Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ranking of urban areas by continuous urban development. Top 70 USA-Canada.
I put together this list just for fun. It's the top 70 urbanized areas in the USA and Canada. Most of the data is from 2000 so there could be some minor changes in rank (Dallas probably passed Boston for example), but I think this gives a basic idea of how the population and densities of the urban footprints compare to one another.
I did combine the areas of Detroit/Windsor and San Diego/Tijuana because I consider those single urban continuos areas however I didn't include any other areas in Mexico.
What do you think? Find anything interesting in these numbers? Anything seem out of wack? It will be interesting to compare this list to the 2010 numbers when they come out.
One thing that sticks out for me is the Virginia Beach area. That is a pretty good sized area that seems to stay under the radar.
First number is continuous urbanized population, second is the square miles of that population and the third is the density of the area.
These are not MSA numbers, they will tend to be lower, sometimes a lot lower, than MSA or CMSA stats, but they better represent a metro area's core developed areas and the densities stats are more relistic than MSA density stats which tend to factor in tons of excess open land with few people.
regarding "continuous" urban development, would Baltimore be combined with Washington DC?
And I think the Atlanta population is more than that, I thought its metro is at least 4.5 million
regarding "continuous" urban development, would Baltimore be combined with Washington DC?
And I think the Atlanta population is more than that, I thought its metro is at least 4.5 million
Ranking of urban areas by continuous urban development. Top 70 USA-Canada.
I put together this list just for fun. It's the top 70 urbanized areas in the USA and Canada. Most of the data is from 2000 so there could be some minor changes in rank (Dallas probably passed Boston for example), but I think this gives a basic idea of how the population and densities of the urban footprints compare to one another.
I did combine the areas of Detroit/Windsor and San Diego/Tijuana because I consider those single urban continuos areas however I didn't include any other areas in Mexico.
What do you think? Find anything interesting in these numbers? Anything seem out of wack? It will be interesting to compare this list to the 2010 numbers when they come out.
One thing that sticks out for me is the Virginia Beach area. That is a pretty good sized area that seems to stay under the radar.
First number is continuous urbanized population, second is the square miles of that population and the third is the density of the area.
These are not MSA numbers, they will tend to be lower, sometimes a lot lower, than MSA or CMSA stats, but they better represent a metro area's core developed areas and the densities stats are more relistic than MSA density stats which tend to factor in tons of excess open land with few people.
I think since this data is almost 10 years old most sunbelt city's numbers are far from acurate. I think that there are updated estimates from the census that show as much.
I think since this data is almost 10 years old most sunbelt city's numbers are far from acurate. I think that there are updated estimates from the census that show as much.
Shhhhhhhhhhhh! You're not suppose to say that on this thread. What you should have said is "WOW, looking at these numbers, why on Earth are so many small southern Urbanized Areas placed in the same class as certain Midwestern cities that are CLEARLY superior in every way, shape and form".
If you are including US-Mexico border-straddling metros you probably ought to include Ciudad Juarez (El Paso) and Nuevo Laredo (Laredo) as well. McAllen- Matamoros? Los Dos Nogales? Probably would not make a difference in those cases.
I'm sure things have changed significantly with the fast frowing cities in the last 10 years. San Antonio's urbanized area is probably in the top 25 now.
Too bad you stopped literally JUST BEFORE Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Hazleton, PA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What you should have said is "WOW, looking at these numbers, why on Earth are so many small southern Urbanized Areas placed in the same class as certain Midwestern cities that are CLEARLY superior in every way, shape and form".
