Urban Sprawl: Which U. S. City Sprawls the Most?
video description
Date: 2019-09-12
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Toriano Malo
LOL. this video is one of the least informative I've seen in a long time. I don't even know where to begin. for one thing, if researchers can't even decide on a definition for what sprawl is or how to measure it. those researchers are idiots. also there is a DIFFERENCE between what constitutes a city. and what is a metropolitan area. for one thing, if you want to use the actual definition of a city. the city of Miami in Florida is a small. BUT it has a large Metropolitan area. so if you looked it up on Wikipedia or searched it up on google. the definition of how large or small it is would change depending on what you looked up. if you looked up largest cities in America (top 100 list) Miami would be way on the bottom. but if you looked up largest Metros. I bet it would be higher. Same would go for Atlanta. the cities population is estimated at 486, 290 ranked 38th in the country. kinda small right? not if you include the metro. in which case it is then ranked 9th largest in the US at 5, 884, 736. how about Houston. on top 100 list of largest cities its ranked as number 4 at 2. 313 million. kinda of big right? but its metro rank drops down to #5 but the population increases to 6, 892, 427 million people. oddly enough tho, what constitutes a Metro is whats really ill defined. and example would be where I currently live. Charlotte North Carolina. at 859, 035 thousand people. it is currently ranked at 17 on the list. but when adjusting for its metro area Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia its population increases to 2, 525, 305. but its rank drops down to #22. this is interesting when you consider San Antonio Texas. one of the cities in this video among other mentioned. the city of San Antonio is ranked at #7. below Philadelphia, Phoenix, Houston, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. putting it well in the 10 largest cities in America. with its population of 1, 511, 946. but its metro rank is 24 at 2, 473, 974 - San Antonio-New Braunfels. that may not seem all that odd till you consider how charlotte and Atlanta both define their metro areas. and the way each city sprawls out to create that metro area. you would think Charlotte is pretty big. accept you can be in Charlotte's metro but be pretty far from the city itself. If you were to use Charlotte and Atlanta's model for consideration of what a metro area is. and apply to both San Antonio and Austin tx. there is actually only a small gape between the urban sprawl of both of those cities. I know because I have been to Austin. and have drove through it to get to San Antonio. they might as we be Texas second Metroplex. if they were to be classified as such right now. they would move up on the list from 24th and 31st individually. to 13th at 4, 589, 802 combined. does anyone else know of other possible cities on path to collide and create new metro doesn't already exist yet? I'd be interested to know. like learning about these statistics
reply
LOL. this video is one of the least informative I've seen in a long time. I don't even know where to begin. for one thing, if researchers can't even decide on a definition for what sprawl is or how to measure it. those researchers are idiots. also there is a DIFFERENCE between what constitutes a city. and what is a metropolitan area. for one thing, if you want to use the actual definition of a city. the city of Miami in Florida is a small. BUT it has a large Metropolitan area. so if you looked it up on Wikipedia or searched it up on google. the definition of how large or small it is would change depending on what you looked up. if you looked up largest cities in America (top 100 list) Miami would be way on the bottom. but if you looked up largest Metros. I bet it would be higher. Same would go for Atlanta. the cities population is estimated at 486, 290 ranked 38th in the country. kinda small right? not if you include the metro. in which case it is then ranked 9th largest in the US at 5, 884, 736. how about Houston. on top 100 list of largest cities its ranked as number 4 at 2. 313 million. kinda of big right? but its metro rank drops down to #5 but the population increases to 6, 892, 427 million people. oddly enough tho, what constitutes a Metro is whats really ill defined. and example would be where I currently live. Charlotte North Carolina. at 859, 035 thousand people. it is currently ranked at 17 on the list. but when adjusting for its metro area Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia its population increases to 2, 525, 305. but its rank drops down to #22. this is interesting when you consider San Antonio Texas. one of the cities in this video among other mentioned. the city of San Antonio is ranked at #7. below Philadelphia, Phoenix, Houston, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York. putting it well in the 10 largest cities in America. with its population of 1, 511, 946. but its metro rank is 24 at 2, 473, 974 - San Antonio-New Braunfels. that may not seem all that odd till you consider how charlotte and Atlanta both define their metro areas. and the way each city sprawls out to create that metro area. you would think Charlotte is pretty big. accept you can be in Charlotte's metro but be pretty far from the city itself. If you were to use Charlotte and Atlanta's model for consideration of what a metro area is. and apply to both San Antonio and Austin tx. there is actually only a small gape between the urban sprawl of both of those cities. I know because I have been to Austin. and have drove through it to get to San Antonio. they might as we be Texas second Metroplex. if they were to be classified as such right now. they would move up on the list from 24th and 31st individually. to 13th at 4, 589, 802 combined. does anyone else know of other possible cities on path to collide and create new metro doesn't already exist yet? I'd be interested to know. like learning about these statistics
reply
Brewzerr
I dont know if this has already been addressed or not, but housing affordability affecting and encouraging sprawl really should be discussed. That is the elephant in the living room that so many people are refusing to acknowledge. Its a major factor in what drives people to choose to live in more suburban, low density areas. Urban living is great and makes much more sense than sprawl, but the reality is that it has gotten obscenely expensive. Most urban core areas in America these days are basically just the exclusive domain of the privileged and the wealthy elite. The rest of us who have to work for a living are left with no other choice but to settle for less desirable environs, and if that means having to live in some soulless cookie-cutter suburban maze and sit in hour-long traffic jams in order to get to our jobs and provide for our children, then so be it. All these smug urban elitists seem to think that most people who live in sprawly areas live there by choice, when the reality is that MOST of them live there out of sheer necessity. If were ever going to TRULY address the problem of sprawl, then this issue of housing affordability will have to be dealt with in a way that benefits everybody. not just the privileged few.
reply
I dont know if this has already been addressed or not, but housing affordability affecting and encouraging sprawl really should be discussed. That is the elephant in the living room that so many people are refusing to acknowledge. Its a major factor in what drives people to choose to live in more suburban, low density areas. Urban living is great and makes much more sense than sprawl, but the reality is that it has gotten obscenely expensive. Most urban core areas in America these days are basically just the exclusive domain of the privileged and the wealthy elite. The rest of us who have to work for a living are left with no other choice but to settle for less desirable environs, and if that means having to live in some soulless cookie-cutter suburban maze and sit in hour-long traffic jams in order to get to our jobs and provide for our children, then so be it. All these smug urban elitists seem to think that most people who live in sprawly areas live there by choice, when the reality is that MOST of them live there out of sheer necessity. If were ever going to TRULY address the problem of sprawl, then this issue of housing affordability will have to be dealt with in a way that benefits everybody. not just the privileged few.
reply
Torsten Adair
I'd suggest that you judge it by development. Cities do not annex land until it is developed, at which point, it is added to the city's demographics. (MSAs cover counties, many of which are half-rural, like the Omaha MSA)Some cities, like St. Louis, are landlocked; or have reached a boundary, like Baltimore. Others, like Omaha, can annex other towns up to a certain size. Others, like Houston, battle with smaller cities for land. So. 1) Analyze by city boundary. Incorporated areas. 2) Analyze by MSA, and CSA. 3) Take each county in each MSA and CSA, and analyze by population and density. You would probably need to create an inverse rating. a bigger city with a low density ranks higher than a small city with a low density. Visually: Take the CSA map of the USA. Big thick borders. Index-color each county in the CSA zones by density. Want to drill deeper with your top ten candidates? Census tracts. The bigger the tract, the smaller the population.
reply
I'd suggest that you judge it by development. Cities do not annex land until it is developed, at which point, it is added to the city's demographics. (MSAs cover counties, many of which are half-rural, like the Omaha MSA)Some cities, like St. Louis, are landlocked; or have reached a boundary, like Baltimore. Others, like Omaha, can annex other towns up to a certain size. Others, like Houston, battle with smaller cities for land. So. 1) Analyze by city boundary. Incorporated areas. 2) Analyze by MSA, and CSA. 3) Take each county in each MSA and CSA, and analyze by population and density. You would probably need to create an inverse rating. a bigger city with a low density ranks higher than a small city with a low density. Visually: Take the CSA map of the USA. Big thick borders. Index-color each county in the CSA zones by density. Want to drill deeper with your top ten candidates? Census tracts. The bigger the tract, the smaller the population.
reply
David Levesque
In the small city I'm in, I live in an area where cars are needed. The area did have a gas station, but became EPA unacceptable. It does have a Mall but on foot, it's a hour away. Taxi's ( Uber, whatever) are expensive and yet people will say, they see nothing wrong with it. It's simple, try going anywhere where there is work within a twenty minute walk. Or your kids, same time, have to bus to school. If that's the case. You live in poorly planned city. And this area of this city is like that. To me, there's something wrong with it. As more streets are built in said area, maybe a public transportation bus stop will come. But seems not likely. Since other than one middle of a far end road is a ma&pa store, no other businesses. Hey, a bright note, pizza delivery does come to the area. If your not a big sports fan, or 13 to 30 years old, whoopie, but. smiles( that's a auto dependent business exchange too) smiles.
reply
In the small city I'm in, I live in an area where cars are needed. The area did have a gas station, but became EPA unacceptable. It does have a Mall but on foot, it's a hour away. Taxi's ( Uber, whatever) are expensive and yet people will say, they see nothing wrong with it. It's simple, try going anywhere where there is work within a twenty minute walk. Or your kids, same time, have to bus to school. If that's the case. You live in poorly planned city. And this area of this city is like that. To me, there's something wrong with it. As more streets are built in said area, maybe a public transportation bus stop will come. But seems not likely. Since other than one middle of a far end road is a ma&pa store, no other businesses. Hey, a bright note, pizza delivery does come to the area. If your not a big sports fan, or 13 to 30 years old, whoopie, but. smiles( that's a auto dependent business exchange too) smiles.
reply
A wild Filing cabinet
See, why build close and cramped with public transport when youre in a nation as vast as the US and with such a cheep form of personal transportation. Think of it this way, you could live in a bigger house, with a yard and still be within a short travel time to the city center. European cities? No way. Why build dense when you can build out comfortably. This isnt going to change, and we will need to find new solutions to city social issues. There likely isnt a way to stop sprawl. Would you move out of your nice house with a large lawn and into a small apartment just because someone said its better for the city? No. The city has to provide incentives for people to move in rather than out, and its becoming harder and harder as we stop relying on others for our goods and services and start getting them delivered directly to you.
reply
See, why build close and cramped with public transport when youre in a nation as vast as the US and with such a cheep form of personal transportation. Think of it this way, you could live in a bigger house, with a yard and still be within a short travel time to the city center. European cities? No way. Why build dense when you can build out comfortably. This isnt going to change, and we will need to find new solutions to city social issues. There likely isnt a way to stop sprawl. Would you move out of your nice house with a large lawn and into a small apartment just because someone said its better for the city? No. The city has to provide incentives for people to move in rather than out, and its becoming harder and harder as we stop relying on others for our goods and services and start getting them delivered directly to you.
reply
prushimush
The Northeastern USA is low on urban sprawl, there are no DFW-like endless citysuburbs up here, but there is a consistent urban/suburban sprawl of sorts that connects cities. The I-95/Turnpike corridor in Jersey is a good example, it's suburban strip mall sprawl that connects Philly and New York City. Philly proper has a fairly high amount of sprawl for a Northeastern USA city with the Far Northeast being almost entirely suburban. Long Island in New York has a bad rap due to the sprawling nature of the semi-urban suburbs(FYI never commute here. If you look at Boston there are seamless suburbs and strip malls connecting it to Providence, Rhode Island almost an hour away, this even includes the Patriots' home Gillette Stadium in Foxboro. The entire Northeastern Megalopolis is like this.
reply
The Northeastern USA is low on urban sprawl, there are no DFW-like endless citysuburbs up here, but there is a consistent urban/suburban sprawl of sorts that connects cities. The I-95/Turnpike corridor in Jersey is a good example, it's suburban strip mall sprawl that connects Philly and New York City. Philly proper has a fairly high amount of sprawl for a Northeastern USA city with the Far Northeast being almost entirely suburban. Long Island in New York has a bad rap due to the sprawling nature of the semi-urban suburbs(FYI never commute here. If you look at Boston there are seamless suburbs and strip malls connecting it to Providence, Rhode Island almost an hour away, this even includes the Patriots' home Gillette Stadium in Foxboro. The entire Northeastern Megalopolis is like this.
reply
An Aussie
The metro/city division can be confusing, mainly because 20th century cities sprawled so much thanks to the motor car that now the entire metro is far larger than pre-car cities ever were (yet people refer to the entire metropolitan region as the name of the original main city. Sydney town has long since subsumed the city of parramatta, which now has been designated central city due to the harbour locale of Sydney town causing all the sprawl to head west, leaving parramatta as the geographic centre of the urban conurbation. So now the old city of parramatta will be the central city of the metropolis of three cities (were building another city to the west of parramatta. Yet really its all just Sydneys sprawl finally running out of space and forcing itself to density.
reply
The metro/city division can be confusing, mainly because 20th century cities sprawled so much thanks to the motor car that now the entire metro is far larger than pre-car cities ever were (yet people refer to the entire metropolitan region as the name of the original main city. Sydney town has long since subsumed the city of parramatta, which now has been designated central city due to the harbour locale of Sydney town causing all the sprawl to head west, leaving parramatta as the geographic centre of the urban conurbation. So now the old city of parramatta will be the central city of the metropolis of three cities (were building another city to the west of parramatta. Yet really its all just Sydneys sprawl finally running out of space and forcing itself to density.
reply
yacetube
The answer is definitely atlanta. On the Newman&Kenworthy Graph, Houston and atlanta appear to be the highest energy/capita consuming cities in Amer. in the World. With the lowest densities. In the world. The Graph shows the link between energy consumption and density. The least dense cities are the most sprawling. But it's true the new development (not that new) of many places in the US are extreme-sprawl, or even called exburbs, sometimes you just can't tell if its a kind of suburban, rural or natural area, or just a weird mix of the three. And this anti-urban pattern (thus anti-nature) sprawl is spreading fast. Sprawl in the Southwest desert, exburb or scattered sprawl in the forests. Both cases, nature loses, cause nature-loving-humans just love to live On it.
reply
The answer is definitely atlanta. On the Newman&Kenworthy Graph, Houston and atlanta appear to be the highest energy/capita consuming cities in Amer. in the World. With the lowest densities. In the world. The Graph shows the link between energy consumption and density. The least dense cities are the most sprawling. But it's true the new development (not that new) of many places in the US are extreme-sprawl, or even called exburbs, sometimes you just can't tell if its a kind of suburban, rural or natural area, or just a weird mix of the three. And this anti-urban pattern (thus anti-nature) sprawl is spreading fast. Sprawl in the Southwest desert, exburb or scattered sprawl in the forests. Both cases, nature loses, cause nature-loving-humans just love to live On it.
reply
TheCriminalViolin
Portland, Oregon, and the surrounding area was and still is heavily developed primarily around Single-Occupant Vehicles (any vehicle, usually a kind of car/automobile that most typically has only one occupant, which of course is the driver of the vehicle. As such, when it comes to the overall walk-ability, bike-ability, or any other non motor vehicle forms of transit, Portland and much of it's surrounding metro area is notoriously bad in the latter noted forms of transit. Also, access to public transit, or really our sorry excuse for such here, is also a fairly common problem across the metro area here. A LOT of places STILL don't even have any sidewalks where they desperately needed them many decades ago even. And the sprawl here gets worse every year.
reply
Portland, Oregon, and the surrounding area was and still is heavily developed primarily around Single-Occupant Vehicles (any vehicle, usually a kind of car/automobile that most typically has only one occupant, which of course is the driver of the vehicle. As such, when it comes to the overall walk-ability, bike-ability, or any other non motor vehicle forms of transit, Portland and much of it's surrounding metro area is notoriously bad in the latter noted forms of transit. Also, access to public transit, or really our sorry excuse for such here, is also a fairly common problem across the metro area here. A LOT of places STILL don't even have any sidewalks where they desperately needed them many decades ago even. And the sprawl here gets worse every year.
reply
Nathan Speer
Growing up in Houston, it's weird hearing people thinking Los Angeles should be considered on these lists (the second top comment also thinks LA should be considered. Entire blocks in suburban Houston could span 1. 5-2mi; that is as a pedestrian it could be 30-45 minutes from one crossing intersection to the next-- in 100+ degree heat-- in 100% humidity-- and the strip malls and businesses sprawling in between are one-story business parks, gun and pawn shops, retailers that would normally be in a mall. No place mind you where you could get some water. And then you make it to the intersection and there isn't even a gas station or convenience store or liquor store to dehydrate.
reply
Growing up in Houston, it's weird hearing people thinking Los Angeles should be considered on these lists (the second top comment also thinks LA should be considered. Entire blocks in suburban Houston could span 1. 5-2mi; that is as a pedestrian it could be 30-45 minutes from one crossing intersection to the next-- in 100+ degree heat-- in 100% humidity-- and the strip malls and businesses sprawling in between are one-story business parks, gun and pawn shops, retailers that would normally be in a mall. No place mind you where you could get some water. And then you make it to the intersection and there isn't even a gas station or convenience store or liquor store to dehydrate.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
