I'm guessing you're talking mainly about the outer richmond, outer sunset, and maybe the excelsior? There are a few truly suburban-ish spots in the hilly parts

I'm guessing you're talking mainly about the outer richmond, outer sunset, and maybe the excelsior? There are a few truly suburban-ish spots in the hilly parts in the middle of the city (like Monterey Heights, for instance), but I don't think those are very extensive. Population density of the outer sunset is: 16,489 Monterey heights: 9,639 btw, I'm getting these from http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Monterey-Heights-San-Francisco-CA.html http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Monterey-Heights-San-F... Now let's take a really sprawly place http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antioch,_California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antioch,_California about 3,500/sq mi This might not be completely fair, since I'm taking all of antioch whereas I'm doing SF in a neighborhood-by-neighborhood way... but all in all, I just don't think you can call any part of san francisco "suburban sprawl" without stretching the term beyond what people typically mean when they say it.