Karamay in context: Street-network sprawl trends

Karamay in context

2.433.64.2<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of street additions
2.433.64.2<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of entire street network
KaramayXinjiang Uygur (Region)China (Country)

The chart above shows SNDi trends for new street additions (left panel) and the entire network (right panel), with Karamay plotted against Xinjiang Uygur and China. The SNDi of new construction in Karamay fell steadily, compared to Xinjiang Uygur which followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase and China which followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase. Most recently, Karamay's incremental SNDi fell from 2.49 to 2.38 between 1991-2005 and 2006-2020. In terms of the aggregate network, Karamay ranked 16th out of 31 cities in Xinjiang Uygur and 701st out of 1843 in China as of 2020.

New Street Additions (2006–2020)

SNDi value
2.38
Rank in China
439th of 1843
Rank in Xinjiang Uygur
10th of 31

Entire Network (Aggregate)

SNDi value
2.64
Rank in China
701st of 1843
Rank in Xinjiang Uygur
16th of 31

Rankings go from most connected to most disconnected — rank 1 is the most connected.

What about similarly populated cities?

22.533.5<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of street additions
22.533.5<19751976–19901991–20052006–2020SNDi of entire street network
KaramayMahbubnagarLuoding

While Mahbubnagar and Luoding both fluctuated in its street-construction patterns, Karamay built increasingly connected streets over time in new street additions. Looking at the full network, Mahbubnagar and Luoding both fluctuated in connectivity, while Karamay became progressively more connected. Notably, Karamay had a more sprawly network than Mahbubnagar in 1975 but the two have since reversed their relative ranking.