Select Cities by Elevation Gap between Lowest and Highest Points

[plinko]

The lowest point in Phoenix would be out by the Gila River, about 1,000ft. The highest point is Camelback Mountain at 2,704ft. Oddly, both would have been within city limits in 1980.

Downtown Phoenix sits at roughly 1,085ft.

[AviationGuy]

Based on more recent Houston city limits maps, I'm finding the difference to be about 140 ft, with many areas being at sea level, and with areas within the city limits on the northwest side being as high as about 140 ft. The incline is quite gradual and hard to notice. Within the MSA, though, are rolling to somewhat hilly areas, with higher elevations. The highest I could find was about 420 ft in northern Montgomery County northeast of Conroe near Waverly, but there are a lot of areas in the MSA over 300 ft. Going northwest along 249, for example, are rolling pine forests between Tomball and Magnolia, and a lot of suburban neighborhoods in that area are built in areas I find to be scenic. Many Houston residents who have been here all their lives have never ventured into the higher, rolling/hilly areas on the outskirts. The area around Lake Conroe is quite hilly and is developed around the shores.

Within the city, like within the loop, there's not much variation, although it's noticeable along thoroughfares that border the larger bayous, like Allen Parkway and Memorial Dr near downtown. I found a neighborhood off of Allen Parkway where you go up a nice incline to get into the neighborhood. Other than that, it's difficult to notice much variation at all (if any) if you're not close to a major bayou.

I haven't looked in detail, but I recall areas on the outskirts of Chicago (e.g., west and north) that were pretty rolling.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by BnaBreaker

Nashville's hills are one of my favorite features of the city, but I didn't think for a second it'd have the biggest elevation discrepancy of any city east of Utah!

I looked this up 10+ years ago and couldn't believe that Nashville has something 700 feet above the Cumberland River, but it's this lump of hills several miles south of the river and downtown:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Radnor..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUyMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

The well-known parts of Nashville aren't particularly hilly and the neighborhoods aren't built on top of hills or on their slopes. The hills are pretty dense west of Downtown but most of that is Cheatham County and that whole county has failed to add almost any population in the recent boom because road access is difficult and building sites are poor.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Radnor..._ep=EgoyMDI2MDUyMC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

That's why the sprawl keeps moving north, east, and south. West isn't available and Williamson County (southwest) has low-density zoning that has effectively banned new subdivisions. Most of the county is now zoned for five acres per house.

[IluvATX]

Anchorage is missing

[jmecklenborg]

^Chattanooga is missing, which runs away with the prize for the eastern United States. The lowest point is 620 and the highest is 2,400. More importantly, the city is one of the few with real neighborhoods built atop very high hills, tunnels bored through hillsides, etc.

Atlanta *could* have scored very high in this realm if the city had been founded closer to Stone Mountain, which is about 800 feet high. It would have been amazing if the city neighborhoods had grown to surround it. Instead, it's an anomaly that comes into view while circling 285.

[AviationGuy]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

^Chattanooga is missing, which runs away with the prize for the eastern United States. The lowest point is 620 and the highest is 2,400. More importantly, the city is one of the few with real neighborhoods built atop very high hills, tunnels bored through hillsides, etc.

Atlanta *could* have scored very high in this realm if the city had been founded closer to Stone Mountain, which is about 800 feet high. It would have been amazing if the city neighborhoods had grown to surround it. Instead, it's an anomaly that comes into view while circling 285.

On Austin's west and northwest sides, above the escarpment, many neighborhoods are built atop high, tree covered hills, with spectacular views of valleys, canyons, the Colorado River, and the city skyline. In other areas of the city, there's not much topographical variation except areas like Barton Hills, Travis Heights, and a few parts of downtown and the university area. North and East Austin in particular have boring topography, except in just a few spots.

[IluvATX]

Anchorage low point 0’ and high point 8005’. Clearly number 1 and as Honolulu is listed, this list seems to include all 50 state.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by benp

The river elevation is about 550' at the water intakes upstream of the falls, 500' at the crest, 320' at the base of the falls, 270' near the Lewiston-Queenston bridge, and around 230' at Lake Ontario.

Niagra Falls scared the hell out of me as a kid - everything about it. The river above, the falls, then the gorge, the whirlpool, the way the power plants cling to the sides of the gorge, the arch bridges, etc.

[muppet]

What's the most 'unlikely' city in the US? The kind of place built in unforgiving topography, and difficult for infrastructure, but in the end makes for urban drama.

I love how San Francisco is so hilly, and spans a giant bay that it's had to bridge multiple times.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by muppet

What's the most 'unlikely' city in the US? The kind of place built in unforgiving topography, and difficult for infrastructure, but in the end makes for urban drama.

Climate-wise, Las Vegas then Phoenix. In terms of topography, probably San Francisco. San Francisco as a big city wouldn't have been possible without the invention of cable cars.

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

I thought Denver and Phoenix would be higher but this is based on city limits from 1980, I wonder if Phoenix may have annexed land since then that makes their figure in this stat higher?

Elevation Gap(in Feet)
Between Lowest and Highest Point:
5,200'--Salt Lake City, UT
5,074'--Los Angeles, CA
4,020'--Honolulu, HI
2,125'--San Jose, CA
1,754'--Oakland, CA
1,073'--Portland, OR
934'----San Francisco, CA
823'----San Diego, CA
775'----Nashville, TN
700'----Tucson, AZ
674'----Austin, TX
660'----Pittsburgh, PA
564'----Birmingham, AL
527'----Cincinnati, OH
520'----Seattle, WA
495'----San Antonio, TX
489'----Baltimore, MD
479'----Cleveland, OH
441'----Philadelphia, PA
410'----New York, NY
409'----Washington, DC
385'----El Paso, TX
379'----Louisville, KY
367'----Long Beach, CA
348'----Atlanta, GA
340'----Denver, CO
330'----Boston, MA
312'----Omaha, NE
300'----Kansas City, MO
296'----Dallas, TX
293'----Minneapolis, MN
284'----Oklahoma City, OK
278'----Newark, NJ
265'----Charlotte, NC
253'----Ft Worth, TX
229'----St Louis, MO
220'----Milwaukee, WI
208'----Columbus, OH
190'----Tulsa, OK
181'----Indianapolis, IN
140'----Memphis, TN
128'----Buffalo, NY
102'----Phoenix, AZ
97'-----Detroit, MI
94'-----Chicago, IL
83'-----Houston, TX
40'-----Jacksonville, FL
33'-----New Orleans, LA
30'-----Miami, FL

https://www.usgs.gov/educational-resourc...ation-1980-census?utm_source=chatgpt.com

It would be nice to have the mean elevation above sea level for each city on the list, which would provide better context overall.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by muppet

What's the most 'unlikely' city in the US? The kind of place built in unforgiving topography, and difficult for infrastructure, but in the end makes for urban drama.

I love how San Francisco is so hilly, and spans a giant bay that it's had to bridge multiple times.

There are many American cities that are placed at locations that have major inherent difficulties JUST so that the founder had geographic control over a key choke point or crossroads:

New Orleans: sub-sea level swamps
Seattle: temperate rain forest hills
San Francisco: unstable dunes of sand and steep slopes and the fault lines
Pittsburgh: extremely hilly and landslide prone
Denver: high, unforgiving desert
Houston: a seasonally flooding bayou swamp
Miami: a swamp
Albuquerque: incredibly harsh desert
Oklahoma City: known to indigenous peoples as being cursed because of the frequent tornados (is any city and its surroundings hit as often and as hard?)
Los Angeles: the fault lines, the fire risk, the lack of water
Austin: the most flash flood prone major city in the country, high fire risk, challenging topography in major portions
San Antonio: the second most flash flood prone major city in the country, high fire risk
Las Vegas: impossible desert without Lake Mead

And so many more.

I’d challenge people on Phoenix though. That’s a great place for a major population center. It may be hot, but it’s a rich agricultural valley with a halfway decent water supply (did you know: Arizona uses less water today than it did in 1970?
Due largely to the transition away from agriculture in the Phoenix area). Also: It was a major indigenous center at one point, and the city layout is in keeping with the indigenous-built aqueducts.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by muppet

What's the most 'unlikely' city in the US? The kind of place built in unforgiving topography, and difficult for infrastructure, but in the end makes for urban drama.

I love how San Francisco is so hilly, and spans a giant bay that it's had to bridge multiple times.

Few U.S. cities have prewar neighborhoods built on sharply sloped topography. San Francisco and Pittsburgh have the most areas of this type. New York City (+New Jersey Palisades) has a fair amount, although the hills aren't as high.

Los Angeles has many homes built on its slopes, but they mostly aren't traditional neighborhoods. The homes that dot the Hollywood Hills over to Santa Monica stretch for many miles but there aren't any corner stores (that I'm aware of) up in those areas like a prewar neighborhood.

[PhillyRising]

The highest point in Philadelphia is correctly located on Summit Street in the Chestnut Hill section of the city....near the intersection of Germantown Ave and Bethlehem Pike.....

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Riverranchdrone

I can see Austin being higher than San Antonio but should not have a higher range than El Paso.

Austin lowest point is Onion Creek at city limits (382 feet) and the highest is near the Jester Estates neighborhood in far NW Austin (1,114 feet). Mt.Bonnell is only 785 feet above sea level. Most folks figure it is the highest spot in the city, but it's not.

The El Paso figure must be a mistake. Lowest point in El Paso is 3740 feet, and the highest is 7,192 feet at North Franklin Mountain.

[llamaorama]

This is an interesting topic. There's raw elevation and there's elevation difference. Some of the most impressive examples of topographic relief aren't necessarily also the absolute highest points.

IMO the mountains around LA and especially out by Palm Springs are really visually massive. San Jacinto and San Gorgonio Peaks are both 10,000 to 11,000 feet tall, and in between them is a deep valley that in some locations is actually below sea level. And around Cabazon that valley that I-10 goes through is only a few miles wide, and the mountains just go up on either side. Coming down that incline on I-10 where you drop like 1,500 feet is neat too.

You immediately feel the effect this has on the climate too. The weather can change from cool to really hot really fast. Also the smog cloud that is highly visible (like, it's so thick its almost billowy) that hangs over San Bernardino when you get closer to LA and are coming down into that valley is kind of weird.

Obviously Mt Rainier is another example of this. 14,000 feet and if you are standing in Seattle you are at 0'. And the Olympic Mts are big too.

In contrast most of the Rockies doesn't look nearly as tall even if they have a lot of raw elevation. Pikes Peak is 14,000 feet but Colorado Springs is already at 6,000 and there's other smaller mountains in between, so it's not quite as tall looking from any given point. When you drive over I-70 or go somewhere like Breckenridge you are already high in elevation already at the valley floor so the peaks aren't necessarily as "way up there" subjectively speaking.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Los Angeles has many homes built on its slopes, but they mostly aren't traditional neighborhoods. The homes that dot the Hollywood Hills over to Santa Monica stretch for many miles but there aren't any corner stores (that I'm aware of) up in those areas like a prewar neighborhood.

Generally, no. There’s the Canyon Country Store in Laurel Canyon, but most people probably drive to it. Ditto for the Canyon General Store in Malibu Canyon and Canyon Gourmet in Topanga Canyon. That’s all I can think of.

[dave8721]

I was surprised to be Boston so high on the list. I knew they had some ~100 foot hills but 330 feet surprised me. The high point is way down in West Roxbury, I forget how far South the city limits extend.

[mrnyc]

while it has some hills and elevation, like up to cle hts, cleveland's appearance on the list is much more to do with its valleys and ravines.

the dropoff to the flats and the cuyahoga industrial valley is a biggie, as is the dropoff from downtown to lake erie.

also, the city parks network is dramatic as you can drop right down to a world away from the city and suburbs:

Cleveland's "Emerald Necklace" spans over 300 miles of connecting trails across the Cleveland Metroparks system. The elevations of these valley-hugging reservations primarily range from 600 to 1,200 feet above sea level, though the deep ravines frequently feature steep, 100-to-150-foot elevation changes.

Specific elevations and valley features for key reservations include: Rocky River Reservation: A deep valley cut by the Rocky River with steep shale cliffs. The valley floor sits around 573 feet, while the surrounding valley tops and reservations climb to about 627 to 1,200+ feet above sea level. Brecksville Reservation: Features rugged gorges carved by Chippewa Creek. Valley bottoms begin around 630 feet, and the high ridges of the reservation reach up to 1,050 feet above sea level. Euclid Creek Reservation: Includes the Eastern Ledge Trail with an overlook suspended 130 feet above the valley and creek below. Bedford & South Chagrin Reservations: Winding along the Chagrin River valley, trail elevations generally measure between 800 and 1,050 feet above sea level, depending on which scenic overlook or ridge you are exploring.

[bobdreamz]

Miami : a Swamp !!!

Well it's not completely a "Swamp"! This is the Silver Bluff neighborhood just south of Brickell and near Coconut Grove where Coral Limestone bluffs emerge near the shores of Biscayne Bay :


https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQl2hIpVabHu1TmEMExlsneTg-AibBAUuZfg&s


https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQl2hIpVabHu1TmEMExlsneTg-AibBAUuZfg&s