2018 US Urban Area Estimates... (best, cost, state, places)

[btownboss4]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Urban Area Pop Per Square Mile, 2018:
7,267 Los Angeles
6,816 San Francisco/Oakland
5,442 New York
4,932 Miami
3,823 Washington
3,614 Phoenix
3,536 Chicago
3,478 Seattle
3,436 Houston
3,305 Dallas/Fort Worth
2,805 Detroit
2,795 Philadelphia
2,389 Boston
1,927 Atlanta

I actually wonder what Boston/Atlanta would look like if their UA,’s were 3.55 million people.

Like Boston would likely shed 825 sq miles or so by dropping 930k.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Urban Area Pop Per Square Mile, 2018:
7,267 Los Angeles
6,816 San Francisco/Oakland
5,442 New York
4,932 Miami
3,823 Washington
3,614 Phoenix
3,536 Chicago
3,478 Seattle
3,436 Houston
3,305 Dallas/Fort Worth
2,805 Detroit
2,795 Philadelphia
2,389 Boston
1,927 Atlanta

6,816 San Francisco-Oakland
6,311 San Jose

6,637 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose

That's 5.370 Million people in 809 sq miles.

Anyhow, I think Palo Alto is actually in the SF urban area even though its in the SJ metro area.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by btownboss4

I actually wonder what Boston/Atlanta would look like if their UA,’s were 3.55 million people.

Like Boston would likely shed 825 sq miles or so by dropping 930k.

I know, too bad.

[btownboss4]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I know, too bad.

Boston, Atlanta and Philly all have a ton of land in the 1000-1250ppsm range which boosts up their UA vs western counterparts just because the eastern seaboard has a very high “rural density” compared to the rest of the country. Si it doesn’t take a lot to bump them to UA status

[atadytic19]

Originally Posted by murksiderock

Minimum 500,000 population. Couldn't find a streamlined list, so sourced via (this is such an excellent data site lol):

http://censusreporter.org/profiles/4...rbanized-area/

Parentheses is % growth from 2010...


53 El Paso 814,170 (+1.38)
54 McAllen, Tx 808,344 (+10.91)
16.23)
...

El Paso is usually seen as the 5th largest area in Texas but it seems like McAllen is blowing past it.
I think McAllen recently passed it in MSA size.

Also, it is interesting that the gap between Houston and DFW in MSA is widening but they are getting closer by UA. Looking at the UA map it looks like from the MSA only Galveston US and Conroe UA are missing/ very disconnected.

[jd433]

Wow, I cant believe how empty Atlanta is. This has totally changed my perception.

[jdaelectro]

Originally Posted by jd433

Wow, I cant believe how empty Atlanta is. This has totally changed my perception.

Yeah, it's easily the most sprawl heavy/low density, large population center in the US.

[murksiderock]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

This isn't going to make the "SF is like NYC" crowd very happy. Undoubtedly, this thread will be rife with explanations of why UA isn't a useful metric because of SF's ranking here.

As we can see, SF is in imminent danger of being surpassed in UA population by Seattle, and even San Diego is within striking distance. In both SD and LA, the UA and MSA is nearly the same number.

Lmao yeah Bay Areans aren't gonna like a ranking of 13th, slipping to Seattle...

For the record though, I do feel like at the very least SJ should be combined with SF UA...

Sacramento is the most rapidly urbanizing California area, unless you count the IE separately from LA (I don't). Proud of my city...

[Chicagoland60426]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

The Bay Area CSA has 9.6 million people.

The SF-Oakland urban area is also only 526 sq miles which is by far the smallest in physical size of the top 25.

My source: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/all?g...E&vintage=2018. 2018 5 year estimates puts it at 100,000 less.

A quick google search says SF Bay area has 7.753 million. Confusing.
However, wikipedia does say 9.66 million, covering 13,621 sq. miles.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Jo...atistical_Area

That's nearly 3,000 sq. miles more than Chicago's CSA, but similar in population. But, which is it? I would think straight from the census data is the more accurate estimate.

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Urban Area Pop Per Square Mile, 2018:
7,267 Los Angeles
6,816 San Francisco/Oakland
5,442 New York
4,932 Miami
3,823 Washington
3,614 Phoenix
3,536 Chicago
3,478 Seattle
3,436 Houston
3,305 Dallas/Fort Worth
2,805 Detroit
2,795 Philadelphia
2,389 Boston
1,927 Atlanta

At least in urbanized area, this reveals that LA has a very uniform sprawl, in that the vast majority of the metro population(12.6 mil out of 13.2 mil) basically reside in an extension of LA proper, given the density is not too far higher for the city at 8,000. Same for Phoenix; in fact the density increases from just the city proper.

It's funny seeing Phoenix as more dense than Chicago in this form of statistical configuration. Without context, one may come to think Phoenix is actually a more urban in the typical sense.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by jd433

Wow, I cant believe how empty Atlanta is. This has totally changed my perception.

It's low-density but it's not exactly empty. The core of the urbanized area will naturally be denser than the fringes.