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.
By looking at these numbers, it's really easy to identify who has the most bloated MSA designations. Though to be fair, there are a lot of these designations that don't make sense either, like why are San Jose's and SF/Oakland's UAs separated when the development is contiguous? That's but one example.
By looking at these numbers, it's really easy to identify who has the most bloated MSA designations. Though to be fair, there are a lot of these designations that don't make sense either, like why are San Jose's and SF/Oakland's UAs separated when the development is contiguous? That's but one example.
The same reason Baltimore & DC’s are despiser not loosing density in their UA borders
The Bay Area CSA is now comprised of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Merced, Napa, San Benito, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sonoma, Stanislaus and Solano counties.
Quote:
That's nearly 3,000 sq. miles more than Chicago's CSA, but similar in population.
So what? This just means Chicago workers are less reliant on neighboring counties for affordable housing.
It sucks that so many people need to travel 90 miles of more to get to work, but we must count them as part of us in order to know how to spend tax dollars and how to plan regionally.
I strongly suspect that Monterey county will be added next year propelling the CSA over 10 million.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joakim3
The same reason Baltimore & DC’s are despiser not loosing density in their UA borders
Always interesting to me how the US keeps it separate, but Demographia combines adjacent UA's. Does anyone know specifics behind the difference in criteria on density, and what it takes for two UA's to form one? Especially when they are adjacent. Even for the single UA's some have almost a 1 million person difference between them.
Demographia 2019 UA:
New York: 21,045,000
Los Angeles: 15,440,000
Chicago: 9,275,000
Washington DC-Baltimore: 7,515,000
Boston: 7,130,000
Dallas/Fort Worth: 6,550,000
Houston: 6,315,000
San Francisco Bay Area: 6,100,000
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 5,955,000
Atlanta, GA: 5,580,000
Phoenix, AZ 4,480,000
Detroit, MI 4,050,000
Seattle, WA 3,715,000
San Diego, CA 3,175,000
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI 2,855,000
2018 United States UA
1 New York 18,776,233 (+2.32%)
2 Los Angeles 12,616,501 (+3.83)
3 Chicago 8,636,309 (+.33)
4 Miami 6,107,242 (+10.99)
5 Dallas/Fort Worth 5,888,916 (+14.98)
6 Houston 5,704,641 (+15.38)
7 Philadelphia 5,538,175 (+1.78)
8 Atlanta 5,098,403 (+12.91)
9 Washington 5,051,789 (+10.14)
10 Boston 4,475,825 (+7.05)
11 Phoenix 4,142,622 (+14.15)
12 Detroit 3,751,407 (+0.46)
13 San Francisco/Oakland 3,565,427 (+8.66)
14 Seattle 3,513,326 (+14.84)
15 San Diego 3,189,835 (+7.88)
16 Minneapolis/St Paul 2,877,365 (+8.54)
17 Tampa/St Petersburg 2,729,645 (+11.79)
18 Denver 2,710,084 (+14.15)
19 Baltimore 2,278,976 (+3.42)
20 St Louis 2,151,139 (+0.02)
I strongly suspect that Monterey county will be added next year propelling the CSA over 10 million.
It will be interesting to see, whether SF or D.C. will be the 3rd(in the US) and 4th(in North America) to become both regions next 'Megacity'. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megacity
Always interesting to me how the US keeps it separate, but Demographia combines adjacent UA's. Does anyone know specifics behind the difference in criteria on density, and what it takes for two UA's to form one? Especially when they are adjacent. Even for the single UA's some have almost a 1 million person difference between them.
Demographia 2019 UA:
New York: 21,045,000
Los Angeles: 15,440,000
Chicago: 9,275,000
Washington DC-Baltimore: 7,515,000
Boston: 7,130,000
Dallas/Fort Worth: 6,550,000
Houston: 6,315,000
San Francisco Bay Area: 6,100,000
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 5,955,000
Atlanta, GA: 5,580,000
Phoenix, AZ 4,480,000
Detroit, MI 4,050,000
Seattle, WA 3,715,000
San Diego, CA 3,175,000
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI 2,855,000
2018 United States UA
1 New York 18,776,233 (+2.32%)
2 Los Angeles 12,616,501 (+3.83)
3 Chicago 8,636,309 (+.33)
4 Miami 6,107,242 (+10.99)
5 Dallas/Fort Worth 5,888,916 (+14.98)
6 Houston 5,704,641 (+15.38)
7 Philadelphia 5,538,175 (+1.78)
8 Atlanta 5,098,403 (+12.91)
9 Washington 5,051,789 (+10.14)
10 Boston 4,475,825 (+7.05)
11 Phoenix 4,142,622 (+14.15)
12 Detroit 3,751,407 (+0.46)
13 San Francisco/Oakland 3,565,427 (+8.66)
14 Seattle 3,513,326 (+14.84)
15 San Diego 3,189,835 (+7.88)
16 Minneapolis/St Paul 2,877,365 (+8.54)
17 Tampa/St Petersburg 2,729,645 (+11.79)
18 Denver 2,710,084 (+14.15)
19 Baltimore 2,278,976 (+3.42)
20 St Louis 2,151,139 (+0.02)
Demographia seems to be more generous in what it considers "urban" for the sake of urban area, that's for sure. I prefer the US definition, though there is a case to be made that many areas should be combined as one...
People of City-Data, do we still agree that UA is the best or most precise measurement if city size in the United States? That's been the running favorite on here for years now, even if not quite consensus...
Demographia seems to be more generous in what it considers "urban" for the sake of urban area, that's for sure.
Iirc, the Demographia urban area (for Boston at least) is the Boston, Worcester, Providence, and maybe Manchester US urban areas all mushed together. I don’t think it has a lower density threshold, it’s just more willing to cross state and county lines.
Last edited by Boston Shudra; 04-21-2020 at 06:02 PM..
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
Demographia seems to be more generous in what it considers "urban" for the sake of urban area, that's for sure. I prefer the US definition, though there is a case to be made that many areas should be combined as one...
People of City-Data, do we still agree that UA is the best or most precise measurement if city size in the United States? That's been the running favorite on here for years now, even if not quite consensus...
In places where you have single urban population centers it's close. But it under counts some others. SF is far too under counted at 3.6 million for example. The CSA is almost 10 million, that's too huge a gap to be a valid count either way. I think Demographia may be only minimally generous, I don't think it's too egregious. Look at Dallas' difference as well.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,558,075 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
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
Do you have this for all UA's or at least top 25 or so?
Always interesting to me how the US keeps it separate, but Demographia combines adjacent UA's. Does anyone know specifics behind the difference in criteria on density, and what it takes for two UA's to form one? Especially when they are adjacent. Even for the single UA's some have almost a 1 million person difference between them.
Demographia 2019 UA:
New York: 21,045,000
Los Angeles: 15,440,000
Chicago: 9,275,000
Washington DC-Baltimore: 7,515,000
Boston: 7,130,000
Dallas/Fort Worth: 6,550,000
Houston: 6,315,000
San Francisco Bay Area: 6,100,000
Miami/Fort Lauderdale: 5,955,000
Atlanta, GA: 5,580,000
Phoenix, AZ 4,480,000
Detroit, MI 4,050,000
Seattle, WA 3,715,000
San Diego, CA 3,175,000
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI 2,855,000
2018 United States UA
1 New York 18,776,233 (+2.32%)
2 Los Angeles 12,616,501 (+3.83)
3 Chicago 8,636,309 (+.33)
4 Miami 6,107,242 (+10.99)
5 Dallas/Fort Worth 5,888,916 (+14.98)
6 Houston 5,704,641 (+15.38)
7 Philadelphia 5,538,175 (+1.78)
8 Atlanta 5,098,403 (+12.91)
9 Washington 5,051,789 (+10.14)
10 Boston 4,475,825 (+7.05)
11 Phoenix 4,142,622 (+14.15)
12 Detroit 3,751,407 (+0.46)
13 San Francisco/Oakland 3,565,427 (+8.66)
14 Seattle 3,513,326 (+14.84)
15 San Diego 3,189,835 (+7.88)
16 Minneapolis/St Paul 2,877,365 (+8.54)
17 Tampa/St Petersburg 2,729,645 (+11.79)
18 Denver 2,710,084 (+14.15)
19 Baltimore 2,278,976 (+3.42)
20 St Louis 2,151,139 (+0.02)
If you read Demographia's presentation from their last report (2019), it seems that they are using 1000 ppl/m2 or 400 ppl/km2. The biggest difference with Demographia's report is that they combine urban areas that they have deemed to have grown together while CensusReporter (as evident by the map) clearly doesn't. FWIW, Census Reporter isn't part of the Census, they only package information that is intended to be more digestible for publication. Who knows with the Census Bureau is going to do with these designations going forward?
Here are just a few huge differences that stick out with the Demographia number first, followed by Census Reporter's. SLC's number actually more than doubled under Demographia. When you look at that awesome Census Reporter interactive map, it's really easy to see how Demographia comes to their conclusions.
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.
