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.
^nice, they combined the San Jose and San Francisco urban areas together. That list isn't direct from the US census though (it's from demographia.com, which took census data and applied some of their own methodology to it).
But, it seems to be pretty much exactly the same combination the US census is planning to do in 2013 when they update the nation's metro/urban areas (FINALLY, in SF/SJ's case).
I agree, the bay area should be one MSA. It's consistently dense from S.F to San Jose. If D.C and Baltimore combine they would have 6,790,000 in 2959 sq.mi., 2294/sq.mile dropping to #10 in density.
"Weighted" density my friend. The article said PHX had 2.9 mill in 800 sq. miles, according to your chart it is denser than metro Philly which has around 4mil in 800 sq. miles. Out west there are alot less old small towns in the ex-urban expanse that keep the overall density just high enough to be considered "urban" and stretch out the size of the urban area. It just stops, and then there is completely uninhabited deserts or mountains. The exurbs of metro Boston and Philly in praticular, are dotted with so many little boroughs and towns and bonefide cities that there urban footprint is stretched much further out, and thus the density numbers get watered down.
"Weighted" density my friend. The article said PHX had 2.9 mill in 800 sq. miles, according to your chart it is denser than metro Philly which has around 4mil in 800 sq. miles. Out west there are alot less old small towns in the ex-urban expanse that keep the overall density just high enough to be considered "urban" and stretch out the size of the urban area. It just stops, and then there is completely uninhabited deserts or mountains. The exurbs of metro Boston and Philly in praticular, are dotted with so many little boroughs and towns and bonefide cities that there urban footprint is stretched much further out, and thus the density numbers get watered down.
This article was based on Phoenix urban area populaton/density according to the 2000 census. It now has 4,100,000 in 798 sq. miles.
Phoenix, Scotsdale and Mesa alone are over 800 sq miles and and has just over 2M people all together, so I have no idea how they are coming up with 4.1 in 700sq miles. There is a huge miscalculation somewhere.
Maybe the article got the urban area limits wrong.
Phoenix is passed 500 sq miles
Mesa and Scottsdale are like 180 and 130 sq miles.
Peoria is about 140 sq miles
add in Tempe, Surprise, Gilbert, Glendale and the rest and that 4.1M people come from an area twice as large as the article is suggesting.
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.
