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'm becoming more and more curious-how much longer can urban sprawl continue before it can stretch out no further? As suburbs are built further and further out, commutes will get longer and longer. The distance that this continuous urban land can spread increases as more and more jobs spread further out, and as highways are upgraded, but how much further can it go before it reaches critical mass? Eventually sprawl will have to reach a point where parts of the metro are so far from one another that they can no longer be considered suburbs or even exurbs. So how will urban sprawl play out once this "critical mass" is reached?
I'm becoming more and more curious-how much longer can urban sprawl continue before it can stretch out no further? As suburbs are built further and further out, commutes will get longer and longer. The distance that this continuous urban land can spread increases as more and more jobs spread further out, and as highways are upgraded, but how much further can it go before it reaches critical mass? Eventually sprawl will have to reach a point where parts of the metro are so far from one another that they can no longer be considered suburbs or even exurbs. So how will urban sprawl play out once this "critical mass" is reached?
IMO, some big cities' MSAs are pretty spread out now, e.g. NY and Chicago. Not all those people work in the downtown.
Interesting. It seems like the SF Bay Area already has reached "critical mass," as it didn't really expand much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
IMO, some big cities' MSAs are pretty spread out now, e.g. NY and Chicago. Not all those people work in the downtown.
True, many jobs are further spread out. But how much further out can they be until they are disconnected from the original metro area? How much further out can they be until they are no longer easily accessible?
IMO, some big cities' MSAs are pretty spread out now, e.g. NY and Chicago. Not all those people work in the downtown.
Of course, both of those are so spread out mainly because they contain far more people than most MSAs. Both of them have more job centralization than most, in particular NYC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OuttaTheLouBurbs
True, many jobs are further spread out. But how much further out can they be until they are disconnected from the original metro area? How much further out can they be until they are no longer easily accessible?
NYC reached that point a while ago, helped by geography. Someone living in Long Island can't access a suburban New Jersey job easily in any mode of transportation. Most can access a Manhattan job, though the commute will be long for many. The very outer edge of the metro doesn't have particularly convenient job access. In any case, the outer edge hasn't grown that much, in the 90s the city grew faster than the suburbs. In some directions, if NYC sprawls too far, the suburbs would be in another metropolitan area. At one time, the census considered Newark a separate metro, now it's part of the NYC metro. Fairfield County, CT is still separate.
Until the trip between one end of a metro area and the other is unbearable? Many say that is already the case. Long Island to New Jersey is one example. How about Oxnard to Anaheim? Incidentally some areas that we consider suburban are actually classified as their own MSA. Examples: Naperville/Aurora IL, Riverside/San Bernardino/Ontario CA, Ogden UT.
Last edited by pvande55; 05-19-2014 at 06:49 PM..
Reason: Correct Riverside
I'm becoming more and more curious-how much longer can urban sprawl continue before it can stretch out no further? As suburbs are built further and further out, commutes will get longer and longer. The distance that this continuous urban land can spread increases as more and more jobs spread further out, and as highways are upgraded, but how much further can it go before it reaches critical mass? Eventually sprawl will have to reach a point where parts of the metro are so far from one another that they can no longer be considered suburbs or even exurbs. So how will urban sprawl play out once this "critical mass" is reached?
In the Philadelphia area and Washington D.C, one thing you see is new centers within the suburban areas. King of Prussia, Great Valley, West Chester, Gaithersburg, Dulles, etc. Less so in NYC, however.
True, many jobs are further spread out. But how much further out can they be until they are disconnected from the original metro area? How much further out can they be until they are no longer easily accessible?
Accessible/Easily = less than a 90 minute commute each way. There are various benchmarks (30 minutes, 40, 60) so you can pick whichever but after you pass each one you lose a greater % of people willing to make the commute.
The issue is that as you get further away from the core job density decreases so you wind up with development that is less and less dense as you move out from the core and/or you have people commuting to NYC from Pennsylvania and Massachusetts or people in the Inland Empire commuting to jobs in West LA.
The formation of edge cities doesn't usually represent an increase in job density for whatever suburban county they're in . . . it's just the magnet for business activity in the subregion.
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.
