Urban footprints

[dave8721]

Originally Posted by LA21st

There gaps in se Florida. Once you past palm beach it doesn't look that developed to me. I certainly don't see a 180 miles.

Jonathan Dickinson State Park makes a gap between Jupiter and Hobe Sound. Its over 120 miles from Homestead to Jupiter. There is the park and then another 50+ miles from Hobe Sound up to the northern edge of Fort Pierce where there is another little gap before Vero Beach.
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.0116.../data=!3m1!1e3

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by dave8721

Jonathan Dickinson State Park makes a gap between Jupiter and Hobe Sound. Its over 120 miles from Homestead to Jupiter. There is the park and then another 50+ miles from Hobe Sound up to the northern edge of Fort Pierce where there is another little gap before Vero Beach.
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.0116.../data=!3m1!1e3

But those are gaps. Not that it matters, I was just confused when he talked about Ventura's gaps, and Florida has the same thing And north of Palm Beach doesn't look that developed compared to the 101 Corridor, so I'm not sure why he considered that debatable.
Development thins out north of Palm Beach pretty hard.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by edale

Btw I'm not invested in 'winning' this contest. I could care less if LA has the biggest amount of uninterrupted sprawl. In fact, I consider it a point of shame rather than anything to be proud of.

Exactly. This is not a 'contest' one should want to win. The seemingly endless, flat artificial sprawl in S Florida is rather disgusting to me.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Once you past palm beach it doesn't look that developed to me.

Originally Posted by LA21st

Development thins out north of Palm Beach pretty hard.

I don't know how in any sane world, one could look at this map north of the Palm Beach area and assert, "it doesn't look that developed to me".

Yes, it starts to thin out compared in comparison to the southern portions of the stretch, but it's still quite substantial in terms of intense development of the land. And that's not the point anyway... it is part of the longest continuous stretch of development.

https://www.google.com/maps/@26.8411.../data=!3m1!1e3



Straight-line shot... ~110 miles of continuous development. Just north of Jupiter to Homestead/ Florida City area. Check it... Use the distance finder.

https://www.google.com/maps/@26.3592.../data=!3m1!1e3



Or via highway, ~130 miles of continuous development.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Jupi...25.4452724!3e0


And this is being conservative by putting the northern terminus in the Jupiter area, using the ~2-3 mile state park as an end of continuous development. And... it eliminates the fully-developed Jupiter Island along that stretch which connects the development with the Hobe Sound-Port St. Lucie area.

If one doesn't include that rather small state park stretch, then it goes another 60+ miles north to the Sebastian inlet area, where it then thins out to more sparse development and state park for about 5 miles before getting into the whole Melbourne, Cocoa beach, Titusville area... and then you pretty much just have nodal stretches of development (Daytona area, Palm Coast, St. Augustine, up to the Jax coastal areas) interspersed with natural lands on up the coast. Relatively thin areas stretching up the coast, yes.

[pj3000]

And since you can't do the same type of straight line distance measurement of continuous development in the greater LA area, without hitting into undeveloped mountain areas, let's just stick to the 101 highway...

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2221...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2183...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2011...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1505...7i16384!8i8192

Nothing this undeveloped exists in that 110 - 130 mile stretch in South Florida from Jupiter area to Homestead area.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by pj3000

And since you can't do the same type of straight line distance measurement of continuous development in the greater LA area, without hitting into undeveloped mountain areas, let's just stick to the 101 highway...

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2221...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2183...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2011...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1505...7i16384!8i8192

Nothing this undeveloped exists in that 110 - 130 mile stretch in South Florida from Jupiter area to Homestead area.

You said lets stick to the 101, and then show two pic from the 101? And that stretch is very small. Its like a field.
And that mountain range pass isn't large either. Maybe a mile? If you're driving through, anyone would said it's development then entire way. A mile stretch of undeveloped land isn't significant, as your argument was earlier.
Then you show some pics north and south of the 101? I might as well show the everglades in florida.

It's Banning (population 30,000) to Ventura. 152 miles.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I don't know how in any sane world, one could look at this map north of the Palm Beach area and assert, "it doesn't look that developed to me".

Yes, it starts to thin out compared in comparison to the southern portions of the stretch, but it's still quite substantial in terms of intense development of the land. And that's not the point anyway... it is part of the longest continuous stretch of development.

https://www.google.com/maps/@26.8411.../data=!3m1!1e3



Straight-line shot... ~110 miles of continuous development. Just north of Jupiter to Homestead/ Florida City area. Check it... Use the distance finder.

https://www.google.com/maps/@26.3592.../data=!3m1!1e3



Or via highway, ~130 miles of continuous development.

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Jupi...25.4452724!3e0


And this is being conservative by putting the northern terminus in the Jupiter area, using the ~2-3 mile state park as an end of continuous development. And... it eliminates the fully-developed Jupiter Island along that stretch which connects the development with the Hobe Sound-Port St. Lucie area.

If one doesn't include that rather small state park stretch, then it goes another 60+ miles north to the Sebastian inlet area, where it then thins out to more sparse development and state park for about 5 miles before getting into the whole Melbourne, Cocoa beach, Titusville area... and then you pretty much just have nodal stretches of development (Daytona area, Palm Coast, St. Augustine, up to the Jax coastal areas) interspersed with natural lands on up the coast. Relatively thin areas stretching up the coast, yes.

So it's not 180 miles.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by pj3000

And since you can't do the same type of straight line distance measurement of continuous development in the greater LA area, without hitting into undeveloped mountain areas, let's just stick to the 101 highway...

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2221...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2183...7i13312!8i6656

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2011...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1505...7i16384!8i8192

Nothing this undeveloped exists in that 110 - 130 mile stretch in South Florida from Jupiter area to Homestead area.

South Florida is pretty squished between alligators and sharks which makes it seems like a long thin line of uninterrupted development. Southern California has mountains but more wiggle room but i still found Ventura to LA proper more or less seemless minus a field or two here and there.

[pj3000]

^ so you’re claiming that from the northern terminus of the south Florida region (let’s be conservative and call it Jupiter/Tequesta area)to its southern terminus (Homestead/Fla City) is not 100% continuously developed?

It is. And this type of uninterrupted, continuous development simply does not exist in the LA area. If you can find it on the map where it displays this continuous development, I would seriously really like to know. And I will fully refute everything I’ve ever claimed here.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by LA21st

You said lets stick to the 101, and then show two pic from the 101? And that stretch is very small. Its like a field.
And that mountain range pass isn't large either. Maybe a mile? If you're driving through, anyone would said it's development then entire way. A mile stretch of undeveloped land isn't significant, as your argument was earlier.
Then you show some pics north and south of the 101? I might as well show the everglades in florida.

It's Banning (population 30,000) to Ventura. 152 miles.

I showed 4 picks from the 101 (one of them a couple hundred yards off of it to display that there is nothing but farmland there). That’s hardly akin to “showing the Everglades”. And that mountain pass is roughly 2 miles, about the same distance as the state park north of Jupiter FL before the Hobe Sound/Port St. Lucie area. If you don’t want to count something that’s “not that large”, then let’s have at... I’ll go 80% of the way to Georgia and have the map to back me up.

Give it up.

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I showed 4 picks from the 101 (one of them a couple hundred yards off of it to display that there is nothing but farmland there). That’s hardly akin to “showing the Everglades”. And that mountain pass is roughly 2 miles, about the same distance as the state park north of Jupiter FL before the Hobe Sound/Port St. Lucie area. If you don’t want to count something that’s “not that large”, then let’s have at... I’ll go 80% of the way to Georgia and have the map to back me up.

Give it up.

Agree to disagree. A tiny mountain pass and some fields wouldn't constitute significant undeveloped land, especially if you're driving through.It barely registers.
If 2.5 total miles is what you're basing this on, it's not convincing.

10?15? sure. That would make sense.

[pj3000]

^ I'm talking about continuous, uninterrupted development. Whether that gap is 2 miles or 10 miles, it's an interruption. That's it. There's no doubt that the LA area is wayyy bigger... it would be absurd of me to try to suggest otherwise.

I just don't know of anywhere else that has the length of continuous development that exists down the south Florida coast. And like I said above, it's not a trophy anyone should want to win. I much prefer some gaps and actual topography/natural land than what is present in FL.

[homebucket]

It really depends how you define "continuous" and "development". How short of a gap is acceptable for "development" to be continuous? Also, one could argue farmland is still development.

For the Bay Area, the longest stretch is from the northern parts of Napa County (Calistoga/St Helena) to the southern part of Santa Clara County (Gilroy), a distance of about 130-150 miles depending on where you measure from and to. It does get quite narrow in some parts though because of the topography, pinned in by the Bay and the Diablo Mountain Range.

The widest spot (East-West) is about 16-17 miles in San Jose, but on average it's about 4-5 miles. So ~130 miles x ~5 miles of development along this corridor.

https://goo.gl/maps/7XUJ3oNRy84wYDvq9

[LA21st]

Originally Posted by homebucket

It really depends how you define "continuous" and "development". How short of a gap is acceptable for "development" to be continuous? Also, one could argue farmland is still development.

For the Bay Area, the longest stretch is from the northern parts of Napa County (Calistoga/St Helena) to the southern part of Santa Clara County (Gilroy), a distance of about 130-150 miles depending on where you measure from and to. It does get quite narrow in some parts though because of the topography, pinned in by the Bay and the Diablo Mountain Range.

The widest spot (East-West) is about 16-17 miles in San Jose, but on average it's about 4-5 miles. So ~130 miles x ~5 miles of development along this corridor.

https://goo.gl/maps/7XUJ3oNRy84wYDvq9

If youre driving through that Ventura county you dont see development for a minute or so? And that field in Ventura is likely because the owner won't sell. Its not like it would just sit undeveloped.

[bossabreezes]

Originally Posted by edale

I'm just looking at a continuous urban footprint without interruptions for mountain passes or whatever. There is a development gap between between the western edge of the SF Valley and Thousand Oaks. You can see it right here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1644.../data=!3m1!1e3

There's another gap (pass) between Thousand Oaks and Camarillo:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.2136.../data=!3m1!1e3

No such gaps exist between Woodland Hills and Redlands.

If these were areas of woods and located in Charlotte, Raleigh or Atlanta; nobody would declare the gaps of this size to be the boundary of the metropolitan area.

Thousand Oaks, Newbury Park, etc are all still very much part of the Los Angeles Urban Footprint.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by bossabreezes

If these were areas of woods and located in Charlotte, Raleigh or Atlanta; nobody would declare the gaps of this size to be the boundary of the metropolitan area.

Thousand Oaks, Newbury Park, etc are all still very much part of the Los Angeles Urban Footprint.

No one is claiming that they are not.

He was just pointing out where the development is not continuous, i.e, gaps.

[dktshb]

Originally Posted by LA21st

/

From suburb to suburb 160 or more. Ventura/Oxnard to whatever.
I'd say 115 north to south.

Its basically a state.

Having the biggest footprint (sprawl) is not something to aspire to and even though LA is identified as sprawling so many other cities are worse especially when you factor in population and density.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by dktshb

Having the biggest footprint (sprawl) is not something to aspire to and even though LA is identified as sprawling so many other cities are worse especially when you factor in population and density.

A good example of "now *that's* sprawling" is the Houston area, from Willis to Galveston along the last 94 miles of I-45. The largest gap in that stretch is a swampy stretch between Dickinson and League City that is filling in -- with an outlet mall smack in the middle.

ETA: Playing the same eyeball game with Atlanta, I'm seeing 85 miles of built-up continuity along I-75, from the north edge of Cartersville to Locust Grove. Atlanta is trickier though.

Dallas-Fort Worth is pretty clear-cut: 76 miles along I-30 from Royce City to the west edge of Fort Worth, right before meeting I-20. However, that gap before reaching the Willow Park-Hudson Oaks-Weatherford tangle seems to be closing, and the west edge of Weatherford is an impressive thicket of exurbia. Once the Weatherford cluster is connected (~25 miles), DFW is a good 105 miles, if not more, of unending development.

[Centropolis]

yeah i mean LA being the second largest metro area in the US, it’s not that bad. Traffic actually seems to move better than Atlanta and at some point you hit mountains, desert, or the sea. Atlanta or Houston? yeah...

[Stay Stoked Brah]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Exactly. This is not a 'contest' one should want to win. The seemingly endless, flat artificial sprawl in S Florida is rather disgusting to me.

I don't think anybody wanted a competition. I think we all realize that the most contiguous uninterrupted area of the u.s. is in southern California or south Florida.

The longest continuous routes of so cal (sylmar to the border san ysidro) serves an overall population of about 18 million people vs. the longest routes of so Flo of about 6 million.