Why does San Jose it's own Metro area?? Isn't it a part of the bay area (San Francisco: employment, live)

[Nella925]

I don't understand why other areas are not divided, but the bay area has been divided into two metros...I personally believe it should be the San francisco-Oakland-San Jose metro...

Just a thought that popped into my head after reading another thread, so can anyone answer the question??

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Nella925

I don't understand why other areas are not divided, but the bay area has been divided into two metros...I personally believe it should be the San francisco-Oakland-San Jose metro...

Just a thought that popped into my head after reading another thread, so can anyone answer the question??

The Census breaks metropolitan areas up a few different ways. There are MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) and then there are CMSAs (Combined Metropolitan Statistical Areas). CMSAs are several metro areas that adjoin each other.

So San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose is the CMSA for all the MSAs that comprise the Bay Area. The MSAs of the Bay Area are:

Santa Rosa-Petaluma
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara
Santa Cruz-Watsonville
Vallejo-Fairfield
Napa
Stockton-Lodi


http://www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=29398346

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

The Census breaks metropolitan areas up a few different ways. There are MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) and then there are CMSAs (Combined Metropolitan Statistical Areas). CMSAs are several metro areas that adjoin each other.

So San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose is the CMSA for all the MSAs that comprise the Bay Area. The MSAs of the Bay Area are:

Santa Rosa-Petaluma
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara
Santa Cruz-Watsonville
Vallejo-Fairfield
Napa
Stockton-Lodi


http://www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=29398346

You already said it, but a month ago, Stockton was also added to the Bay Area due to their high percentage of residents working in the Bay.

That takes the Bay Area's population to 8.370 million per latest census bureau data.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

You already said it, but a month ago, Stockton was also added to the Bay Area due to their high percentage of residents working in the Bay.

That takes the Bay Area's population to 8.370 million per latest census bureau data.

Yeah, I'm not sure I'd consider Stockton to be a part of the Bay Area, but the Census Bureau does.

[Mack Knife]

Don't worry, sooner or later New York will be added to the Bay Area and then the news anchors can always include the local angle for anything that happens within the continental US.

And San Jose? They can't even use a decent name for their airport, calling it Min... something or other instead of San Jose International Airport that would bring the city into some bearing of status. Small thinking keeps San Jose little more than an add-on to the Bay Area.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

The Census breaks metropolitan areas up a few different ways. There are MSAs (Metropolitan Statistical Areas) and then there are CMSAs (Combined Metropolitan Statistical Areas). CMSAs are several metro areas that adjoin each other.

So San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose is the CMSA for all the MSAs that comprise the Bay Area. The MSAs of the Bay Area are:

Santa Rosa-Petaluma
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara
Santa Cruz-Watsonville
Vallejo-Fairfield
Napa
Stockton-Lodi


http://www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=29398346

This is all true and is good information, but it doesn't get at specifically why SF and SJ are split. The reason has to do with the county lines and because the commuting patterns between the counties don't meet their (arbitrarily-defined) commuting pattern cutoff. It doesn't pass the threshold needed to be joined into one MSA (I think you need 25% commuting sharing?), but it does pass the threshold for CSA (I think 15%?).

Personally, I do find it hard to believe that there isn't enough commuters going back and forth (especially when looking at the peninsula as you see A LOT of people going between cities between Milbrae - Mountain View/Cupertino daily for work) to make it an MSA... Looking at commuters on 280, 101, Caltrian, and 880, you could have fooled me that it isn't one metro. But, what do I know.

My personal opinion on the matter is that the census has a way of defining metros that works best in places that have one, or at most 2, major employment center(s). In places like the Bay Area where things are more multi-nodal, their models start to break down fairly quickly.

And this is why you're left with odd situations like the Bay Area being split into 2. There are other examples throughout the country of similarly-confusing breakdowns, such as Philly's MSA not including regions of NJ that were traditionally part of its metro (have recently been switched to NYC's metro). It's not a perfect system, but it does work well for most metros.

At the end of the day, those who live here and/or are familiar with the area obviously know region is one contiguous metro that functions as one unit.

[gone down south]

They're split that way because there enough volume of posts to justify a new forum. Totally arbitrary, there's no particular reason behind it. The East Bay / Oakland keeps asking for its own forum, but when the actual number of posts are looked at it probably makes more sense to sense to fold the whole area into one rather than further fragmenting the conversations

[matt345]

Uh oh, not this topic again. I'm guessing the OP isn't very familiar with Bay Area provincialism and the passionate arguments it can lead to...

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

This is all true and is good information, but it doesn't get at specifically why SF and SJ are split. The reason has to do with the county lines and because the commuting patterns between the counties don't meet their (arbitrarily-defined) commuting pattern cutoff. It doesn't pass the threshold needed to be joined into one MSA (I think you need 25% commuting sharing?), but it does pass the threshold for CSA (I think 15%?).

Personally, I do find it hard to believe that there isn't enough commuters going back and forth (especially when looking at the peninsula as you see A LOT of people going between cities between Milbrae - Mountain View/Cupertino daily for work) to make it an MSA... Looking at commuters on 280, 101, Caltrian, and 880, you could have fooled me that it isn't one metro. But, what do I know.

My personal opinion on the matter is that the census has a way of defining metros that works best in places that have one, or at most 2, major employment center(s). In places like the Bay Area where things are more multi-nodal, their models start to break down fairly quickly.

And this is why you're left with odd situations like the Bay Area being split into 2. There are other examples throughout the country of similarly-confusing breakdowns, such as Philly's MSA not including regions of NJ that were traditionally part of its metro (have recently been switched to NYC's metro). It's not a perfect system, but it does work well for most metros.

At the end of the day, those who live here and/or are familiar with the area obviously know region is one contiguous metro that functions as one unit.

The current system favors the NE US in terms of awarding political clout. The cities there are the old hub and spoke format and are all dense in a single center. Our Western cities do not follow that pattern. The game is rigged. So what's new?

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Mack Knife

And San Jose? They can't even use a decent name for their airport, calling it Min... something or other instead of San Jose International Airport that would bring the city into some bearing of status. Small thinking keeps San Jose little more than an add-on to the Bay Area.

Are all the other airports that bear an historical figure's name also responsible for making those towns unworthy of "status" as well? Funny how the leading economic engine of the country, as well as a town of nearly 1,000,000 can be said to be a mere regional "add-on."