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.
The only one of these areas that's even close to being a true megacity is Chicago. Its' true urban population is about 9.1 million people. Chicago has that population in just over 2600 square miles. Just for comparison's sake, Toronto's Golden Horseshoe is over 12,000 square miles. DC and the Bay Area are even more spread out. So, the answer is Chicago.
The only one of these areas that's even close to being a true megacity is Chicago. Its' true urban population is about 9.1 million people. Chicago has that population in just over 2600 square miles. Just for comparison's sake, Toronto's Golden Horseshoe is over 12,000 square miles. DC and the Bay Area are even more spread out. So, the answer is Chicago.
Er, that isnt the question being asked.
But I agree, Chicago is by far the most resembling a megacity because it's actual urbanized area is huge.
Getting to 10 million tho, how soon do u think that will happen?
- Toronto's Golden Horseshoe is projected to reach 12 million by 2035.
- Chicagoland's current state lends it a population of 11 million by 2035.
- DMV's current state lends it a population of 12 million by 2035.
- Bay Area's current state lends it a population of 10.5 million by 2035.
Honestly though, projecting beyond 10 years span is erroneous. Too many things can and will change in a long term scenario. We don't even know the current state of Chicagoland and DMV in 2013, Chicagoland's posted improvement in it's economy while the DMV's seen a cool off. Don't know yet on how that will affect their annual growth and by how much exactly. Also don't know what state Toronto's housing market is going in right now, there's a lot of confusion regarding the demand market presently and we wont know for up to another year. As well as the fact that the Bay Area rides the highs and lows of the technology boom, we don't even know how long that will go on yet.
It's year to year basis for progress for all four of these cities honestly.
Wont know until 2014 either way. However, the four places with these current boundaries and definitions, I agree with one of the above posters, under these definitions it will be far too easy becoming a megacity (10 million - 19,999,999). Which will give North America four megacities and three hypercities, total of seven above 10 million. Again with this current definition, I suppose.
This is exactly what I thought before opening the thread. I think Toronto and DC will have the highest growth percentages and population totals for their respective metro areas based on current/future trends and projections.
I know it's not listed, but the Dallas Metroplex is expected to hit over 10 million in 2035 (or 2040) I believe.
Well maybe it is a 40 year projection which would make sense, straight-lining anything that far however to me does not
And a question for Montclaire (a serious one) is there enough undeveloped land that is buildable to extend to these numbers, or would this be significant build ups outside the inner bay with some densification within as I just dont see the inner bay doubling density but am curious on thoughts of where the geography could handle so-to-speak given the area
The San Francisco Bay Area has been beat down from the dot-com bubble bursting and the housing crash, so I think it is poised for a pretty big boom, which it is now in the process of. The new tech boom seems a lot more sustainable. Also future trade with the countries in Asia is going to put the west coast on high growth in the future. It is the fastest growing part of California. Chicago, for all the talk of its recovery isn't really posting gains to its CSA enough to stay above DC and SF. I have no idea what the current state of Toronto is. I think it will come down to DC or San Francisco. San Francisco for sure if the federal government ever makes cuts.
San Francisco is only 800,000 people and its metro area only has 4.3 million people. Almost no one in real life considers Stockton part of the San Francisco area. Why do San Franciscans think their area compares to Chicago, Toronto, or DC, truly world cities? I don't get it. You aren't LA. Live with 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.
