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.
I dunno about that. DFW is huge. LA is much much bigger when you go to CSA level (not talking about the desert area), it can stretch 100 miles in several routes through it.
In regards to LA and Bay Area maybe topping DFW, I was speaking in regards to the amount of major cities by population in each metro not overall land area.
Largest Metro by "land area" Jacksonville, Fla. It includes the whole county.
That is incorrect, Jacksonville is mostly coterminous with Duval county but it's METRO includes multiple counties. Jacksonville is the largest city, not metro by land area.
Why do people use metro area instead of urban area for land area comparisons? Metro areas (as in MSAs) aren't meant for those kind of comparisons but for posters focus on them and avoid urban areas. Metro areas follow county lines and can include lots of undeveloped or rural areas; the Los Angeles metro area includes an uninhabited mountain range. Use urban areas rather than tossing meaningless numbers.
Some may dislike that urban areas separates ones they believe should be put together; but one can always manually add up separated urban areas. Better to err on the side of over-separation rather than under; you can't separate manually. If I remember right, I got about 1,050 square miles from adding up the urban areas in the Bay Area. Regardless of measure, the NYC urban area is the largest; none comes close. But the Los Angeles metro area (MSA) is larger.
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.