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.
Well, you know what I mean. The Census Bureau states that the Phoenix MSA consists of 2 counties (Maricopa and Pinal) which total 16,573 sq. mi. The Urban Area obviously does not take up that much space in comparison to the total sq miles of both of these counties, the majority of that space being uninhabited desert.
This picture gives a better idea of the two counties that are a part of the Phoenix MSA and the actual Phoenix UA.
...and we also must remember that although the Census Bureau defines some of those MSA's by their counties, some of those counties are huge and empty - Phoenix MSA being a good example. Most of the land considered a part of the MSA is actually uninhabitable desert. When you leave the UA, you're actually in the desert.
I agree that areas in the SW/West and extreme SE Florida probably have the most defined line in drop off. I think a lot has to do with geography and time of development. The NE cities stay fairly urbanized for a preety large distance then drop off more gradual or at times (which i think Philly is a good example) never drop off and maintian high density directly into the next area/MSA - that is where the boundaries come into play with much more complex commuter patterns. The Philly MSA and UA have areas within 15 miles of the Core (meaning center city) in 3 locations where the MSA/UA is just cut at a municpal boundary, one of which is an area where the maintianed density is greater than 7K ppsm directly through, people literally walk accross the boundary for everyday life, this dynamic only exisit in a very few locales (MSAs) as the concentration of population creates statistical categorizations not consistent with the cohesion or functionality of the place. But they are what they are, but is another reason why other metrics are used, some show less reliance on arbitrary municpal boundaries and sizes thus less reliant on size differances of these municpalities. Even on UA, there are cut lines in the philly UA that exclude more thn 400K from the continuous core.
To your point though i do agree, even in the cities with the large boundaries, the vast majority of population is within a reasonable proximity (though many still have a large bolous of people counted, where other areas have it cut, This where the statistics are misleading in some ways. On MSA Houston for example just passed Philly but the amount of people that live within 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50, 100 miles is considerably smaller for each level so functionlly there are still many more people but the complex commuter rates and small counties geographies create inconsistencies in comparing some of the population metrics. This is really why i think it is important to compare places on multiple criteria/metrics. Probably no one fits any one area perfectly and some show certain areas larger or smaller depending on the methodology. In many ways it is benefit for jobs etc to live in a more dynamic/concentrated area in that there is not only all in the MSA but 3, 4 ,5 other MSAs all easily commutable within 30-45 minutes.
Well, you know what I mean. The Census Bureau states that the Phoenix MSA consists of 2 counties (Maricopa and Pinal) which total 16,573 sq. mi. The Urban Area obviously does not take up that much space in comparison to the total sq miles of both of these counties, the majority of that space being uninhabited desert.
This picture gives a better idea of the two counties that are a part of the Phoenix MSA and the actual Phoenix UA.
I agree that areas in the SW/West and extreme SE Florida probably have the most defined line in drop off. I think a lot has to do with geography and time of development. The NE cities stay fairly urbanized for a preety large distance then drop off more gradual or at times (which i think Philly is a good example) never drop off and maintian high density directly into the next area/MSA - that is where the boundaries come into play with much more complex commuter patterns. The Philly MSA and UA have areas within 15 miles of the Core (meaning center city) in 3 locations where the MSA/UA is just cut at a municpal boundary, one of which is an area where the maintianed density is greater than 7K ppsm directly through, people literally walk accross the boundary for everyday life, this dynamic only exisit in a very few locales (MSAs) as the concentration of population creates statistical categorizations not consistent with the cohesion or functionality of the place. But they are what they are, but is another reason why other metrics are used, some show less reliance on arbitrary municpal boundaries and sizes thus less reliant on size differances of these municpalities. Even on UA, there are cut lines in the philly UA that exclude more thn 400K from the continuous core.
To your point though i do agree, even in the cities with the large boundaries, the vast majority of population is within a reasonable proximity (though many still have a large bolous of people counted, where other areas have it cut, This where the statistics are misleading in some ways. On MSA Houston for example just passed Philly but the amount of people that live within 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 25, 50, 100 miles is considerably smaller for each level so functionlly there are still many more people but the complex commuter rates and small counties geographies create inconsistencies in comparing some of the population metrics. This is really why i think it is important to compare places on multiple criteria/metrics. Probably no one fits any one area perfectly and some show certain areas larger or smaller depending on the methodology. In many ways it is benefit for jobs etc to live in a more dynamic/concentrated area in that there is not only all in the MSA but 3, 4 ,5 other MSAs all easily commutable within 30-45 minutes.
oh it is all well and good to compare using different metrics, but you would not say that Philly has a higher UA and move on, you would stick on UA and not let go even when others have moved on. as in bla bla bla at least Philly has a bigger UA.
Again many areas with a large UA does not necessarily have a nicer everything else.
Mumbai, Delhi, Manila, Jakarta all have higher UAs than NY.
Incheon, Kolkata, Mexico City, Cairo, etc has a larger UA than LA
Lagos and Karachi has larger UA's than Chicago and London.
Lahore Pakistan has a larger UA than Hong Kong.
Hyderabad in Pakistan, Baghdad and Dallas has larger UA's than San Fransisco.
It is all just useless to have a UA on its own and call it a useful stat.
Comparing the economies by UA might be fruitful, but saying one city is better just by UA size puts Miami ahead of Philly, Houston ahead of Boston. DFW ahead of SF. Manila ahead of NY, Lagos Nigeria ahead of London or Chicago. That is just crazy
1. NYC 17.8 Million (18.4)
2. LA 11.8 Million (12.2)
3. Chicago 8.3 Million (8.6)
4. Philadelphia 5.1 Million (5.3)
5. Miami 4.9 Million (5.2)
6. DFW 4.1 Million (4.6)
7. Boston 4.0 Million (4.1)
8. DC 3.9 Million (4.2)
9. Detroit 3.9 Million (3.8)
10. Houston 3.8 Million (4.4)
11. Atlanta 3.5 Million (4.2)
12. SF 3.2 Million (3.3)
What will be the top 10 Cities for urban Area and in what order?
More update estimates:
1. NY 20.6M
2. LA 14.8M
3. Chi 9M
4. DFWA 5.6
5. SF/SJ/Oak 5.5
6. MIA 5.4
7. Phil 5.3
8. Hous 4.9
9. Bost 4.8
10. ATL 4.6
11. DC 4.5
12. PHO 3.9
13 DET 3.8
looks like Philly is going down while Houston, Phoenix ATL, and Dallas are moving on up. When all of them pass Philly which metric would you move on to? Density?
1. NY 20.6M
2. LA 14.8M
3. Chi 9M
4. DFWA 5.6
5. SF/SJ/Oak 5.5
6. MIA 5.4
7. Phil 5.3
8. Hous 4.9
9. Bost 4.8
10. ATL 4.6
11. DC 4.5
12. PHO 3.9
13 DET 3.8
looks like Philly is going down while Houston, Phoenix ATL, and Dallas are moving on up. When all of them pass Philly which metric would you move on to? Density?
Where is this data coming from - this looks like the International 500 ppsm metrics, not a census UA metric - it also combines CSA metrics - this isnt Census data HTown nor is it equivilized to US metrics
and seriously 500 ppsm? that isnt even suburban let alone urban; where did DFW pick up 1 million urban dwellers since 2008?
Yes I agree no single metric portrays the story
I know we harp but quite honestly we are one of the few areas with a legimate argument for being significantly undercounted, most arguments for other areas are they are overcounted based on rural and largely distanced portions of the population
Where is this data coming from - this looks like the International 500 ppsm metrics, not a census UA metric - it also combines CSA metrics - this isnt Census data HTown nor is it equivilized to US metrics
and seriously 500 ppsm? that isnt even suburban let alone urban; where did DFW pick up 1 million urban dwellers since 2008?
Yes I agree no single metric portrays the story
I know we harp but quite honestly we are one of the few areas with a legimate argument for being significantly undercounted, most arguments for other areas are they are overcounted based on rural and largely distanced portions of the population
it is estimates, the census data is not out yet remember?
The UA numbers you gave was official from 2000, the list that I gave were estimates from 09 (probably using estimate numbers from that year or the one before)
btw, why don't you ever list ua with other metrics like density? is it because you find places that are always put down for sprawl, like LA is 3 times as dense at the UA level?
it is estimates, the census data is not out yet remember?
The UA numbers you gave was official from 2000, the list that I gave were estimates from 09 (probably using estimate numbers from that year or the one before)
btw, why don't you ever list ua with other metrics like density? is it because you find places that are always put down for sprawl, like LA is 3 times as dense at the UA level?
I used the 2008 UA Census estimates- the most recent ones, so DFW picked up 1 million people in a year
Urban area designations chop up the Bay Area to an even larger degree than MSA designations do. Case in point:
Urban Areas within the Bay Area CSA
San Francisco-Oakland - 3,228,605
San Jose - 1,538,312
Concord - 552,624
Santa Rosa - 285,408
Antioch - 217,591
Vallejo - 158,967
Santa Cruz - 157,348
Fairfield - 112,446
Gilroy-Morgan Hill - 84,620
Napa - 79,867
Livermore - 75,202
Watsonville - 66,500
Petaluma - 59,958
^numbers are from 2000
The hills, ocean, and the bay force our development into patterns that don't play nice with census criteria...for example, does anyone REALLY believe that places such as Atlanta and Miami have more populated "urbanized areas" than San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose does?
Urban area designations chop up the Bay Area to an even larger degree than MSA designations do. Case in point:
Urban Areas within the Bay Area CSA
San Francisco-Oakland - 3,228,605
San Jose - 1,538,312
Concord - 552,624
Santa Rosa - 285,408
Antioch - 217,591
Vallejo - 158,967
Santa Cruz - 157,348
Fairfield - 112,446
Gilroy-Morgan Hill - 84,620
Napa - 79,867
Livermore - 75,202
Watsonville - 66,500
Petaluma - 59,958
^numbers are from 2000
The hills, ocean, and the bay force our development into patterns that don't play nice with census criteria...for example, does anyone REALLY believe that places such as Atlanta and Miami have more populated "urbanized areas" than San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose does?
I dunno what Kidphilly is on about, the bay area is one big urban area. But if something is ranked above Philly, he will argue to the death that it is not. The UA I posted for the area is much closer to reality than what he posted.
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.
