Cherkasy: region in Ukraine
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 Cherkasy, Ukraine on the sprawlmap
Most recent snapshot: Taking into account the entire (i.e. aggregate) street network in Cherkasy as of 2014, the overall level of street-network sprawl is 3.25, which is in the 40th to 60th percentile of disconnectedness.
Trends in street network construction: The SNDis of street construction for the respective time periods are 3.24, 3.12, 4.56 and 4.33. Disconnectivity in street construction in Cherkasy follows a zig-zag trend. In 1976-1990, street construction was most disconnected, while construction was most connected in 1991-2000.
Quantity of street network construction: The street network in Cherkasy spans a total of 14994 kilometers. It is dominated by roads constructed in 1976-1990. These roads have an SNDi of 3.12, which is in the 40th to 60th percentile of disconnectedness.
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 3.24, 3.13, 3.21 and 3.25. The SNDi of the aggregate street network in fell at first, but Cherkasy has worsened in disconnectivity since 1990.
The level of street-network sprawl in new development in Cherkasy followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase. To get a sense of how street development has changed in Cherkasy, we can consider three of its most populous cities: Cherkasy, Smila and Uman. None of the most populous cities follow the same trend as the region. The level of street-network sprawl in new development in Cherkasy was at its lowest in 1991-2000. The level of street-network sprawl in new development in Smila rose steadily. The level of street-network sprawl in new development in Uman followed a zig-zag trend with an overall increase.
How do development practices in Cherkasy fare in comparison to others in Ukraine? Most recently in 2001-2014, street construction in Cherkasy was the 21st-most disconnected out of the 27 regions in Ukraine. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has fallen; relative to other regions in Ukraine, street construction in Cherkasy has become more connected. Cherkasy ranked 8th in 1975, 18th in 1976-1990, 12th in 1991-2000 and 21st in 2001-2014.
As of 2014, the city with the most disconnected street network in Cherkasy is Uman with an SNDi of 3.34, which is highly disconnected. Conversely, the most connected city is Cherkasy with an SNDi of 1.05, which is relatively well-connected. See trends for these cities: Cherkasy, Uman
The level of street-network sprawl in the aggregate network in Cherkasy was at its lowest in 1976-1990. To get a sense of how the aggregate street network has changed in Cherkasy, we can consider three of its most populous cities: Cherkasy, Smila and Uman. None of the most populous cities follow the same trend as the region. The level of street-network sprawl in the aggregate network in Cherkasy was at its lowest in 1991-2000. The level of street-network sprawl in the aggregate network in Smila rose steadily. The level of street-network sprawl in the aggregate network in Uman peaked in 1991-2000.
To date, Cherkasy is the 15th-most disconnected out of the 27 regions in Ukraine. Its position in the ranks since 1975 has fallen; relative to other regions in Ukraine, the street network in Cherkasy has become more connected. Cherkasy ranked 8th in 1975, 15th in 1976-1990, 14th in 1991-2000 and 15th in 2001-2014.