Huh? Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land has 6,892,427 people living in 8,258 mi^2 for a population density of 834 people/mi^2 [1]. San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward h

Huh? Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land has 6,892,427 people living in 8,258 mi^2 for a population density of 834 people/mi^2 [1]. San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward has 4,727,357 people living in 2,474 mi^2 for a population density of 1,910 people/mi^2 [2]. That's remarkable, given the fact that the Santa Cruz Mountains make a lot of the land unsuitable for development, while pretty much everywhere around Houston that isn't part of the Gulf is suitable for sprawl. Also fun fact: Los Angeles easily beats both regions, with 13,353,907 people living in 4,848 mi^2 for a population density of 2,755 people/mi^2. L.A. is a lot more dense than people think. Weighted density is a better calculation, in any case. With those figures the sprawl of Houston becomes even more apparent: SF comes in at 2 of 34 (plus L.A. at 3 and San Diego at 9), while Houston is ranked 23 [4]. I grew up not far from Houston. Say what you will about Texans, but urbanists they are not. :) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Houston#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Houston#Demographics [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco%E2%80%93Oakland%E2%80%93Hayward,_CA_Metropolitan_Statistical_Area#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco%E2%80%93Oakland%... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_metropolitan_area#Demographics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_metropolitan_area#... [4]: https://austinzoning.typepad.com/austincontrarian/2008/03/weighted-densit.html https://austinzoning.typepad.com/austincontrarian/2008/03/we...