Gumi-si: city in Gyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea
What exactly constitutes the spatial extent of the city? For these aggregations, we used the Global Human Settlement Layer Urban Center Database (GHS-UCDB) to define the boundaries of the city. These cities -- or urban centers -- cover areas that are densely populated and built-up, and so may extend beyond the spatial borders of these cities that we may be familiar with. The GHS area is shaded in blue.
View Gumi-si, South Korea on the sprawlmap
Most recent snapshot: Taking into account the entire (i.e. aggregate) street network in Gumi-si as of 2014, the overall level of street-network sprawl is 0.67, which is relatively well-connected.
Trends in street network construction: The SNDis of street construction for the respective time periods are 0.78, 0.63, 0.54 and 1.79. The disconnectivity of new streets constructed in Gumi-si fell, then rose. In 1991-2000, new street layouts were the most connected.
Quantity of street network construction: The street network in Gumi-si spans a total of 581 kilometers. It is dominated by roads constructed in 1976-1990. These roads have an SNDi of 0.63, which is relatively well-connected.
Effect on the aggregate network: New construction in each period adds to the total stock of streets, but does not change streets that have already been built. Therefore, it has a limited effect on the street network as a whole. The SNDis of the aggregate street network in the respective time periods are 0.78, 0.67, 0.63 and 0.67. The SNDi of the aggregate street network in fell at first, but Gumi-si has worsened in disconnectivity since 2000.
Gumi-si and Gyeongsangbuk-do do not follow the same trend in the disconnectivity of their street network constructions. The SNDi in Gumi-si was at its lowest in 1991-2000, while the SNDi of street constructions in Gyeongsangbuk-do rose steadily.
How do development practices in Gumi-si fare in comparison to others in Gyeongsangbuk-do? Most recently in 2001-2014, street construction in Gumi-si was the 2nd-most disconnected out of the 3 cities in Gyeongsangbuk-do. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has fallen; relative to other cities in Gyeongsangbuk-do, street construction in Gumi-si has become more connected. Gumi-si ranked 1st in 1975, 2nd in 1976-1990, 3rd in 1991-2000 and 2nd in 2001-2014.
Gumi-si and South Korea do not follow the same trend in the disconnectivity of their street network constructions. The SNDi in Gumi-si was at its lowest in 1991-2000, while the SNDi of street constructions in South Korea rose steadily.
How do development practices in Gumi-si fare in comparison to others in South Korea? Most recently in 2001-2014, street construction in Gumi-si was the 26th-most disconnected out of the 39 cities in South Korea. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has fallen; relative to other cities in South Korea, street construction in Gumi-si has become more connected. Gumi-si ranked 15th in 1975, 31st in 1976-1990, 35th in 1991-2000 and 26th in 2001-2014.
Gumi-si and Gyeongsangbuk-do do not follow the same trend in the disconnectivity of their aggregate street networks. The SNDi in Gumi-si was at its lowest in 1991-2000, while the SNDi of street constructions in Gyeongsangbuk-do rose steadily.
To date, Gumi-si is the 1st-most disconnected out of the 3 cities in Gyeongsangbuk-do. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has not changed. Gumi-si ranked 1st in 1975, 1st in 1976-1990, 1st in 1991-2000 and 1st in 2001-2014.
Gumi-si and South Korea do not follow the same trend in the disconnectivity of their aggregate street networks. The SNDi in Gumi-si was at its lowest in 1991-2000, while the SNDi of street constructions in South Korea rose steadily.
To date, Gumi-si is the 29th-most disconnected out of the 39 cities in South Korea. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has fallen; relative to other cities in South Korea, the street network in Gumi-si has become more connected. Gumi-si ranked 15th in 1975, 22nd in 1976-1990, 26th in 1991-2000 and 29th in 2001-2014.
As of 2015, Gumi-si had a built-up area of 34.17 square kilometers, and a population of 332203 people.
These are some other cities with approximately the same population: