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.
Or maybe global warming will change the climate out there in the desert in your favor. Just watch out for McDonalds when they come to chop down your new rainforest.
And honestly a larger CSA would it matter, the people are spread out over and area larger than many states, there is little cohesion between Thousand Oaks and Bakersfield.
I also think when the combined NYC/Philly it will be equally as silly as both will always retain a significant image of their own, the area between becomes grey but not the cores.
again if the population grows in the land away from LA the requirements for this area to stay part of CSA will be lost, subtraction by addition for the LA CSA - just do the math it is really pretty simple - the population is increasing away from LA CSA border, that means more and more difficulty to retain the combined CSA status, this has happened in others area of the country already. You have blinders on to believe this is not the case
Riverside and San Bernandino are in the LA CSA. How are they growing away from the LA CSA?
Riverside and San Bernandino are in the LA CSA. How are they growing away from the LA CSA?
CSA is based on county commuter rates, Philly lost Mercer County from it's MSA in 2000 because of less than 400 commuters, it also meets the NYC CSA status and will be back over the Philly MSA threshhold either in 2010 or 2011, this is the NYC/Philly link
But just becasue they are today does not mean they will be in the future.
Where on this map is the population growing and where are the job centers for the new populous, that is where your answer lies. 15% of every person who lives in San Bernadino and/or Riverside need to commute to LA county - that will become tougher and tougher as a threshold. Remember just because they qualify today does not mean they always will, that underlies your growth assumption which i believe to be flawed.
Location: Austin, TX/Chicago, IL/Houston, TX/Washington, DC
10,138 posts, read 16,035,535 times
Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Just one point, as the metro (Riverside/Bakersfiled) grows and becomes more concentrated away from LA, it will likely just become it's own metro and not meet the LA CSA requirements, almost a reverse engineering away from CSA status, more jobs in the core of the new populous means more and more people closer to the LA MSA will need to traverse the border. So at 4+ million for riverside/bakersfield say 40% are employed, 250K have to crooss the border with LA to maintian this status, I am not trying to be the contrarian but at some point and maybe soon LA will lose this from the CSA not gain more. It is actually going to become harder and harder to maintain the CSA status over time.
Thats a fair point.
Basically what you're trying to say and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the larger Riverside becomes the more it will develop a core of its own, as commuter patterns to Los Angeles County will show a decrease compared to the population growth levels thus leaving the risk of losing Riverside from CSA, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly
Not to mention the NE is actually working in an opposite sense given the relatively small county sizes.
Via the CSA map above, the Northeast corridor has CSA's that touch each other on a long boundary. Possibility of 2050 there being one large mega CSA is also a possibility. But no idea on it.
Basically what you're trying to say and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the larger Riverside becomes the more it will develop a core of its own, as commuter patterns to Los Angeles County will show a decrease compared to the population growth levels thus leaving the risk of losing Riverside from CSA, right?
Via the CSA map above, the Northeast corridor has CSA's that touch each other on a long boundary. Possibility of 2050 there being one large mega CSA is also a possibility. But no idea on it.
On your first point exactly, and the larger counties and populations means a crap load of cross county commuters will be required to maintain the status.
On your NE CSA question, I do not see enough to connect Philly and Baltimore, Cecil is sparse with the only population center commuting into DE, the souther part is too far removed from the Baltimore expanse. To the north Eastern CT does not have enough either way to connect Boston and NYC
So I really on see a combined Mid Atlantic CSA, all of NJ, SE PA (including Philly, Allentown/Beth, and Reading with NYC and Western CT. Population around 2030 approaching 38 million
In the Mid Atlantic CSA region I forgot New Castle County DC (Wilmington already part of the Philly MSA) and Cecli County MD (Also already part of the Philly MSA) and Kent County DE (Dover) will likely also qualify in the near future.
Last edited by kidphilly; 08-29-2010 at 08:18 PM..
Reason: Forgot DE and MD - added at bottom of post
LA has a lot of room to grow, but it's mainly sprawl and it will continue to be sprawl. Plus they should slow down population growth soon due to the air pollution that tends to develops in SoCa. Not trying to knock the region but a lot of SoCa cities/towns have some of the highest air pollutant rates in the nation, major more growth shouldn't be as encouraged.
~
Los Angeles County is huge, so let me sort out all the NYC metro counties to rougly equal the same square mileage as LA County.
NYC:
Bergen County NJ- 234 sq Miles, 895,250 Pop (3,823 PPSM)
Nassau Caounty NY- 287 sq miles, 1,357,429 Pop (4,735 PPSM)
Hudson County NJ- 47 Sq miles, 597,924 Pop (12,807 PPSM)
Westchester County NY- 442 Sq miles, 955,962 Pop (2,209 PPSM)
Union County NJ- 103 Sq Miles, 526,426 Pop (5,097 PPSM)
Fairfield County CT- 626 Sq Miles, 901,208 Pop (1,440 PPSM)
Suffolk County NY- 912 Sq Miles, 1,515,475 Pop (1,665 PPSM)
Essex County NJ- 126 Sq Miles, 769,644 Pop (6,095 PPSM)
Passaic County NJ- 185 Sq Miles, 491,778 Pop (2,654 PPSM)
Middlesex County NJ- 310 Sq Miles, 790,738 Pop (2,553 PPSM)
Rockland County NY- 174 Sq Miles, 300,173 Pop (1,723 PPSM)
Morris County NJ- 469 Sq Miles, 488,518 Pop (1,042 PPSM)
Monmouth County NJ- 472 Sq Miles, 644,105 Pop (1,365 PPSM)
Total: 4,202 Sq Miles- 10,234,630- 2,435 PPSM
~
Los Angeles County (including LA the city)
Total: 4,061 Sq Miles- 9,848,011 Pop- 2,425 PPSM
~
Even though the land area for the NYC metro counties is a bit higher, the population density tells you that the 2 areas basically have the same amount of space developed (or not developed)- There's only a 10 People per square mile difference!
Basically, even with LA included- Those specific NYC metro counties have about the same population, without even having NYC in the equation.
The LA metro may have a lot of room, but the all around infrastructure isn't going to support the same kind of population capacity as the NYC metro. And if the Philly MSA merges with NYC's, which is likely, you can forget it.
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.
