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.
I am really confused as to why certain MSAs are defined the way they are...
For instance, why does Tacoma count as part of Seattle's MSA but San Jose not part of San Francisco's MSA? SF's MSA (not CSA) should be 7.5 million, because the San Jose area should be included.
Sure, San Jose is ten miles further from SF than Tacoma from Seattle but there is a much denser, more defined continuous urban area between San Francisco and San Jose than between Tacoma and Seattle. And Sunnyvale, which is essentially an outskirt of San Jose, is the same distance from SF as Tacoma is from Seattle.
Look at this satellite image of the bay area. How is that half-ring around the bay not a "continuous urban area"? Is it for political reasons they are separated?
No clue. Akron isn't included in Cleveland's and it's in the neighboring county. It takes me quicker to drive from my Cleveland home to Akron then some areas considered in the MSA. (25-35 min drive to Akron from my home).
There has to be a 3-mile wide overlap of development btwn the 2 MSAs. In thes case of SF and San Jose, its actually about 2.8 Miles at the San Mateo and Santa Clara Borders because of an office park in Menlo Park. Its ridiculous but what the heck.
It has to do with commuter habits. For instance Chicago and Milwaukee have basically filled the gap as far as development, but they don't get enough commuters traveling from a county in one MSA to a county in the other MSA to draw them together.
But then DeKalb is included in the Chicago MSA, yet there's a 15 mile gap between the development. It's because so many people cross between the two areas for work.
I grew up in Iowa City. We added Washington County to our MSA a few years ago. There is about 15 miles between Iowa City and the Washington County border, and there isn't any sprawl or even cities in Washington County. It happened because enough people from Washington County started commuting to Iowa City to push it over the line.
I hear ya, but between Wakaugan (sp?) and Oak Creek is not that developed and Milwaukee is nearly twice as far from Chicago as SJ from SF. The development between SF and SJ, as that image shows, is very dense and the distance isnt that far. Plus, there are a fair number of people from Santa Clara County who work in SF, and vice versa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614
It has to do with commuter habits. For instance Chicago and Milwaukee have basically filled the gap as far as development, but they don't get enough commuters traveling from a county in one MSA to a county in the other MSA to draw them together.
But then DeKalb is included in the Chicago MSA, yet there's a 15 mile gap between the development. It's because so many people cross between the two areas for work.
I grew up in Iowa City. We added Washington County to our MSA a few years ago. There is about 15 miles between Iowa City and the Washington County border, and there isn't any sprawl or even cities in Washington County. It happened because enough people from Washington County started commuting to Iowa City to push it over the line.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
The same argument could be made for the Baltimore-Washington area, where Howard county and Anne Arundel county in Maryland that are 25-30 mins from DC city limits are given to the Baltimore MSA and takes away almost another 1 million from DC's MSA, but of course their both a part of the B/W CSA. Then let alone the rest of Baltimore city and it's immediate suburbs which are just beyond those counties. Thats why looking at the CSA's numbers seems more accurate to me. (Only in certain metro areas though)
Chicago60614 has it right. It has nothing to do with how close together various cities are, or how much population density fills the space between them. As the U.S. Census Bureau defines metropolitan areas, MSA's are all, totally, completely about the percentage of population of a county which works in the MSA's urban core and/or percentage of jobs in the county in question which are held by people who live in the MSA's urban core. Actually, in order to qualify as part of a metro area, a county also has to have certain "metropolitan characteristics," such as some minimum population density, and several other traits which keep it from being predominately rural in character. Counties which do not have these characteristics are few and far between anywhere near cities of even moderate size, so gnerally the question of what counties are included in an MSA is all about commuting. If the degree of commuting exchange between one MSA and the urban core of another MSA does not pass a certain threshold, then they remain separate MSA's regardless of how close together they are, the lack of any unpopulated gaps between them, or how much they "seem" like one local area to the people who live there. This is all explained at the Census Bureau's website. I've posted the link on another thread some months ago. I forget which thread, and this late at night I'm not inclined to spend the time looking it up, but you can find the info yourself by entering "metropolitan area" as a search item at the Census Bureau's website and doing some research.
I hear ya, but between Wakaugan (sp?) and Oak Creek is not that developed and Milwaukee is nearly twice as far from Chicago as SJ from SF. The development between SF and SJ, as that image shows, is very dense and the distance isnt that far. Plus, there are a fair number of people from Santa Clara County who work in SF, and vice versa.
Well I wouldn't say it's not developed. Along the lakeshore from the northern boundry of Waukegan to the southern boundry of Oak Creek you have roughly 400,000 people living in the 40 mile distance along the lake.
In the end it's all about commuting for the MSA's, and San Fran and San Jose are already a CSA. I would think before too long Chicago and Milwaukee would form a CSA of close to 12 million people. At some point Rockford will join the mix with another 400,000 people. There is quite a lot of infill though, but at the same time the entire area is growing fast, Rockford's burbs and Chicago's burbs are just a short drive as of today.
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.
Census Bureau criteria
