What do you think your Metro Area's population will be in the 2010 Census? (comparison, Boston)

[LakeShoreSoxGo]

I think the core stops at SFO and on the east Richmond and Oakland other other side. On either side of the bay once you pass those locations the cities get much less dense and have a much more older suburban nature. San Leandro, san Pablo, and Milbrae look nothing like urban cores, dense as they may be. Berkeley, Daly City, Alameda those are much more "core" cities.

[CMDallas]

mmm the same maybe add 100,000 or 200,000 maybe up to 500,000 if we grew THAT much.

[CityPerson09]

DFW: 6.50 Million
Dallas: 1.32 Million
Fort Worth: 780,000

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by LakeShoreSoxGo

I think the core stops at SFO and on the east Richmond and Oakland other other side. On either side of the bay once you pass those locations the cities get much less dense and have a much more older suburban nature. San Leandro, san Pablo, and Milbrae look nothing like urban cores, dense as they may be. Berkeley, Daly City, Alameda those are much more "core" cities.

I tend to agree.

I would define the core of the SF urban area as:

West
SF
Daly City
Colma
South SF
San Bruno
SFO

East
Oakland
Emeryville
Piedmont
Alameda
Berkeley
Albany
El Cerrito
Richmond
San Pablo

I guess its where I feel the suburban feel ends and the more crowded, dense feeling areas begin.

But to be honest, the density on the Peninsula is very constant and goes well beyond the Airport. In can't really think of a significant break along 101 at all until where that MBZ dealership is in Belmont, but even then, West of the freeway is still very dense.

As far as the East Bay, once you get to Pinole the density drops off considerably but before that its pretty constant from the Bay Bridge all the way up. From 880 its pretty constant all the way from Oakland to Hayward and Union City. Fremont is so huge and has all this room to grow that it has some open spaces visible from the freeway, albeit very small.

[jjohns252525]

For DC I would say:

DC, city limits-550,000
Metro-5,750,000
CSA (includes Baltimore metro)-8,250,000

[rah]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I tend to agree.

I would define the core of the SF urban area as:

West
SF
Daly City
Colma
South SF
San Bruno
SFO

I think i would also add places such as San Mateo, Redwood City, Palo Alto, etc as being core cities along the peninsula too.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by rah

I think i would also add places such as San Mateo, Redwood City, Palo Alto, etc as being core cities along the peninsula too.

Yes, I definitely agree.

Guess I subconciously stopped at the areas that could be mistaken as being 'ghetto'. LOL

[gwillyfromphilly]

Originally Posted by wpmeads

hummm, my guess for my city:

Houston
2.6 million city
6 million MSA
6.1 million CSA

It difinitely wont be that high.

[gwillyfromphilly]

Originally Posted by Spade

I bet Census will show that it's gaining. Census right now is undercounting numerous cities. Philadelphia just picked up some residents because they undercounted them. The metro however will be either at 10 million or very VERY close to 10 million. I will be adding to the 10 million within the next year or year and a half.

You are absolutely right. They do undercount Philly's population and a couple of other cities.

[djmario_88]

Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly

It difinitely wont be that high.

Yea you're right. It won't be that high.