In which direction does your city sprawl out to its greatest extent? How far? This includes exurbs, and open land between sprawled communities. For this thread, sprawl ends when the last strip mall and suburban division ends (or you run into another metro area).


Milwaukee's western suburbs sprawl out about 35 miles or so west of downtown, to roughly oconomowoc (just out of frame to the west Waukesha).

http://www.steepleview.org/images/sv-map1.gif


I would imagine LA is probably the winner of this contest. I think the inland empire reaches 100 miles or so inland.

http://www.where-rv-now.com/Maps/Chicago1.gif

about 60 miles to the North (Kenosha).

70 Miles to the west- Huntley( West of Elgin), Sugar Grove(west of Aurora), Morris(West of Joliet)(not even on this map)

About 50 miles to the south- Matteson.(not even on this map)

60 miles- Michigan City, IN. to the east (Nearly not even on this map)

I am not proud of this but, here is the facts about Chicago sprawl- guess sprawl is worse than I thought. http://www.sierraclub.org/sprawl/report98/chicago.asp

Wow, sprawl seems to be a never ending thing here.

It's hard to say for my metro because it's so oddly shaped.

Atlanta may be a contender as well. Listed as sierra club's "worst sprawler." Not only does it sprawl more than 70 miles outside of its downtown in some shape or form, it also has little urban areas to counter the sprawl.

http://time-and-money.com/chargers/AtlantaMetro1.gif

Wow, that's so crazy it's almost awesome. I thought Stockbridge was well inside Atlanta's sprawl.

Atlanta may be a contender as well. Listed as sierra club's "worst sprawler." Not only does it sprawl more than 70 miles outside of its downtown in some shape or form, it also has little urban areas to counter the sprawl.

http://time-and-money.com/chargers/AtlantaMetro1.gif

But look at all our gas stations!

I suggest that Atlanta needs abother Beltway for the future, like an 80 miles diameter around Atlanta soon.

Its so bad in Chicago, that Chicago extending a major spur in the south suburb. from Bolingbrook to New Lenox(use the map I provided).

^That will just make things worse, lol.

KC sprawls in every direction, but its worst to the south. Imagine sprawl for 40 miles straight south, meanwhile it is 25-30 miles in every other direction. Johnson County, Kansas sprawled all the way to the southern border, then Franklin, Linn, Miami counties took over.

Here are two maps..long term sprawl from 1950 onward

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Jeff59c/DaytonGrowth1.jpg

And recent sprawl...1990-2000...a close-up of the general area in the above map, but closer to Dayton...the areas in blue are the areas that are gaining the most population....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Jeff59c/populationgrowthGreA090B.jpg

In terms of distance, using the first map. about 21 miles from downtown to Troy in the north and also 21-22 miles to Middletown in the south....Xenia is 18 miles to the east...

Yeah, I think my city (Los Angeles) takes the cake. If you drive nonstop from Redlands (in the Inland Empire) to Simi Valley (in Ventura county), you will drive 100 miles in pure sprawl, nonstop city with no breaks inbetween. Nowhere will you see an empty field. The same thing goes if you drive from San Clemente (southernmost Orange County) to Simi Valley.. you get 100 miles of city after city after city with no fields, greenbelts, or any sort of breaks inbetween. :)

http://img284.echo.cx/img284/7288/sprawl5vx.jpg

Here in StL sprawl is a big problem. Downtown to Wentzville is around 45 miles west on the Mark Twain Expwy (I-70). and now its reaching out to warrenton which is about 55 miles from Downtown. Going south along I-55 i would say about 35 miles. East into Ill. Highland and Lebanon are about 40 miles out.

Detroit & Windsor:

http://img291.echo.cx/img291/4658/mapimage8wr.gif
http://img291.echo.cx/img291/5858/mpsvc3gu.gif

Toronto:
If you measure from Oshawa to Hamilton, it's about 90miles or upwards of 150km.

hmmm In Cincinnati from downtown up I-75 up to Piqua Ohio 72.1 miles, but i'm not sure if you can call the city of dayton sprawl.

The whole stretch from Walton,Ky up I-75 through Cincinnati/Dayton to Piqua is about 90+ miles.

Cincinnati-Dayton-Springfield (approx. 3.3 million)
http://ohioskylines.com/ChrisPics/CincinnatiDayton.jpg

Atlanta's sprawl is way way way more than that tiny map indicates.

^ I will agree, but sprawl is not always urban(1,000 person per square mile.)

Syracuse sprawls northwest about 14 miles from downtown. The whole county only builds 1,000 houses per year. Hard to sprawl out much with so little development.

http://www.pbase.com/ciceroclay/image/41948845.jpg

hmmm In Cincinnati from downtown up I-75 up to Piqua Ohio 72.1 miles, but i'm not sure if you can call the city of dayton sprawl.

The whole stretch from Walton,Ky up I-75 through Cincinnati/Dayton to Piqua is about 90+ miles.

Whats going on is overlapping patterns of sprawl and hollowing-out inner cities. This is happening in both Cincinnati and Dayton, and in the smaller cities like Springfield and perhaps Middletown and Hamilton...

A good picture of sprawl in Ohio is this township population by density map, showing how exurbia is moving way out into the country...the medium blue and even lighter blue townships probably "look" rural as a lot of farmland is still left, but there are ribbon developments on country roads, small subdivision, and people commute to work in services or manufacturing, not farms....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/Jeff59c/map04.jpg

Well, Greater Chicago which extends northup to Kenosha is about 15-20 miles away from combining with the Milwaukee area which extends south to Racine
http://www.advancedfertility.com/pics/image_map%20200.gif

No more than 30 miles away from swallowing up Rockford
http://www.farnsworthhouse.org/images/fh_map_2_600_rockford_2.gif

and Michigan City, which is now part of the Chicago CSA about 25 miles away from South Bend if that...
http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/cities/chicago/maps/chi-sb-champ.gif

So I guess Chicago is sprawling eqaully in all directions...

For Philly, its Northeast, and I'm guessing it sprawls out atleast 10 to maybe 15 miles. Somewhere in that area.

OKC is hard to say. The city limits run up to 364th Street on the NW side of town, but the suburbs run a lot further than that to the SE, all the way out to Lake Thunderbird.

In my town we're growing towards the west, northwest, northeast and east.

Huntsville/Decatur:
Northeast: New Market- 17 miles
Northwest: Ardmore- 26 miles
Southeast: Owens Crossroads- 13 miles
Soithwest: Hartselle- 29 miles
East: Gurley- 15 miles
South: Lacey's Spring- 13 miles
West: Athens- 26 miles

^ I doubt a metro that small can have that kinda non-stop development.

^
In which direction does your city sprawl out to its greatest extent? How far? This includes exurbs, and open land between sprawled communities.

There is about 8 miles of farmland between Huntsville and Decatur, but 20% of Decatur residents work in Huntsville. The only other cities I would dispute would be Ardmore and Gurley. There is some farmland between HSV and these cities, but that is quickly giving way to lots and lots of houses. If I was talking about non-stop development, yes, it would be much smaller, about 10-15 miles all around.

Augusta Georgia sprawls the most on its West side, where the non-stop strip malls and the like start at about 20 miles in suburban Evans.

edit:

Augusta Georgia sprawls the most on its West side, where the non-stop strip malls and the like start at about 20 miles in suburban Evans.

augusta is NOT that big.

Indy sprawl is bad mostly because it is so uneven. If you start downtown and head directly southwest or directly southeast, you can be in the country (and I mean FARMS) within 15 minutes. However, take US31 directly south and it would take at least a half hour. The worst sprawl is definitely on the north/northeast area of the city. It is not uncommon for people to commute downtown from Cicero, on the Morse Reservoir, which is about 21 miles away from the city center and would probably take around an hour in rush hour traffic (pathetic). Many also commute from Anderson, which would take around an hour in rush hour traffic as well (31 miles one way). The sprawl between Anderson and Indy is somewhat deceiving--you appear to be in the country for a good portion of the drive on I-69, but the sprawl is actually not along the interstate, but moreso along IN-32, IN-37, and IN-38. The map I've posted doesn't do much justice to most of the new development between Noblesville, Westfield, Carmel, and Zionsville, but whatever. You get the idea.

To make matters worse, there is absolutely no public transportation outside of Marion County (the central county), so people have no choice but to drive. Not surprising that Indy was listed on the page with the most expensive cities in which to commute.

http://images.fotopic.net/ycovcz.jpg

Some of these make Minneapolis not seem so bad. However, due their expanding in every direction, keep in mind a place like Minneapolis or Atlanta should be measured end to end, not center out. Places like Great Lake and coastal cities, etc are limited in the direction they can expand; magnifying the core to the outer ring compared to landlocked cities. Maybe square miles of the metro area is a more acurate reflection of sprawl.

Minneapolis extends fairly evenly in about a 40 mile radius from downtown Minneapolis. It is fully developed out about 20 miles out each way and somewhat developed out to 40+miles.

Also, this is likely true with most metros; it is beginning to swallow up small cities and towns on the far perifery of the metro with some of the cities and towns expanding out to meet the sprawling metro leaving an undeveloped gap between the two...if that discription makes any sense.

Yeah, I think my city (Los Angeles) takes the cake. If you drive nonstop from Redlands (in the Inland Empire) to Simi Valley (in Ventura county), you will drive 100 miles in pure sprawl, nonstop city with no breaks inbetween. Nowhere will you see an empty field. The same thing goes if you drive from San Clemente (southernmost Orange County) to Simi Valley.. you get 100 miles of city after city after city with no fields, greenbelts, or any sort of breaks inbetween. :)

http://img284.echo.cx/img284/7288/sprawl5vx.jpg
idonno buddie. chicago can put up quite the fight on this one. from Kenosha to Michigan City is nearly 125 mi. and most prob. in the next 20-30 years you can double that distance becouse your going to have to add southbend (southwest)and millwakee otherwise known as Chicago,WI.(to the north) onto the equation totaling at somwere around 230mi. of strait sprawl

idonno buddie. chicago can put up quite the fight on this one. from Kenosha to Michigan City is nearly 125 mi. and most prob. in the next 20-30 years you can double that distance becouse your going to have to add southbend (southwest)and millwakee otherwise known as Chicago,WI.(to the north) onto the equation totaling at somwere around 230mi. of strait sprawl

are you counting a straight line across the lake or I-94?

If you want to play the rules of including other cities in the sprawl equation, you are going to have to count the entire New England megalopolis as on emassive sprawl. If not now, in ten years for sure.

what is it sprawling from? this is talking about one city and its sprawl. I mean if you count all of new england then we may have to count all of southern california.

Louisville sprawl From Downtown

Northwest-14-17 miles to Georgetown Indiana
North-15-18 miles to Sellersburg/Charlestown Indiana
East- 19-22 miles to La Grange Kentucky
SouthEast-21-24 miles to Shelbyville Kentucky
South- 22-40 miles to Shephardsville Kentucky or Bardstown Kentucky
Southwest- 20-40 miles to West Point Kentucky or Elizabethtown Kentucky via 31W
West-7-9 miles from Downtown to Portland Kentucky which is in the WEST Louisville

idonno buddie. chicago can put up quite the fight on this one. from Kenosha to Michigan City is nearly 125 mi. and most prob. in the next 20-30 years you can double that distance becouse your going to have to add southbend (southwest)and millwakee otherwise known as Chicago,WI.(to the north) onto the equation totaling at somwere around 230mi. of strait sprawl

mapquest version...94 miles from San Clemente to Santa Clarita
http://mq-mapgend.websys.aol.com/mqmapgend?MQMapGenRequest=FDR2dmwjDE%3byt2l%26FDJnci4Jkqj%2cMMCJ%3aHOEvq%3babwufa%3a%29u2guzz5%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24x%264bs%26wbs%26ESEKGF%3dTPWIK%2cbxq0zg%26%3d2n0y2nu%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3a%26f2w9%40%3aHOHQJ%3barxhut%3a%29u2gdw2a%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3ahu1l%26%26FDEmvqjHqjwjg%7c%14D%13%13%17OHM%26ab51yt%3a%29u2agu22%26u7l%26%3dy2%26uzw%26%3da0d%402s9%40%5fl04%24l0f%24nqa%24xuw%24%2e96r%3a1ab%3a%29a8%3ala1%3a9u%24n0r%24%2e9wy%3a16z%3a%290yw%260yg%26%3das1%40a5h%40%5fng4%24lhf%24%2e107%3a9ra%3a%290bl%26u8x%26%3daw1%402xl%40%5fng4%24n9y%24%2e9zz%3a9rt%3a%29uzl%260a2%26%3dal5%40ald%40%5fl1r%24nqa%24%2e1y2%3a94a%3a%290zx%26u2x%26%3daxu%402g0%40%5fx14%24l1f%24%2el4r%3a1uy%3a%29u1w%26085%26%3da25%40a2q%40%5fndz%24lhr%24%2el68%3ahf%24%2e9r2%3a0a%24%2e1f7%3a06%24%2e9wr%3a9yt%3aqr%24nhw%24%2e1w%24nqf%24%2e96y%3a16a%3a%290b5%26uy2%26%3da20%40b2l%40%5fnuu%24ngw%24%2e9fr%3a94r%3a%29urs%26u8a%26%3dalq%40al1%40%5flur%24sg%40%5fnhy%24sd%40%5flhy%24lur%24%2e1ab%3a162%3a%29uyl%260tl%26%3daaq%40a2l%40%5fn5r%24nha%24%2e1aa%3a9ry%3a%29a82%26u1s%26%3dyn%26ya%3a96a%3agy%24wg

... and 124 miles from Redlands to Oxnard
http://mq-mapgend.websys.aol.com/mqmapgend?MQMapGenRequest=FDR2dmwjDE%3byt2l%26FDJnci4Jkqj%2cMMCJ%3aHOEvq%3barn1fz%3a%29u2g9zyw%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24x%264bs%26wbs%26ESEKGF%3dTPWIK%2cb5uy2w%26%3d2n0uyn0%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3a%26f2w9%40%3aHOHQJ%3barnhzr%3a%29u2w9zzn%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3ahu1l%26%26FDEmvqjHqjwjg%7c%14D%13%13%17OHM%26ar2gu1%3a%29u2a9r20%26wt%3a%290ag%26%3dax%26%3d8gl%40z%3a%29atg%26aa%3a%29azw%264%24%2edrz%3a%2908%3a%29f2n%26ur%3a%29yy5%260r%3a%294bg%26uts%26%3drn5%40%5fsd%40%5f55z%24%2ehu%24%2ed4a%3a%2908%3a%29w70%26zz%3a%29uyl%260ya%26%3dt0%26ur2%26%3d255%40%5fl%26%3dbxq%40z%3a%29w72%26ry%3a%290r5%264y%3a%29aya%260t%3a%29w2a%26u7a%26%3dbn1%40%5f0%26%3dbw0%40rn%26%3dblu%40%5fnl%40%5fxdw%24%2ehf%24%2e1wy%3alz%24%2elfz%3a9ur%3a%290yn%26%3dal%26%3dagh%40ax%26%3dag5%40%5fx5%40%5fx1a%24x%26%3dbgd%40bg%26%3db0d%40%5fx%26%3dbal%40r5%26%3danh%40tw%26%3dag5%40r5%26%3dbau%40%5fsu%40%5f50w%24%2eg%40%5fx16%24%2e94a%3a%29w7s%26%3daa%26%3drn0%40%5fn9z%24%2el61%3ah4%24%2eqw1%3agz%24%2eqza%3a10b%3a%29wrs%26z1%3a%29wzw%26fy%3a%29atx%26u2x%26%3db01%4022l%40%5fxq6%24s9%40%5fal6%24ld%40%5fsua%24%2e1yr%3a%2907l%26w%24%2e9at


besides, kenosha is way too far north to count as Chicago sprawl, a more accurate measurement might be from Waukegan to Gary.. which is only 74 miles

http://mq-mapgend.websys.aol.com/mqmapgend?MQMapGenRequest=FDR2dmwjDE%3byt2l%26FDJnci4Jkqj%2cMMCJ%3aHOEvq%3bw2w0rb%3a%29rtsh48%3a%26%40%24%3a%26%40r%3ada8%3aqa8%3aTD%15JFE%3aHOHQJ%3bwaxga8%3a%29rtgqwt%3a%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24w9f2%3a%2aE%14QXO%2a5941x1%40%5fg0ar01%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3a%26f2w1%40%3aHO%1593bdWik1mf%3bNSC%12JDBJ%40rllyb0%26%3dya5wr0%26%3dr2%26%3dra%266%24%2eda%24%2e1%40%5fa5%40%5fx%26%3dyl%26w%24%2ehy%24n%26%3d2nh%401%3a%294r%3a1%40a0%26%3dtx%26a%24%2egu%24ld%40%5fg9%4080%26%3d2w0%40zx%26%3d2sl%40r5%26%3d2ld%40%5fn%26%3drg%26aa%3a%29zr%3a1u%24%2e0a%245h%40%5fn04%24xl%40%5fnqf%24n%26%3dbl%2648%3a%29uy0%26u2l%26%3d2s1%402nu%40%5fndf%24nua%24%2e00%240q%40%5fn1z%24sd%40%5fal%40zx%26%3dzl%26yz%3a%29ubn%26f2%3a%29r2%3aqf%24%2e9y2%3a0r%24%2e9yb%3a961%3a%29u1x%26r2%3a%29ry%3al%40%5fg1%40bs%26%3dzg%26%3dr5%26%3d2xg%40%5fxu%40%5f5q%40%5flq%40%5f0l%40%5f5u%40%5fn9y%24xq%40%5fgl%402x5%40%5fsg%40aa%26%3d2lu%40%5flu%40%5fa0%40%5fa%26%3d8w%26w2%3a%29u70%26u%24%2e0u%245%26%3dbl%26ay%3a%29y1%3a90a%3a%294a%3aha%24%2eg0%24sh%40%5flh%40t5%26%3d8l%26ry%3a%29y8%3a9uy%3a%29zt%3a9a8%3a%2947%3ag4%24%2egy%245g%40%5fsd%402w%26%3d85%26u1%3a%29y2%3a0f%24%2eqr%24su%40%5flh%40r%3a%290a%3a9%40%5fn5%402%3a%29w8%3al%40%5fg9%401%3a%29z2%3a1%40%5f0d%40%5fg%26%3d8g%260r%3a%290b%3a0f%24%2el4%24xq%40%5fa1%40r%3a%29u82%26w%24%2e5u%24%2e9%40%5fsl%40%5fnq%40%5fn1u%24a%26%3dzw%26%3d2%3a%29f2%3a0%40%5fx1%40rn%26%3d10%26u1x%26%3d2gq%40asg%40%5fn16%24ngu%24%2e9wy%3a9f8%3a%294y%3ahw%24%2e9u1%3a901%3a%29y8%3a9f%24%2e9fa%3a%294%24%2e9y2%3adu%24%2e94z%3a54%24%2egf%24l5%40%5fn94%24n1a%24%2e5y%245l%40%5fa1%402su%40%5fn5%408w1%40r%3al0r%3a%29r%24l16%24%2e5%40tn%26%3d2n%26y%24%2egy%242%26%3d82%26u%24%2e5%40z2%26%3d2l%26u7

..and east to west from chicago to aurora its only ~43 miles...

http://mq-mapgend.websys.aol.com/mqmapgend?MQMapGenRequest=FDR2dmwjDE%3byt2l%26FDJnci4Jkqj%2cMMCJ%3aHOEvq%3bw2gu42%3a%29rtw547%3a%26%40%24%3a%26%40r%3ada8%3aqa8%3aTD%15JFE%3aHOHQJ%3bw2gqfy%3a%29rt0d67%3a%26%40%24%3a%26%40%24w9f2%3a%2aE%14QXO%2a59zz2d%40%5fg5a2wh%40%24%3a%26%40%24%3a%26f2w1%40%3aHO%1593bdWik1mf%3bNSC%12JDBJ%40rn5w1g%26%3dyagwyn%26wb%3a9y%24n0%40aa%26w2%3a%290%2455%40%5fx%26y2%3a%29u%24sd%40%5fa%26%3dz%3a%29a7%3aq%40%5fn14%24%2e1%40%5fn94%24%2e9%40%5fw1%40%5fs%26%3d2w0%40%5fn9%40%5fnqy%24%2e1%40%5fngu%24%2e1a%24%2e9zb%3a%290%24%2e9aa%3au%40%5fn06%24lg%40%5fl5f%24%2e9z%24%2e96y%3a%29f%24%2e90y%3a%29a%24%2e9y8%3au%40%5fn9w%24%2el%40%5fn1y%24%2e90%24%2e942%3a14%24%2eh0%24nq%40%5fnuu%24%2e1y%24%2e04%24%2e9y8%3a%29uta%26%3dy0%26%3d2xu%40%5fnl%40%5fn1z%24%2e9r%24%2e14a%3a%29u70%26%3dbl5%40%5f5q%40%5fsh%40%5fnlw%24%2egz%24%2eqa%24%2ed4%24n%26%3dblq%40%5fnu%40%5fn90%24%2ely%24%2e9w2%3a5%40%5fsu6%24%2el%40%5fxqa%24%2eqw%24%2ed08%3a%29aa%3a%294rs%26%3d2s%26%3daal%40%5fn1%40%5fn50%24n1%40%5fl%26%3dag%26ua%3a%29w1%3adw%24%2e5y%245h%40%5f5u%402w%26%3d221%40a2%26%3d8n%26%3db0%26%3d22%26%3db5

So.. LA definetly beats Chicago, by far

New Orleans is a compact city being surrounded by water and swamps. To the West would be Laplace which is about 28 miles from Downtown, to the South would be Lafitte which is about 25 miles from Downtown, to the East would be Delacroix or Shell Beach which is about 30 miles from Downtown. If you go North, you are looking at the furthest direction (of course there is Lake Pontchartrain, but, about 250,000 of the metro area live North of Lake Pontchartrain. Covington is about 50 miles from New Orleans and is a well populated suburb of New Orleans--about 125,000 people live in the Covington/Mandeville area, although the cities themselves have about 10,000 and 16,000 inside of their small city limits, respectively. Picayune, MS is about 55 miles to the NE of New Orleans and is heavily influenced by New Orleans and commuters, although technically Pearl River County in Mississippi (population 65,000) isn't included in the metro area. Hammond/Pontchatoula is exploding with new subdivisions that are a direct product of New Orleans and is about 60 miles to the NW (although 30 miles of travel is over swampland to get there). And Tangipahoa Parish (population 135,000) isn't included in the official metro New Orleans population, yet, although some statistics have begun to utilize that parish with the metro population. Technically one could argue that the true metro population of New Orleans is closer to 1.7 million if these newer developing parishes and counties in the distance were to be included in the New Orleans' MSA. We'll probably pick up two or three parishes by 2010, anyway...

I made a map, Black means sprawl. Red means the chicagoland metro area.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/puiko/chisprawl.gif

ANyways... for east-west, I say from Aurora through Gary.

http://img268.echo.cx/img268/4475/la9wt.png

here's a map of the greater LA area at the same scale as the Chicago one. Looks like a bigger area to me..

^
That's something to be proud of.....
L.A. the most sprawling U.S. metro.

BTW,
Funny signature DT L.A. best DT by 2015, in what?

^
That's something to be proud of.....
L.A. the most sprawling U.S. metro.

BTW,
Funny signature DT L.A. best DT by 2015, in what?


"In the USA"... need me to read it for you? ;)

^
Can you because I have a hard time reading bull ;)

How is DT L.A. going to outdo Mid town Manhattan or the Loop in 10 years?
I was in L.A. in March. I was not impressed at all with the D/T. Other parts of L.A. were fabulous.

why happen to the neveda state line in yr map?

isnt the LA's DT on a fault line?

I think phoenix or houston is the most sprawling...at least LA has a lot of density in its metro.

http://www.galvestontexas.net/houston_files/400px-Large_Houston_Landsat.jpg

houston sprawls everywhere but mostly to the west, northwest and north while the east is the least sprawling becuase it (pasadena, deer park, channel view and east side of houston) is mostly minority and/or working class and the area is dominated by the ports and refineries.

why happen to the neveda state line in yr map?

isnt the LA's DT on a fault line?

Nevada is at least 150 miles east of where the red line is.
From the coast to the red lines furthest point is at the most 100 miles.

Oh and about the signature, i dont know about the best DT in 10 years, but definitly moving up the list, with at least 40 - 50 Towers Under Consstruction or proposed right now, and Momentum will take off even more so when LA live (55, 25, 25) Breaks ground this year, Metropolis (53, 47, 38) in early 2006 and Grand Ave (5 towers, 50, 35, 35 ,35 ,25) in late 2006. In 5 years, the south park area of DT LA will be unrecognizable, with at least 16 Condo Towers under construction by late 2006.

^ thank you.

No prob!

Indianapolis seems to sprawl more to the north and northeast, out into the suburbs of Fishers, Carmel, Lawrence and Noblesville.

http://www.wall-maps.com/US-cities/Indianapolis_map.gif

idonno buddie. chicago can put up quite the fight on this one. from Kenosha to Michigan City is nearly 125 mi. and most prob. in the next 20-30 years you can double that distance becouse your going to have to add southbend (southwest)and millwakee otherwise known as Chicago,WI.(to the north) onto the equation totaling at somwere around 230mi. of strait sprawl

No yeah, LA doesn't take the cake but nor does Chicago (which is quite sprawly nonetheless). New York is by far, the most sprawly metro in the US. By urbanized area, it makes an ENORMOUS footprint.

Pound for pound tho, Chicago does outsprawl both LA and NY.

Roanoke isn't very sprawled; its stuck in a fairly small valley, which contains most of the sprawl.

No yeah, LA doesn't take the cake but nor does Chicago (which is quite sprawly nonetheless). New York is by far, the most sprawly metro in the US. By urbanized area, it makes an ENORMOUS footprint.

Pound for pound tho, Chicago does outsprawl both LA and NY.

The city of New York has over 7 million residents; thus, alot of sprawl.

And LA is the most sprawled metro in the United States, hands down.

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-11/top10sm.jpg
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-11/topworldsm.jpg

The farmland in between Chicago and Milwaukee is considered to be the 3rd most "at risk" farmland in the country. It is expected that by 2030, Greater Chicago and the Milwaukee metro will have merged (along with Rockford Ill.)
http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/cities/chicago/maps/chi-mil-mad.gif

Chicago's largest suburb Aurora, is located in the western portion of the metro area. It's population is growing at a super fast clip, (currently approaching 170,000) By 2030 It's poplation will double to 340,000. Other fast growing, fast sprawling suburbs of Chicago are:
Naperville 140,106 growing at 1.3% a year
Joliet 129,519 growing at 4.4% a year
Elgin 97,761 growing at 0.4% a year

Overall, I would say the fastest sprawling portion of Chicagoland is it's western/southwestern suburbs.
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/22/40369422.gif
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/27/40369427.gif

I think you also mean.. Northwestern too.

Chicago metro will finally gain a new state in its metro by 2020 or sooner, Michigan.

On my trip to Toronto weeks ago... on I-94, I see many new houses in Southwestern Michigan, probably preparing for Chicago? lol.

Azian, you are correct the northwest suburbs of Chicago are also grow at a fast clip, but I think the westerna and southwestern suburbs are growing faster.
Here are maps of the two largest metros in the U.S. sprawling into adjacent cities.

1) Greater L.A. sprawling towards San Diego.
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/24/40116224.gif
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/50/40116250.gif

New York sprawling through northern New Jersey almost reaching the Philadelphia suburbs
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/76/40116276.gif
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/87/38254887.gif
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg1/06/40116306.gif

I think you ment AZN not Azian, different people with similar names..

Philly and NYC is nearly connected, so is Philly Baltimore...

Yeah, I meant AZN

Philly and NYC have almost merged. Baltimore has a ways to go. Actually the Virginia side of the Washington-Baltimore metro is the fastest sprawling, so it would be sprawling southwards.

Here is a computer model forcasting the growth of the Wahington- Baltiomore metro in the coming decades.

http://www.geog.umd.edu/resac/images/urban-model-anim2-img2.jpg
http://www.geog.umd.edu/resac/images/urban-model-anim2-img3.jpg
http://www.geog.umd.edu/resac/images/urban-model-anim2-img5.jpg
http://www.geog.umd.edu/resac/images/urban-model-anim2-img6.jpg
http://www.geog.umd.edu/resac/images/urban-model-anim2-img7.jpg

Chicago's urban growth by 2030:
http://x2.putfile.com/7/19012332843.jpg
http://www.geosimulation.org/pictures/chicagosim.gif

I'm sensing the smart growth folks in Portland, OR, are smugly loving this thread.

I'm sensing the smart growth folks in Portland, OR, are smugly loving this thread.
Funny that you mentioned Portland. From what I've been reading about Portland's "smart growth" plans as of late, it seems that Portland is sprawling more than ever. Even at a faster pace than Phoenix AZ. Portland's peak travel times increased by 33% during the 90's up to 43 minutes. The outer counties of the Portland area obtained a larger share of metropolitan growth over the last 10 years than the outer counties of the Atlanta area which is known for sprawl. I guess we have "too much" room in this country, so I highly doubt smart growth policies will have any major effect on metropolitan and urban developement in the near future.
http://www.publicpurpose.com/hwy-tti20011986.pdf
http://www.demographia.com/por-ugb-chartbook.pdf
http://www.demographia.com/db-poratlsub.htm

My guess of the approximate area of Philadelphia Sprawl :

http://img310.imageshack.us/img310/7990/m33ue.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

^ Which isnt really sprawl IMO

The Greater Puget Sound urban area stretches from Tumwater just south of Olympia all the way into Northern Snohomish County, a length of roughly 110 miles with Ft. Lewis/McChord Air Force Base, the Nisqually Wildlife refuge & delta, & Snohomish river delta as the only breaks in dense development. Growth occured in this fashion due to a linear string of important cities along Puget Sound & Interstate 5 (Olympia, Tacoma, Seattle, & Everett) plus the geography (mountains & sound) pretty much limiting the direction of growth.

http://www.ofm.wa.gov/popden/images/popden2000color.gif

Here is New Orleans urban layout. Notice the odd shapes..that is because of swampland and marsh inhibiting growth in various areas. Notice the split on the Northern suburbs. Pontchatoula just to the South of Hammond is accesible to New Orleans by I-55, but, it has swampland to it's South and East and that is why it is "cut off." Then when you get to Madisonville (just to the West of Mandeville), you have the Northern slab of suburbs all the way to Slidell and moving NE to Picayune, MS, where you have a large amount of commuters who live in vast subdivisions built around man-made lakes. However, Pearl River county is not, yet, officially counted in Metro New Orleans population. Nor is Tangipahoa Parish, where Pontchatoula is located.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y161/alon504/NEWORLEANSMAP.bmp

I'm sensing the smart growth folks in Portland, OR, are smugly loving this thread.

Got a map? Almost all of the growth in the Portland area the last half decade has been in the sprawling Tualatin Valley west of Portland, Clark County Washington (2nd fastest growing county in Washington, now with almost 400,000 people), the northern Willamette Valley (Polk, Yamhill, & Marion Counties), Clackamas County, & Columbia County.

Tualatin Valley (Hillsboro looking W.):

http://www.aerolistphoto.com/images/or/hillsboro/2004/ORHIh040908D_132.jpg


Clark County (looking W. from Camas):

http://www.aerolistphoto.com/images/wa/vancouver/2004/WAVAh040429D_008.jpg


If growth rates continue, both Washington & Clark Counties may someday pass Multhnomah County (Portland), in population.

Here is New Orleans urban layout. Notice the odd shapes..that is because of swampland and marsh inhibiting growth in various areas. Notice the split on the Northern suburbs. Pontchatoula just to the South of Hammond is accesible to New Orleans by I-55, but, it has swampland to it's South and East and that is why it is "cut off." Then when you get to Madisonville (just to the West of Mandeville), you have the Northern slab of suburbs all the way to Slidell and moving NE to Picayune, MS, where you have a large amount of commuters who live in vast subdivisions built around man-made lakes. However, Pearl River county is not, yet, officially counted in Metro New Orleans population. Nor is Tangipahoa Parish, where Pontchatoula is located.


Only one thing, if New Orleans want a united Metro.

Fill in lake pontchartrain :lol: :banana2:

My offical thoughts about the Chicago metro sprawl as the years go on...
(ignore the X's)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/puiko/estimate.gif

Is this reasonable or am I crazy(again about the sprawl)

The first Atlanta picture with the gas stations was clearly about gas stations
Stock bridge is inside Atlanta's sprawl

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/02/42/65/image_65422.gif

Wow. 17 counties?

WHich metro have the most counties? Looks, like atlanta have the most, with 17. Chicago only have 9( 6 in Illinois, 2 in Indiana, and 1 in Wisconsin)

But also Remember Georgia has the smallest counties, or at least some of the smallest. It is crazy how small some of them are, especially when compared to some of the Western states. And there is talk of even making some of them smaller!

Also remember that for some reason that mostly all of the states west of the mississippi river are abnormally larger than the eastern ones. Greater Atlanta also has one or two alabama counties.

Seriously, Greater Atlanta is now strech into Alabama, or you are joking?

I don't think he was joking, but there are no Alabama counties in the Atlanta metro. Not yet.....

Heres my rough boundries of the NYC metro area:
Red - core urban area
Black - metro area
Blue - Greater metro area

http://tinypic.com/95v1iq.jpg

Wow. 17 counties?

WHich metro have the most counties? Looks, like atlanta have the most, with 17. Chicago only have 9( 6 in Illinois, 2 in Indiana, and 1 in Wisconsin)

Atlanta has 20, But only a little over 5,000 square miles, and yes once agian we have very tiny counties compared to other states. And Chicago is 13 counties and almost 7,000 square miles.
1 Bartow County
2 Carroll County
3 Cherokee County
4 Clayton County
5 Cobb County
6 Coweta County
7 DeKalb County
8 Douglas County
9 Fayette County
10 Gwinnett County
11 Henry County
12 Newton County
13 North Fulton County
14 Paulding County
15 Pickens County
16 Rockdale County
17 South Fulton County
18 Spalding County
19 Walton County
20 Barrow County

Houston is sprawled out in all directions. The furthest out is West Houston and Katy, Northside by 30 miles in both of those directions. It has less sprawl to the east because of the ports and energy refinerys there. Also it sprawls to the south by about 15 miles because Brzoria County has a lot of swamps. But it does sprawl 50 miles all the way southeast out to Galveston.

the Mobile Area is sprawling out too. towards Baldwin County and up north in Mobile County.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2b/Mobile_alabama.jpg

http://mcepersonalreach.com/maps/states/alabama/images/mobile.gif

idonno buddie. chicago can put up quite the fight on this one. from Kenosha to Michigan City is nearly 125 mi. and most prob. in the next 20-30 years you can double that distance becouse your going to have to add southbend (southwest)and millwakee otherwise known as Chicago,WI.(to the north) onto the equation totaling at somwere around 230mi. of strait sprawl

dude trust me, i live in redlands and its 68 miles to downtown Los angeles,
then from downtown to oxnard up north is about another 70 or so....
its pretty far. and its nothing but homes and city after city. no lie****

<Double post>

The Little Rock metro area seems to be experiencing most of its growth in the west and southwest parts of the area. There is very little "sprawl" east though residential developers are trying to build that way. Though there is not much in the way of a push toward the northwest and northeast, two bedroom communities (Cabot and Conway) within a 30 mi radius of the city are booming.

Only one thing, if New Orleans want a united Metro.

Fill in lake pontchartrain :lol: :banana2:

My offical thoughts about the Chicago metro sprawl as the years go on...
(ignore the X's)

Amazing what can happen in a year. Katrina only hit a few weeks later.

Maybe we are overstating it just a bit. I just drove through Atlanta today and the development definately went from suburban to rural at Villa Rica. Thats 30ish miles from downtown. It also began around Braselton on 85 and I know that it ends in Cumming on the 400. While the counties in the CSA go out 70 miles, the development does not go out more than 30 or so.

Houston was a bit overdone too.
-Unless Lake Conroe counts, The Woodlands is the last suburb to the north and is 36 miles out.
-Cinco Ranch is 25-30 west not counting the small "gas station towns" of Brookshire and San Felipe.
-Victory Lakes in League city is 27 or so southeast. I consider this the last "Houston" suburb before the bay cities and Galveston begin.
-Southwest, they go for 31 miles and stop just before Richmond.

These are some major cities form the same zoom level. The closer the streets, the denser the development. This is easier than trying to estimate based on counties in MSA/CSA.

Atlanta:
http://img1.maps.vip.mud.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=__7LFud6wXUX8cfkzRFUu0036eJUtbIigNyeKLZl9tebjZ5qyWJyK9UgtkVbaEg1JY6N_YVytFQ7Hn1EUJCXCVBcBnhmCkGfBhRXv2YhDDYsyNtG5lM31OViFkzOj6afeowhbO6br6.pny2.FmxnxzAeUuvAtDkw

Houston:
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=kSql9.d6wXWVu__nh1M1GPvd49aCuyI4bbwBzqbj.RjGZpD2QEXNfDH7lFO3P8BEI4GiHR.08OYv6Qn6aIemEbtVZh4cmIzoBozUoJ3.wvKUp3p.CguipMEmW3JIaacGeFz1WMgq0Ndg8_.i7mSjRTrNHlobWQ--

Phoenix:
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=XMZTf.d6wXXa0ptcjjvUhHKrnBKDSsaybZ3.YdPQqBVQ7hR.jAPsuc0C9lQ6uqYLuXCFpK9R3Q2Rr4exPfPJ9twFZ.9KV5PckBiYeQ7iFLFE.i6HnH3brmhIqZhR_xBlUg6qitDH.KwrHyY89FWa1u7N2XY0YFAIR2U-

Charlotte:
http://img1.maps.vip.mud.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=CnuVbed6wXXxLjntvL5FOjPAbOZKZWscUVuGvwzoepH.RolEwPmadlSKv_FLJP23WdM51eU0xWubESBGiel9ind5bdaLq_GEO0vPy3iyFe7To40JZXW.ow81RtdJy3mFYWNQhd5ZL6blN6bnc7Nk4H2a36akUA--

Milwaukee:
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=UN.NfOd6wXWddIIJIPI0YxxpiEAeAp7rQ2VKXpvKerUhgrMfp01.7w51UHi0FgRMHFuHnqxUFCbYHAp5P2gbvtlpIpWA4DgzKuLxZg_wOpeyllmO_aDVGwNYVZK..j0pf37xaBt.qpFAmj8NkuWAUhDUrl9WlSIU

Detroit:
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=7MlVhOd6wXU6NmGnnrQZBnW2wvZBqTqKwi_KwMkromPzGGCp.WTiW0Ma5boe6pmPJvWIGourPhJQWPWF80iE4s9dPgNWrcUIyS0jYYNIQhrQl5BkrKgPUxfsKlxCye.3QQqseqoa296rFjy1jORP0NGvoh9JVO6k

Dallas:
http://img1.maps.vip.mud.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=IuHEY.d6wXX6I0AlEBl3OX5.U_j9asEbNhfRd3CxO.fWOJsgT5nCrGYvmgPG7K8Ancb.Y68Q7eftbV5Z9WB8cJ82zWhyCHUiPHRoSvh.36Qo9WENE6Oi7VRnoZOPI3zfYOUkigl5ZuEx5IA_.8QcCIk1plg46w--

Austin:
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=aquoJ.d6wXXjHZcMWZ6Mnr6lW_NE_B8sc4siwDwxeH2KcSprchH9Mf2uoQ6mHnWLChJTT75Q0L2xyVbl8xIhZ8Ww3XuLx5mmE0e0SU0ruiOKxT1ZNFip8.79BB9USqkeSKkIqYYxa8nK_dEjj0I.5ZynknM7gA--

Here is Dallas again but this time with FW.
http://image.maps.yahoo.com/mapimage?MAPDATA=SNKfrOd6wXV7VugyANCU0k7U9vg6xOCznzGMNrADF03_7UmWsl6vy8PR8w31tZvqbhzyGlJ2X3RTTbECIF2BAGbPC9kI7Nq8nOF0tf4ubfcfJs5mS77oleklSTBNgaNtlPXydH.xUFxA5fupkDzAK98UgA_X5g--

Hartford sprawls about 20 miles each way, in all directions....

The sprawl is indistinguishable from New Haven or Springfield's suburbs...

But unlike those, I could be 30 miles away and still be considered in the Hartford MSA, although most of the land is farms.

Heres my rough boundries of the NYC metro area:
Red - core urban area
Black - metro area
Blue - Greater metro area

http://tinypic.com/95v1iq.jpg


hey Asohn your image isnt showing

Florida City / Homestead, FL to Jupiter, FL is over 100 miles of nonstop linear development within the Miami / Fort Lauderdale / West Palm Beach metropolitan area. Suburban development north along the coast continues for several more miles, although it is technically not within the metro area and is does not extend many miles inland. Almost all of the area is suburban/urban dense development (in the style of Los Angeles) as opposed to Atlanta's largely suburban/exurban development. Since much of the area has already built out to the Everglades (and therefore cannot grow more west), densification is happening. An extreme example is Tao, twin 26 story residential towers about 20 miles west of Fort Lauderdale (but within walking distance of the Performing Arts Center and Sawgrass Mills mall) that have views of the Everglades National Park.

PITTSBURGH

Pittsburgh doesn't sprawl much compared to a lot of other cities, but I have noticed infill in the past 20 years. A lot of the sprawl seems to occur along the I-79 corridor from Washington to Zelienople, a 55-mile stretch. I figure that I-79 facilitates it for two reasons:

- It's the major Interstate that passes closest to downtown Pittsburgh
- It's the closest major Interstate to Pittsburgh International Airport

The sprawl along I-79 seems to form two "spokes" that run to the north-northwest and the southwest. There also seems to be another "spoke" forming that runs east-southeast to southeast, roughly following U.S. 30 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-76), but it's not filling in as rapidly as the I-79 corridor. (This is probably due to U.S. 30 being an arterial, and the Turnpike having extremely limited access.) I think the next area to fill in will be west of the city, along U.S. 22/U.S. 30 and the future I-576. Once the Findlay Connector (part of I-576) opens, I expect development around the airport to really take off (pun probably intended). It also wouldn't surprise me if areas north of the city along the PA 8 corridor get developed soon. Suburban Pittsburgh has already taken over southwestern Butler County, so southcentral Butler County seems like the logical next step. Development has already leapfrogged the Turnpike near PA 8 in extreme northern Allegheny County.

Here's a rough list of towns that built up within Pittsburgh's "spokes" of development (as well as projected future developed areas):

I-79 NORTH: McCandless, Franklin Park, Wexford, Marshall Twp., Warrendale, Pine Twp., Richland Twp., Cranberry Twp., Seven Fields, Evans City, Zelienople.

I-79 SOUTH: Carnegie, Heidelberg, Robinson Twp., Peters Twp., Bridgeville, Collier Twp., Upper St. Clair, McMurray, Southpointe, North Strabane Twp., Canonsburg, Eighty Four, Washington.

PA TURNPIKE/U.S. 30 EAST: Monroeville, Murrysville, Penn Twp., Trafford, Jeanette, Greensburg, Hempfield Twp., New Stanton, Latrobe.

FINDLAY CONNECTOR: Moon Twp., Oakdale, Imperial, Clinton, McDonald Twp., Midway, Bavington.

I expect the majority of Pittsburgh's sprawl to occur to the west and southwest in future years, especially as I-576 gets built all the way to the Mon-Fayette Expressway (PA 43). It will intersect U.S. 22 in McDonald Twp., I-79 between Bridgeville and Canonsburg (near the Allegheny/Washington county line and Southpointe), and the Mon-Fayette Expressway near Finleyville. It may also accelerate in the far northwest in southern Beaver County. This is due to the I-376 designation being extended out to Pittsburgh International Airport, and then up the Beaver Valley Expressway (PA 60) to the Turnpike.

ATLANTA

Atlanta's sprawl is probably well-documented here. Using the Interstates as guides, here are the boundaries as I see them:

I-75 NORTH: Acworth
GA 400 NORTH: Cumming
I-985 NORTH: Flowery Branch
I-85 NORTH: Buford
GA 316 EAST: Dacula
U.S. 78 EAST: Loganville
I-20 EAST: Conyers
I-75 SOUTH: McDonough
I-85 SOUTH: Peachtree City
I-20 WEST: Villa Rica

And by 2020:

I-75 NORTH: Cartersville
GA 400 NORTH: Dawsonville
I-985 NORTH: Gainesville
I-85 NORTH: Braselton
GA 316 EAST: Winder (or Athens if GA 316 becomes limited-access)
U.S. 78 EAST: Monroe
I-20 EAST: Covington
I-75 SOUTH: Griffin
I-85 SOUTH: Newnan
I-20 WEST: Carrolton

I don't get it!

Only one thing, if New Orleans want a united Metro.

Fill in lake pontchartrain :lol: :banana2:

My offical thoughts about the Chicago metro sprawl as the years go on...
(ignore the X's)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v694/puiko/estimate.gif

Is this reasonable or am I crazy(again about the sprawl)

LOL! You are majorly crazy. With gas prices going through the roof I doubt(and hope) that the Chicago metro won't sprawl past the yellow line, if that much.

If they built some high-speed passenger ferries from Michigain City to Chicago, sprawl spreading north to Michigian wouldn't be too unreasonable.

By 2030-2040 Chicago/Milwaukee/Rockford will be one combined metro, maybe even South Bend. There is probably no more than 5-10 miles in between Chicago and Milwaukee (urban area) and about 15-20 miles between Chicago and Rockford right now. Madison on the other hand is pretty far out. I can't see that happening in my lifetime. Maybe in 50 years or more.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/chicagogeorge/chicagometromilwaukee.gif
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/chicagogeorge/bigmap.jpg

http://www.geosimulation.org/pictures/chicagosim.gif

LOL! You are majorly crazy. With gas prices going through the roof I doubt(and hope) that the Chicago metro won't sprawl past the yellow line, if that much.

Yes, it is already happening no need to wait for 2015, it is sprawling in 2006 :runaway:
Gas prices, next few years, it will be legacy! :)

milwaukee is sprawling so bad towards chicago...so many new ugly developments are going up near the racine/I-94 area..its so sick.

I suggest that Atlanta needs abother Beltway for the future, like an 80 miles diameter around Atlanta soon.

Its so bad in Chicago, that Chicago extending a major spur in the south suburb. from Bolingbrook to New Lenox(use the map I provided).

Don't forget about Naperville! It is near as you have mentioned the area around Bolingbrook to New Lenox, its territory has passed over I-55!!! Crazy sprawl for a city that is ranking #2 on the best place to live in US! :cheers:

BTW, that map you provided is outdated, you can really tell by the size of current naperville to that map!!!

milwaukee is sprawling so bad towards chicago...so many new ugly developments are going up near the racine/I-94 area..its so sick.

Carlos Lee is Panamanian! Nice signature you've got.

Carlos Lee is Panamanian! Nice signature you've got.

the brewers are so dumb. do not get me started!!! :bash:...no but its sad when milwaukee pays 104093485034985 dollars for a new stadium..wait plus another million for the crane collapse, so the brewers can suffer more another year of a losing season...its still early but brewers fans are getting tired of losing seasons.

I wonder when Dallas and Fort Worth will start growing to the south. As of right now, most of the metros growth is to the North towards the Texas-Oklahoma state line.

Wow. 17 counties?

WHich metro have the most counties? Looks, like atlanta have the most, with 17. Chicago only have 9( 6 in Illinois, 2 in Indiana, and 1 in Wisconsin)
Counties get smaller and smaller as they go east.

To make this short, Seattle sprawls obviously up and down the Puget Sound. It's long and skinny and the Cascades to the east and water to the west inhibit horizontal sprawl.

Stop picking on my posts, it is from a year ago. :)

Imagine, the day if I-39 some day is a suburban highway instead of the rural and farm by pass of Milwaukee and Chicago. Hopefully, I-39 and I-43 will not be a suburban (of Chicago) highway in the future.

Stop picking on my posts, it is from a year ago. :)

Imagine, the day if I-39 some day is a suburban highway instead of the rural and farm by pass of Milwaukee and Chicago. Hopefully, I-39 and I-43 will not be a suburban (of Chicago) highway in the future.

No prob! :)
I admire your imagination on sprawling pattern of Chicago tho! However, I would have to say that in 2015-45, Chicago will be such a mega metropolis center that sprawling suburbanites will starting to change their sprawly mind and came to urban sensed....remember the dome concept of futuristic metro? Chicago metro is going to be in one huge dome with supertalls peaking all over its top! :scouserd:

Dallas-Ft. Worth:
-91 miles from Weatherford(west suburb of Ft. Worth), to Royse City(farthest suburb of Dallas to the east)!!
-70 miles from Denton(northern most suburb of Dallas-Ft. Worth), to Waxahachie(southern most suburb)!!

In my opinion,I think The Greater L.A Area is the most sprawled out area in the country and sooner or later it will merge with San Diego County...

The Bay Area also has an enormous sprawled out area as well.

Wow. 17 counties?

WHich metro have the most counties? Looks, like atlanta have the most, with 17. Chicago only have 9( 6 in Illinois, 2 in Indiana, and 1 in Wisconsin)

17 counties is great but for comparison 1 chicago county is more pop. that all 17 together.

Cook County is a county located in the U.S. state of Illinois. As of 2000, the population was 5,376,741, making it the second largest county by population in the United States (after Los Angeles County, California).

Atlanta is the capital and most populous city of Georgia (U.S. state). It is the county seat of Fulton County, although a portion of the city (the 1909 annexation) is located in DeKalb County. According to the July 2005 census estimate, the city has a population of 470,688 and the Atlanta metropolitan area totaled 4,917,717.

Another comparison.

The Chicago Consolidated Statistical Area (or, in full, the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City CSA) had a population of 9,312,554, according to the most recent census in 2000. Based upon county estimates released in March 2006 from the Census Bureau, the population by 2005 had increased to 9,661,840.

Another comparison.

The Chicago Consolidated Statistical Area (or, in full, the Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City CSA) had a population of 9,312,554, according to the most recent census in 2000. Based upon county estimates released in March 2006 from the Census Bureau, the population by 2005 had increased to 9,661,840.

Thanks for da update bnk!

Detroit sprawls a little over 50 miles from north to south and about 65 from east to west. The southernmost extension of Detroit's sprawl is Flat Rock/Rockwood, while the northernmost extension is Lake Orion/Oxford. The easternmost extension is New Baltimore while the westernmost extension is Howell.

Miami sprawls 126 miles north to south and 41 miles east and west.It is also in the top most dense cities in the united states.Its extreamly dense.Miami Has the number three spot for number of high rises in the metro area only following new york and chicago. Miami has 1,447 high rise buildings in the metro and has the biggest building boom in the united states right now with hundreds more under construction and aproved all over the metro.another strange fact Miami uses more water per person than any city in the united states by far."hum I wounder why" :uh: .Another fact more than half the people that live in Miami are born in other counties outside of the united states."Fact" it is the largest tourist destination in the united states next to new york."Fact" A huge number of people in Miami dont have papers.This may or may not matter but Fact Miami often has the most chat rooms open on aol.Fact Miami has one the most amount of postings on this site in its own Miami room.the suposed population is near 6 million.In my opinion I beleave there is even much much more based on studying many of the facts.

Interestingly no major part of the San Francisco Bay Area really sprawls. San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose (is the radio on?) are all trapped by hills and water. The Silicon Valley's boundries seem to get bigger and bigger each time I check.

Dallas-Ft. Worth:
-91 miles from Weatherford(west suburb of Ft. Worth), to Royse City(farthest suburb of Dallas to the east)!!
-70 miles from Denton(northern most suburb of Dallas-Ft. Worth), to Waxahachie(southern most suburb)!!

thats just wrong..its 91 miles from downtown chicago to downtown milwaukee

Another strange fact Miami uses more water per person than any city in the united states by far. I think this is a result of our large amount of golf courses and the fact that a walk to you're mailbox can make you want to take a shower.

I think this is a result of our large amount of golf courses and the fact that a walk to you're mailbox can make you want to take a shower.

LOL, and don't forget the pool! Instead of taking a shower, I jumped into pool to cool off! :) Man, I missed my days living in Miami... :cheers:

Driving along Lake Michigan, from downtown Chicago to downtown Milwaukee (about 90 miles) you pass through a chain of suburbs along with Waukegan, Kenosha and Racine. It's really evident on that drive, more so than I-94, that there isn't any wide open space left between the cities. When you add the Northern suburbs of Milwaukee and Chicago sprawl into Indiana....that's some sprawl!

L.A. and N.Y. are probably the biggest sprawlers though. The whole East coast from N.Y. , through Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore and D.C. seems like one huge sprawl when you drive it.

My beloved Fargo, ND has sprawled out of control. With a population of 92,000, Fargo has sprawled out almost 5 miles in every direction from downtown. In the process of becoming the greatest urban center in eastern North Dakota, Fargo has also become a regional center for foreigners and other minorities who now account for almost 4% of the population. (Back in the good-old-days (1960s), Fargo was 100% white non-Hispanic.)

Has anyone seen Fargo lately? It almost resembles a major city like Des Moines or Sioux Falls. And it's growing by nearly 1% a year! Someone please save the beautiful city of Fargo from becoming another Los Angeles before it's too late!!! :omg:

Well, my city [Coeur d'Alene, ID] is kind of limited on how far it can expand. It is surrounded mostly by water to the south and mountains to the east and other cities to the north and west. I guess it could expand on to Blackwell Island, and onto the shores of Lake Coeur d'Alene (to the South). Right now, it is expanding ^^up^^. The metro area (140,000/575,000) will eat up the Rathdrum Prairie and Kootenai county will probably max out at 400,000 by 2100.

It does sprawl all the way from LA to San Diego except for Camp Pendleton. BUT from San Clemente to Oceanside is a good 20 miles. It will never merge because Camp Pendleton is so huge

San Diego is 51 miles North to South (Oceanside to San Ysidro).

35 to the north and 16 to the South.

And 25 miles to the East (alpine).

It does sprawl all the way from LA to San Diego except for Camp Pendleton. BUT from San Clemente to Oceanside is a good 20 miles. It will never merge because Camp Pendleton is so huge

Well isn't it based on commuting patterns?

A good deal of people commutte from OC and Riverside counties to San Diego.

Why do most cities sprawl west and north more?

Chicago seems to be sprawling equally in all directions......


http://www.geosimulation.org/pictures/chicagosim.gif
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/chicagogeorge/bigmap.jpg

San Antonio, TX has historically sprawled more toward the North, but over the last 20 years, it's started to sprawl more west, and it looks like it's starting to pick up steam over the next decade. The South side has alot of great potential for sprawl with all the new economic development going on there. The East is by far the weakest.

San Antonio Sprawl...
Northeast - 40 miles
North - 35 miles
Northwest - 30 miles
West - 20 miles
Southwest - 10 miles
South - 10 miles
Southeast - 10 miles
East - 7 miles

Thanks to the new additions to the CSA...adding Providence and RI

...Boston now sprawls more than 100 miles north-south... :shocked:

Salt Lake City is essentially forced to sprawl north and south. The Wasatch Mountains block development to the east, and the Oquirrh Mountains (and further north, the Great Salt Lake) block development to the west. Despite this, in the Salt Lake Valley there's still some land to be filled in to the west, so it's still sprawling that direction.

Development expands about 20 miles to the south through the valley before hitting the Traverse Mountains. I'd say there's a big enough gap there to halt the official urban sprawl definition, but it's filling in fast enough around the "Point of the Mountain" (the pass that gets us through there) that it will soon sprawl south into Utah County (the Provo-Orem area). When that happens, the sprawl will extend for about 45 miles south all the way to about Payson. To the north, the sprawl extends for about 45 miles all the way north to North Ogden and Pleasant View. To the east, mountains stop the sprawl after about 5 miles (if even that) and to the west, the sprawl extend for about 12 miles or so, also constrained by the mountains. It's creeping westward and southward, and soon the entire stretch will extend for about 95 miles from Pleasant View on the north to Payson on the south. Maybe someday soon the gap between Pleasant View and Brigham City to the north and Payson to Santaquin on the south will fill in; that would make it, officially, 110 miles of complete sprawl north-to-south; east-to-west, however, it would remain about 20 miles (in many places even narrower than this). These future suburban sprawls to the north and south are realistic in the near future. For the moment, north-south it's only about 65 miles, though, although the gap to the south is rapidly filling in, which would make it 90 miles. It's a very narrow corridor to build along. Sprawl at the moment is mostly expanding to the west and south.

The suburban sprawl problems are being helped along with a new expressway that was constructed on the west side in the late 90s, and a new freeway is planned even further west anywhere from 5 - 15 years from now. The Legacy Highway is under construction parallel to I-15 from southern Davis County into northern Salt Lake City to relieve congestion. TRAX, the light rail, will soon add 4 lines in the Salt Lake Valley, and commuter rail is under construction from Salt Lake City to Pleasant View, and is expected to eventually run from Brigham City to Payson.

Indy tends to favor northern and southern sprawl.

Why do most cities sprawl west and north more?

Not sure about north, but west has historically been nicer areas of cities, and later suburbs. This is because winds and storm systems move east, so smoke, bad smells, and general pollution move over eastern neighborhoods, making their land values drop.

Not to many people know that Green Bay Metro, population 240,000 is only 5 miles away from the Appleton-Oshkosh Metro, which is 375,000. There is few farmland left between the 2 metros and they will eventually join. From the northernmost end to the southernmost end is at least 50 miles. Most of the cities are along the Fox River and a very narrow strip. In the future, Green Bay/Appleton/Oshkosh Metro will merge with Chicago/Milwaukee via the Hwy 41 corridor. This will not happen for many years, at least 50 years. All an all there will be one big Megalopolis in Chicagoland/IN/WI/MI.

http://www.inquinamentoluminoso.it/worldatlas/images/fig2.jpg

http://www.darksky.org/news/newsletters/40-49/cinzano.jpg

http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/slides/ast/places.gif

those maps are AWESOME!

This will give you a general idea of urban sprawl.

http://www.yosemite.org/naturenotes/images/CinzanoLarge1.jpg

I'd say the northwest for Philly

Hartford...the sprawl machine marches in ALL directions!

In the Baltimore-Washington-Northern VA CSA (4th largest CSA in the nation) most of the sprawl has been in Northern Virginia and to a lesser extent, east of the 95 Corridor in Maryland. Maryland has done a much better job promoting smart growth than Northern Virginia, the latter of which seems to think "growth at all costs" is an intelligent strategy. The result: "glorified office parks," gigantic highway backups and "mall culture."

As far as most spralled in the country overall, I would have to say LA. Chicago's metro area may be nearly an equivalent geographic size as LA's, but a large percentage of the land on the fringe of the Chicago Metro Area are actually farms that shouldn't really be counted in the metro area. By contrast, the LA basin is almost completely filled in because LA's population is double that of Chicago. When one compares the geographic size of the metro area to the population size of the largest anchoring city, I think DFW or Atlanta is the most spralled.

Some of you are talking about the combination of cities like Milwaukee and Chicago in 25 years. In 25 years, BOSWASH will be one CSA stretching from Boston to Washington (including Providence, New York, Philidelphia and Baltimore). Another 25 years after that we may have "Chi-Pitts" (or more appropriately "Pittswaukee") extending from Pittsburgh to Chicago (or Milwaukee as the case may be). This megalopolis would contain Cleveland, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Milwaukee, Toledo, Indianapolis, Columbus, Cincinatti and possibly Buffalo and Toronto.

I hope all reading this thread realize sprawl is always a bad thing. It decreases the overall efficiency of the city by forcing utlities, roads etc to extend to a greater geographic area while serving a population that is only minutely larger.

Yeah, I think my city (Los Angeles) takes the cake. If you drive nonstop from Redlands (in the Inland Empire) to Simi Valley (in Ventura county), you will drive 100 miles in pure sprawl, nonstop city with no breaks inbetween. Nowhere will you see an empty field. The same thing goes if you drive from San Clemente (southernmost Orange County) to Simi Valley.. you get 100 miles of city after city after city with no fields, greenbelts, or any sort of breaks inbetween. :)

http://img284.echo.cx/img284/7288/sprawl5vx.jpg



yeah that is true because when i went to NYC and drove back to washington
not even 20 min on the freeway and it started to feel like i was in a forest i felt seperated from the city
maybe because i am used to the L.A sprawl

^^ Yeah, but behind those trees are thousands of cookie-cutter homes and businesses.

This is a great thread, but I still find it hard to believe that Calgary is so highly rated regarding sprawl.
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-11/top10sm.jpg
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2004/112-11/topworldsm.jpg

I was in Calgary a few years ago, and was impressed with how compact the metro area was. Outside of the dense city center are low to medium density neighborhoods, but then development ends at a seemingly clearly defined point with farms fields or ranch land beyond. Maybe this is just indicative of how little competition US cities have in this unenviable ranking.

The people in Seattle are really environmentally friendly and anti-sprawl, but most of the people outside certainly are not. The sprawl is pretty bad, and it's going up the foothills, which sucks, because instead of looking over and seeing trees, you see housing developments. Also, if you're flying in on a plane, you can really tell how the natural areas of the cascades are taking over. King County is definitely not the environmental steward it pretends to be.

My city sprawls out West and North the most. I think most cities sprawl that way more, too. Houston's southside is picking up a hell of a lot of steam. Pearland, Texas (southside of Houston) doubled in just 10 years. It is now about to top 100,000 by the 2010 census (or closely after it). This area is just 10-15 miles south of Downtown. The westside goes out about 35 miles and the north side goes out about 43 miles. Southwest is also a closer in suburb of Houston. The northeast is also like the southside. Very close in and booming. Plus, they have the forests there instead of the creeks and plains of the southside. The eastside is where most of the chemical factory workers live. Homes are cheaper there and it is one of the most forested parts of Houston. It sprawls about 27 miles east. Houston is very well rounded in its sprawl.

^^ Houston is crazy!

From Google Earth, I saw that it sprawls almost 50 miles from east to west.

That is almost half the size of my entire state!

North and South is over 90 miles.

Raleigh proper sprawls north, around Umstead State Park, for optimal access to the Research Triangle Park. The suburbs (Cary, Apex, Morrisville, Fuquay-Varina, Garner) are mostly southwest, again around Umstead, for RTP access.

http://www.aaroads.com/about/images/sacramento_map.gif

sacramento stretches in all directions.

by popular belief, rancho cordova and a bit further east is still considered part of the city. rancho is about 20-25 miles away from downtown.

to the south is elk grove, which is officially it's own city, but is close enough to sac to be considered part of it. it's a good 15 miles away.

to the north and northeast are arcade and citrus heights.

and of course to the west is west sacramento, which is very much it's own city, but, like elk grove, is pretty much attached to sacramento.

I just calculated it...

From east to west, Hartford sprawls nearly 27 miles...from Bristol to Manchester...

And from north to south, it sprawls from 24 miles...from Cromwell to Windsor Locks..

Wow...pretty sprawling for a Northeastern metro with 1.3 million people...Hartford is actually more sprawled than either Dallas, Houston, or Phoenix. It is denser than Atlanta, suprisingly...

isnt the LA's DT on a fault line?

Why does everyone think Los Angeles is the only city in the world that has earthquakes? 2/3 of the world's population lives in a seismically active zone. Ever heard of a country called Japan? Did an earthquake not hit Hawaii a couple weeks ago? Gee, that's not L.A.
The last major earthquake to hit Los Angeles was 12 years ago.

What exactly defines a metro area aside from just visual development? Media markets? Broadcast TV/radio ranges? Where do Los Angeles' suburbs end and San Diego's begin? where do Chicago's suburbs end and Milwaukee's begin? same with SF and Sacramento?

Chicago gets some earthquakes, too. There was a 4.3 a few years ago (2004) that knocked down some building material of off some skyscrapers.

More recently, an earthquake with an epicenter in Ottawa, Illinois, registering about 4.3 on the Richter scale shook some buildings in Chicago on June 28, 2004.

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago#Climate)

Chicago gets some earthquakes, too. There was a 4.3 a few years ago (2004) that knocked down some building material of off some skyscrapers.

More recently, an earthquake with an epicenter in Ottawa, Illinois, registering about 4.3 on the Richter scale shook some buildings in Chicago on June 28, 2004.

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago#Climate)


I must have missed it:dunno:

Plus the closest fault line to Chicago is New Madrid which is about 450 miles south of Chicago. If it were to go, St Louis, Nashville, and Memphis will be devastated, but Chicago, will only feel some rumbling.

http://www.showme.net/~fkeller/quake/images/shakemap1811.jpg

Rochester sprawls very much to the South - especially to North and South Carolina. It's where we keep most of our 20-30 year olds.

^I've always wondered why they like NC so much specifically. x_X

Chicago gets some earthquakes, too. There was a 4.3 a few years ago (2004) that knocked down some building material of off some skyscrapers.

More recently, an earthquake with an epicenter in Ottawa, Illinois, registering about 4.3 on the Richter scale shook some buildings in Chicago on June 28, 2004.

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago#Climate)

i felt that in milwaukee...it was real weak . my bed just kind of shook a bit. i had no idea what it was, i first thought maybe someone lit a firework down the road or something...but something told me to look online to see if it was earthquake,...and i was right! i found it before the news could even get on it. It was shown on the database that shows all earthquakes every ten minutes or so..

^I've always wondered why they like NC so much specifically. x_X
JOBS JOBS JOBS AND JOBS! Which we do not have in Rochester and NO SNOW which we do have in Rochester.

The people in Seattle are really environmentally friendly and anti-sprawl, but most of the people outside certainly are not. The sprawl is pretty bad, and it's going up the foothills, which sucks, because instead of looking over and seeing trees, you see housing developments. Also, if you're flying in on a plane, you can really tell how the natural areas of the cascades are taking over. King County is definitely not the environmental steward it pretends to be.

You're seeing the remnants of how we did things before growth management. Today, sprawl has been heavily reduced outside a certain line. This is true to some extent in all heavily populated Washington counties, but King County is way ahead because we had growth management before the State mandate.

Columbus, OH was originally shaped like a cross, but then the east and north sides began absorbing all the growth. Then the east side atrophied. Now the city looks like the symbol for "woman," a circle with a cross on the bottom where the east, south and west sides used to be.

I must have missed it:dunno:

Plus the closest fault line to Chicago is New Madrid which is about 450 miles south of Chicago. If it were to go, St Louis, Nashville, and Memphis will be devastated, but Chicago, will only feel some rumbling.

http://www.showme.net/~fkeller/quake/images/shakemap1811.jpg

Yah, in Indianapolis our windows would probably bust, and thats nothing compared to what would happen to poor st.louis, let's hope that earthquake doesen't happen for a LONG LONG TIME. XP.
diden't that earthquake destroy all the 18th century buildings in St. Louis.

OKC: About 50 miles east-west (Shawnee-Yukon). About 55 miles south-north (Norman-Guthrie).

Ugh. Sprawl. At least it isn't constant development. Towards the outer extremities the suburban additions are less patterned, and more random. And then there's a point where there's less development, more open countryside, and you can sort of feel that you're outside of the suburban home building area...

I think that Sprawl in Indianapolis, it's very confusing, alot of people want to live downtown now, and then there is people who want to live in the suburbs, so you go past downtown packed apartments and packed suburbs, and then half empty downtown buildings, and half empty suburbs, it is very mixed up.

Hey question, do you think after the next earthquake that buildings in that section of the midwest will be built to be earthquake resistent? Or will they be built from brick and morter agian? Becuase most buildings in the midwest are masonry(either stone or brick) and so if there was such a large earthquake all the masonry wouldn't hold up to that strong of an earthquake in St.Louis.

I think that Sprawl in Indianapolis, it's very confusing, alot of people want to live downtown now, and then there is people who want to live in the suburbs, so you go past downtown packed apartments and packed suburbs, and then half empty downtown buildings, and half empty suburbs, it is very mixed up.

That's every city today. The urban trends are in motion, and the white flight is being reversed.

That's every city today. The urban trends are in motion, and the white flight is being reversed.


Yah, people it seems today want to live in the city. I think it's great that here in Indy people are moving back into the city, we have a high growth rate!
I guess it's a really popular trend to live in a condo in an old building downtown, the lifestyle, you ride your bike,walk, or take a bus or trolley everywhere, and you become part of the city, you work,play, and live downtown, that is the lifestyle for me!:)

Columbus, OH was originally shaped like a cross, but then the east and north sides began absorbing all the growth. Then the east side atrophied. Now the city looks like the symbol for "woman," a circle with a cross on the bottom where the east, south and west sides used to be.

True enough about that north side growth. There is some growth filling in on the east(Gahanna,Reynoldsburg, west/southwest(Hilliard, Grove City), and even a little southeast(Pickerinton, Canal Winchester). The result is a rectangle that is expanding more to the north and becoming longer, with the center city now in the middle of the southern third of the rectangle.

http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k40/toddguy/colmapimage.gif

http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/slides/ast/places.gif

What a pathetic map. Oh yeah, Atlanta is that tiny, despite the fact that the metro area looks and feels bigger than these so-called more spread out places. Total nonsense.

Well, maybe its becuase the smaller looking cities have higher densities.

http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/slides/ast/places.gif

What a pathetic map. Oh yeah, Atlanta is that tiny, despite the fact that the metro area looks and feels bigger than these so-called more spread out places. Total nonsense.

This map to me shows just how sprawled out our country is. The highest density shown in red cant be more than 10-15 thousand per sq mile and up. There are plenty of areas that arent really urban that are shown in red. Then you have the other colors which are basically all suburbs. The lowest density, the light blue, extends far beyond most urban cores, look at like Denver for example. Then look out how the whole eastern half of the country is light blue.

double post

Notice how the population just drops once it is past the Eastern half, I mean literally just drops.

It's a cool PHOTO! I do think ATL and some some other areas look
"dimmer" is because of time pics. It should be 2-3 times the area!
I'm from STL and know ATL should be larger than shown...Any current
photos...! They're still cool! Thanks

^^

Haha, that would be a horrible guage. NYC, which is made of five different counties, can fit into Los Angeles County fifteen times and still have plenty of room to spare.

Metro NYC covers 29 counties, but that's including Pike County, PA and Ulster County, NY, which can or cannot be considered part of the metro, depending who you ask.

It's a cool PHOTO! I do think ATL and some some other areas look
"dimmer" is because of time pics. It should be 2-3 times the area!
I'm from STL and know ATL should be larger than shown...Any current
photos...! They're still cool! Thanks

No crap. It seems like map-making companies ALWAYS want to slight Atlanta's size, and only Atlanta. I DO NOT understand this. Look at Rand McNalley. They have updated practically every other metropolitan area's urbanized span (in orange), but year after year fail to update Atlanta's. In fact, Atlanta's urbanized span in the Rand McNalley Atlas hasn't been updated since the early 80s.

I do give dibs to the "American Map" atlas for the true built-up, urbanized area for Atlanta. Rand McNalley seems to have an agenda against Atlanta.

It's a cool PHOTO! I do think ATL and some some other areas look
"dimmer" is because of time pics. It should be 2-3 times the area!
I'm from STL and know ATL should be larger than shown...Any current
photos...! They're still cool! Thanks


What is pitiful about that map is that it shows Atlanta to be smaller than St. Louis, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Seattle.

Anyone with a brain who has been to these places knows that Atlanta is much larger.

I do a lot of traveling, and the urbanized spans of these cities/metros are closer to this:

St. Louis (about 45 miles), but only along I-70 from St. Charles County to O'Fallon

Minneapolis: About 40 miles

Pittsburgh: Between 30-40 miles

Cleveland: 35-40 miles east west; 25 miles N-S, before a short break into the sliver of development down into Akron and Canton

Seattle: Long stretch from Olympia to Marysville/Smokey Point, but only about 15-20 miles east-west.

Atlanta: 70 miles N/S by 65-70 miles E-W

I also think that Houston is slighted on that map. In my travels, Houston and Atlanta are massive metropolitan areas, in the top seven, no doubt.

Having been to ALL major metropolitan areas in the U.S. and exploring them extensively, I'd say that the size factor/spread outness goes like this:

1 New York or Los Angeles (Can be debated: New York for one unsteady stream of development along the coast, but LA for the longest into interior stretch of development.

3. Chicago
4-6 Atlanta, Houston, or Dallas (close to the same size)
7. Detroit
8. Philadelphia
9. San Francisco Bay area
10. Washington D.C.
11. Miami/Ft. Lauderdale/W. Palm Beach
12. Phoenix
13. Seattle
14. Boston
15. Minneapolis/St. Paul
16. St. Louis

No crap. It seems like map-making companies ALWAYS want to slight Atlanta's size, and only Atlanta. I DO NOT understand this. Look at Rand McNalley. They have updated practically every other metropolitan area's urbanized span.

A couple of my issues with R McN is the different treatments given to their metro maps. Cities like Minneapolis-St. Paul have a full page, including the downtown close-ups, where as Philadelphia gets only a half page.
I also don't understand why Philly area townships of significant size and importance are not 'colored' like a New England town is on the Boston metro map. I wonder if Rand McNally understands the way Pennsylvania and New Jersey are set up and divided from a municipality standpoint.

Someone always dissing detriot. There metro is way larger than atlanta's. I have flown over Det. it is huge....

Nothing against minneapolis, but SPRAWL _/-^><> IN ALL directions lol. It has even become a 2-state metro.

Someone always dissing detriot. There metro is way larger than atlanta's. I have flown over Det. it is huge....

Detroit is more dense than Atlanta. (well except the actual city of Detroit with miles of empty lots). Atlanta and Detroit are both large, though Atlanta does spread out farther than Detroit, despite the fact that the developed area is not as densely built or populated.

Fly over Atlanta and you'll see the same things.

Nothing against minneapolis, but SPRAWL _/-^><> IN ALL directions lol. It has even become a 2-state metro.

That's not saying much when Wisconsin is less than fifteen miles away from the built-up area. I mean, the Twin Cities aren't that far away from Wisconsin.

A couple of my issues with R McN is the different treatments given to their metro maps. Cities like Minneapolis-St. Paul have a full page, including the downtown close-ups, where as Philadelphia gets only a half page.
I also don't understand why Philly area townships of significant size and importance are not 'colored' like a New England town is on the Boston metro map. I wonder if Rand McNally understands the way Pennsylvania and New Jersey are set up and divided from a municipality standpoint.
I'd have to agree. The Philly area is set up differently than other parts of the country. Actually, the Philly area gets slighted too seeing that half of our metro is being gobbled up by NYC.

Someone always dissing detriot. There metro is way larger than atlanta's. I have flown over Det. it is huge....

People always underestimate Detroit ( and Philly). The truth is although it has problems, it is still a very significant, large city with a huge metro area.

Yeah, DET and STL also...check any thread. Im alright with that .

:tongue4:

Detroit is more dense than Atlanta. (well except the actual city of Detroit with miles of empty lots). Atlanta and Detroit are both large, though Atlanta does spread out farther than Detroit, despite the fact that the developed area is not as densely built or populated.

Fly over Atlanta and you'll see the same things.

Okay, i agree that Atlanta does have a larger metro in land. If you look at the map it appears Atlanta is smaller in land area than Detroit. I googled it' and found that Atlanta is larger. Those maps are never accurate i guess. :)

This is another map that illustrates how freakin close chicago and milwaukee are getting.

This is another map that illustrates how freakin close chicago and milwaukee are getting.


You mean these maps?


http://www.advancedfertility.com/pics/image_map%20200.gif
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/chicagogeorge/chicagometromilwaukee.gif
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b8/chicagogeorge/bigmap.jpg

http://www.geosimulation.org/pictures/chicagosim.gif

Just went to Kansas City. It seemed that its sprawl almost connected with Lawrence's sprawl. Lawrence is about 40 miles from Kansas City and 27 miles to Topeka. Any chance the sprawl of Topeka will connect with the sprawl of KC?

OKC sprawls out all directions,just One BIG MESS!it is One of The worst Sprawl cities in America!

Orlando north , north east and east is the most but all directions as well
the city itself is not that big but the region is huge and we do have a small skyline for the size of our area

Orlando's sprawl is interwoven with Tampa and Daytona Beach/Coastal sprawl. IT is hard to know when you are leaving the Orlando area and entering another region's sprawl.

The St Louis area sprawls far in certain directions. For example, there is continuous development north and south from Godfrey, IL to Pevely, MO, which is a distance of 58 miles. But the most sprawled direction is along the axis that runs northwest to southeast through St Louis. From the western developments of Wentzville, MO, to the eastern subdivisions of Belleville, IL, it is about 65 miles.