U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: The metric that best represents how things are in reality?
City Proper 4 7.14%
United States' Urban Area 11 19.64%
United Nations' Urban Area 10 17.86%
Global Agglomeration 2 3.57%
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) 24 42.86%
Combined Statistical Area (CSA) 5 8.93%
Voters: 56. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2016, 08:54 PM
 
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
3,986 posts, read 3,464,485 times
Reputation: 2461

Advertisements

Somewhere between MSA and Global Agglomeration I think we get the most accurate answers. CSA may be too broad, but Urban Area seems to be consistent in under counting various areas across the country and is flawed and unspecified.

Urban Agglomerations (United States), 2016

01. New York: 22,000,000
02. Los Angeles: 17,600,000
03. Chicago: 9,800,000
04. Washington D.C.: 8,350,000
05. San Francisco: 7,600,000
06. Boston: 7,350,000
07. Philadelphia: 7,300,000
08. Dallas: 6,550,000
09. Houston: 6,200,000
10. Miami: 6,100,000

Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), 2015

01. New York: 20,182,305
02. Los Angeles: 13,340,068
03. Chicago: 9,551,031
04. Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex: 7,102,796
05. Houston: 6,656,947
06. Washington D.C.: 6,097,684
07. Philadelphia: 6,069,875
08. Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 6,012,331
09. Atlanta: 5,710,795
10. Boston: 4,774,321

Again somewhere in the middle of these two.

Last edited by the resident09; 09-07-2016 at 09:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2016, 08:54 PM
 
63 posts, read 45,178 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
City proper is only irrelevant if you care about population, which I do not. There are a handful of cities in the country where you shouldn't separate city form suburbs (Boston), but in many, there is a clear difference, and city dwellers tend to live their lives entirely within city limits. I don't care that Atlanta has a smaller population than Columbus OH. I tend to discuss cities based on amenities and livability. Sometimes, using MSA or US Urban area, makes a town look more impressive than the actual ground-feel by stringing together a series of mediocre cities that happen to be in close proximity; e.g. Norfolk-VA Beach or the Research Triangle.

CSA, while a consistent metric, does not represent a city or even a cohesive metro, and as such, is my least favorite metric.
The whole thread is based around population though. We aren't talking about population density or urbanity. Are you really confidant that these cities below have the most amenities and livability out of all the population centers? You seem to imply that a high city proper population equals more of these things.



City Proper, 2015:
01. New York: 8,550,405
02. Los Angeles: 3,971,883
03. Chicago: 2,720,546
04. Houston: 2,296,224
05. Philadelphia: 1,567,442
06. Phoenix: 1,563,025
07. San Antonio: 1,469,845
08. San Diego: 1,394,928
09. Dallas: 1,300,092
10. San Jose: 1,026,908

Last edited by pointer212; 09-07-2016 at 09:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 09:24 AM
 
Location: (six-cent-dix-sept)
4,554 posts, read 2,325,331 times
Reputation: 2818
is there a listing for metros-ppsm (people per square mile) ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 09:56 AM
 
63 posts, read 45,178 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley-88888888 View Post
is there a listing for metros-ppsm (people per square mile) ?
This is going by UA Urban Area which i think is a good metric for population density. It doesn't include large areas of low density land like some other metrics so people won't say that density numbers are lower than they should be.




----------------------- Population -------- Land Area -------- Density
--------------------------------------------- (sq. mi.) --- (Population / sq. mi.)

1 New York -------- 18,351,295 ---------- 3,450.2 ---------- 5,318.9
2 Los Angeles ------ 12,150,996 ---------- 1,736.0 --------- 6,999.3
3 Chicago ----------- 8,608,208 ---------- 2,442.8 ---------- 3,524.0
4 Miami ------------- 5,502,379 ---------- 1,238.6 ---------- 4,442.4
5 Philadelphia ------- 5,441,567 ---------- 1,981.4 ---------- 2,746.4
6 Dallas ------------- 5,121,892 ---------- 1,779.1 ---------- 2,878.9
7 Houston ----------- 4,944,332 ---------- 1,660.0 ---------- 2,978.5
8 Washington ------- 4,586,770 ---------- 1,321.7 ---------- 3,470.3
9 Atlanta ------------ 4,515,419 ---------- 2,645.4 ---------- 1,706.9
10 Boston ----------- 4,181,019 ---------- 1,873.5 ---------- 2,231.7
11 Detroit ----------- 3,734,090 ---------- 1,337.2 ---------- 2,792.5
12 Phoenix ---------- 3,629,114 ---------- 1,146.6 ---------- 3,165.2
13 San Francisco --- 3,281,212 ---------- 523.6 ------------- 6,266.4
14 Seattle ----------- 3,059,393 ---------- 1,010.3 ---------- 3,028.2
15 San Diego -------- 2,956,746 ---------- 732.4 ------------ 4,037.0
16 Minneapolis ------ 2,650,890 ---------- 1,021.8 ---------- 2,594.3
17 Tampa ------------ 2,441,770 ---------- 957.0 ------------ 2,551.5
18 Denver ----------- 2,374,203 ---------- 668.0 ------------ 3,554.4
19 Baltimore -------- 2,203,663 ---------- 717.0 ------------ 3,073.3
20 St. Louis --------- 2,150,706 ---------- 923.6 ------------ 2,328.5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas

Last edited by pointer212; 09-09-2016 at 10:42 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 09:58 AM
 
3,961 posts, read 3,496,941 times
Reputation: 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley-88888888 View Post
is there a listing for metros-ppsm (people per square mile) ?
I don't think metro's per PPSM is going to be a good measurement tool. Since they are county based they skew Western metros (with huge counties) to ridiculously low numbers. For instance Phoenix MSA (two counties) cover a land area of 14k sq mi, but it's only 11% developed, with almost 90% person free desert. If you were to just look at the ppsm for it's metro you'd have an impression that it was very very low density. In reality Phoenician suburbs are uniform in density at around 3-4k ppsm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 09:59 AM
 
3,961 posts, read 3,496,941 times
Reputation: 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by pointer212 View Post
Population Land Area Density
(2010 Census) (sq. mi.) (Population / sq. mi.)

1 New York 18,351,295 3,450.2 5,318.9
2 Los Angeles 12,150,996 1,736.0 6,999.3
3 Chicago 8,608,208 2,442.8 3,524.0
4 Miami 5,502,379 1,238.6 4,442.4
5 Philadelphia 5,441,567 1,981.4 2,746.4
6 Dallas 5,121,892 1,779.1 2,878.9
7 Houston 4,944,332 1,660.0 2,978.5
8 Washington 4,586,770 1,321.7 3,470.3
9 Atlanta 4,515,419 2,645.4 1,706.9
10 Boston 4,181,019 1,873.5 2,231.7
11 Detroit 3,734,090 1,337.2 2,792.5
12 Phoenix 3,629,114 1,146.6 3,165.2
13 San Francisco 3,281,212 523.6 6,266.4
14 Seattle 3,059,393 1,010.3 3,028.2
15 San Diego 2,956,746 732.4 4,037.0
16 Minneapolis 2,650,890 1,021.8 2,594.3
17 Tampa 2,441,770 957.0 2,551.5
18 Denver 2,374,203 668.0 3,554.4
19 Baltimore 2,203,663 717.0 3,073.3
20 St. Louis 2,150,706 923.6 2,328.5


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas
This is urban area, not metro.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 10:24 AM
 
63 posts, read 45,178 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
I don't think metro's per PPSM is going to be a good measurement tool. Since they are county based they skew Western metros (with huge counties) to ridiculously low numbers. For instance Phoenix MSA (two counties) cover a land area of 14k sq mi, but it's only 11% developed, with almost 90% person free desert. If you were to just look at the ppsm for it's metro you'd have an impression that it was very very low density. In reality Phoenician suburbs are uniform in density at around 3-4k ppsm.
That's why i listed UA Urban Areas. They are not county based. It doesn't include the undeveloped low density areas like you were saying about the MSA metric. As you can see Phoenix's density is 3,165.2 / sq. mi., just like you estimated.

Last edited by pointer212; 09-09-2016 at 10:34 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
3,986 posts, read 3,464,485 times
Reputation: 2461
Quote:
Originally Posted by pointer212 View Post
This is going by UA Urban Area which i think is a good metric for population density. It doesn't include large areas of low density land like some other metrics so people won't say that density numbers are lower than they should be.




----------------------- Population -------- Land Area -------- Density
--------------------------------------------- (sq. mi.) --- (Population / sq. mi.)

1 New York -------- 18,351,295 ---------- 3,450.2 ---------- 5,318.9
2 Los Angeles ------ 12,150,996 ---------- 1,736.0 --------- 6,999.3
3 Chicago ----------- 8,608,208 ---------- 2,442.8 ---------- 3,524.0
4 Miami ------------- 5,502,379 ---------- 1,238.6 ---------- 4,442.4
5 Philadelphia ------- 5,441,567 ---------- 1,981.4 ---------- 2,746.4
6 Dallas ------------- 5,121,892 ---------- 1,779.1 ---------- 2,878.9
7 Houston ----------- 4,944,332 ---------- 1,660.0 ---------- 2,978.5
8 Washington ------- 4,586,770 ---------- 1,321.7 ---------- 3,470.3
9 Atlanta ------------ 4,515,419 ---------- 2,645.4 ---------- 1,706.9

10 Boston ----------- 4,181,019 ---------- 1,873.5 ---------- 2,231.7
11 Detroit ----------- 3,734,090 ---------- 1,337.2 ---------- 2,792.5
12 Phoenix ---------- 3,629,114 ---------- 1,146.6 ---------- 3,165.2
13 San Francisco --- 3,281,212 ---------- 523.6 ------------- 6,266.4
14 Seattle ----------- 3,059,393 ---------- 1,010.3 ---------- 3,028.2
15 San Diego -------- 2,956,746 ---------- 732.4 ------------ 4,037.0
16 Minneapolis ------ 2,650,890 ---------- 1,021.8 ---------- 2,594.3
17 Tampa ------------ 2,441,770 ---------- 957.0 ------------ 2,551.5
18 Denver ----------- 2,374,203 ---------- 668.0 ------------ 3,554.4
19 Baltimore -------- 2,203,663 ---------- 717.0 ------------ 3,073.3
20 St. Louis --------- 2,150,706 ---------- 923.6 ------------ 2,328.5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...es_urban_areas
This is where the Urban areas flaws start to show. Where in this chart you have Washington with basically the same (slightly more) urban population as Atlanta in half the land mass and still has twice the density. Yet the OP shows Atlanta having a slightly higher "urban area". Something is not adding up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,512 posts, read 2,975,743 times
Reputation: 2742
Quote:
Originally Posted by the resident09 View Post
This is where the Urban areas flaws start to show. Where in this chart you have Washington with basically the same (slightly more) urban population as Atlanta in half the land mass and still has twice the density. Yet the OP shows Atlanta having a slightly higher "urban area". Something is not adding up.
The Urban Area metric posted above is from the US Census' 2010 numbers, as opposed to the UN Urban Area 2016 numbers also posted in the OP. So two different measuring agencies, and one of those measures is already very outdated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2016, 11:49 AM
 
3,961 posts, read 3,496,941 times
Reputation: 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by qworldorder View Post
The Urban Area metric posted above is from the US Census' 2010 numbers, as opposed to the UN Urban Area 2016 numbers also posted in the OP. So two different measuring agencies, and one of those measures is already very outdated.
The 2016 UA estimates from the UN are guestimates themselves based what the US CB is estimating for growth. The UN does not do it's own counts. When I look at those numbers they seem little more than US 2010 UA numbers with US growth estimates factored in. Can someone maybe explain this?


UA is a difficult metric to track which is why the CB only releases it decennially.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top