many cities that don't feel rural at all. Many burbs of DC, San Francisco, Miami and others are often as densely populated as their central cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 05:31 AM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,414,249 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgm123 View Post
If you use the urban area as the measure, you're not measuring the sprawl of the city, but the sprawl of the suburbs. That said, I'm not sure it would be fair to call all of NY's urban area as its suburbs.

Never said they were all suburbs, but Long Island, and the townships and whatnot that make up the NY UA are sprawly, no matter what they're called.

I must say though, referring to New York City as the "the antithesis of sprawl" was a HUGE understatement on my part. How much of an understatement?

If NYC + Hudson and Essex County were an urbanized area, it would be the 2nd most populous in the United States--9,663,145 million people living in a 475.8 sq mile area (20,309 ppsm).

For comparison's sake, the actual #2 (Chicago) is home to 8.6 million people, spread over 2,442 sq miles. That's an absurd difference.

Having said that, the other 8,700,000 residents in the NY UA live on a 2,975 sq mile area of land, which is still ginormously HUGE, and undense (2900 ppsm).

New York's UA is unique, no doubt about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 05:49 AM
 
Location: Charlotte (Hometown: Columbia SC)
1,461 posts, read 2,957,688 times
Reputation: 1194
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
By urbanized area:

New York: 3450 sq miles, 18,351,295
Atlanta: 2645 sq miles, 4,515,419
Chicago: 2442 sq miles, 8,608,208
Philadelphia: 1981 sq miles, 5,441,567
Boston: 1873 sq miles, 4,191,019
Dallas: 1779 sq miles, 5,121,892
Los Angeles: 1736 sq miles, 12,150,996
Houston: 1660, 4,944,332
Detroit: 1337 sq miles, 3,734,090
Washington DC: 1321 sq miles, 4,586,770
Miami: 1239 sq miles, 5,502,379
Phoenix: 1146 sq miles, 3,629,114
Seatte: 1010 sq miles 3,059,393
San Francisco: 523 sq miles, 3,281,212


4. Atlanta. The most sprawly "city" in the U.S. All the elements are there: A relatively undense core, low density suburbs, gaps in continuity, and a monstrous footprint--2645 sq miles . It is a nearly 1,000 sq miles larger than Houston's UA (another city that dodges darts for its sprawl) with less population. Not a knock on Atlanta, but it is should be #1 for most sprawl.
Atlanta's UA is larger than Chicago's and right under NYC and the population is not as much as LA, NYC, Or Chicago....It HAS to be #1 for the sprawliest city on that list....The numbers proof it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 07:16 AM
 
Location: NYC
2,545 posts, read 3,297,217 times
Reputation: 1924
The reason sunbelt cities get criticized for sprawl is not because their UAs are very large or because their suburbs sprawl -- every city's suburbs sprawl, including London, Paris and even Tokyo (suburbs are supposed to be low density - that's their raison d'être). It is because they don't have a quality urban core and even if they have some fairly dense hoods in the city (e.g. LA) they all have an auto-centric design through and through that gives the same optical perception of sprawl whether you are 5 minutes from downtown or an hour. As a visitor to one of these cities you may not even be able to tell if you are in the city or in the suburbs. That's the problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2012, 10:58 AM
 
6,610 posts, read 9,032,687 times
Reputation: 4230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fitzrovian View Post
The reason sunbelt cities get criticized for sprawl is not because their UAs are very large or because their suburbs sprawl -- every city's suburbs sprawl, including London, Paris and even Tokyo (suburbs are supposed to be low density - that's their raison d'être). It is because they don't have a quality urban core and even if they have some fairly dense hoods in the city (e.g. LA) they all have an auto-centric design through and through that gives the same optical perception of sprawl whether you are 5 minutes from downtown or an hour. As a visitor to one of these cities you may not even be able to tell if you are in the city or in the suburbs. That's the problem.
In my experience the above is completely false. Sorry...it totally sounds like someone's stereotypical perception rather than real-life experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top