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 know that people are moving out of michigan rapidly and esp. places like Flint and Detroit, but I highly doubt Detroit has lost 150,000 plus since the 2008 estimate.
I would say city proper will be somewhere in the area of 820,000 to 880,000.
Now THIS is a cool thread! I am gonna start with the two largest metros in my state (Charlotte and Raleigh).
Charlotte
725,000 city
1.8 million MSA
2.4 million CSA
Charlotte's MSA could change to included two counties that border Charlotte's home county. If this change occurs, Charlotte's 2010 MSA population would be 2 million even (8 counties with roughly 4,000 sq/mi of land)
Charlotte's CSA could merge with the Hickory NC MSA (located about 45 minutes NW of Charlotte's downtown). If this change occurs, Charlotte's 2010 CSA population would be 2.8 million (16 counties with roughly 8,000 sq/mi of land).
Raleigh
415,000 city
1.2 million MSA
1.8 million CSA
Raleigh's MSA could merge again with the Durham NC MSA. If this change occurs, Raleigh's MSA would have 1.8 million people (8 counties with 4,500 sq/mi of land).
Raleigh's CSA could add Wilson county NC (as well as a few others in Eastern NC). I would expect the CSA to gain 200,000 from this addition. If this happens, Raleigh's CSA could be 2 million even with nearly 10 or 11 counties (5,500 to 6,200 sq/mi of land total).
As far as I am concerned, NC has two MSA areas with over 2 million people. MANY cities in the Midwest and the South has TONS more land in their current MSAs than the larger cities of NC. For example, the MSA of Atlanta has over 8,000 sq/mi (however, Atlanta can back up such a large MSA). Smaller cities than Atlanta also have rather large MSA land areas. Nashville covers 5,700 sq/mi. Kansas City covers 8,000. Las Vegas covers 8,000. Compare that to the 3,100 sq/mi MSA of Charlotte and the 2,100 sq/mi MSA of Raleigh, and it is EASY to see that MSAs fail at telling just how many people live in a certain area. I would LOVE for folks to post the land area of some of these MSA/CSA regions on this thread. Posting land area will help explain a lot when it comes to certain cities appearing to be "bigger" on paper.
I would agree with your Charlotte estimates. I think the Raleigh and Durham MSAs should be merged back together. While I'm at it, Winston-Salem and Greensboro should be merged back to one MSA for that matter.
Well, if the CA Department of Finance is as accurate as they have proven to be:
Los Angeles city proper is about: 4,065,000
L.A. MSA (L.A. and Orange Counties): 13,500,000
L.A. CSA (L.A., Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties): 18,530,000
Now THIS is a cool thread! I am gonna start with the two largest metros in my state (Charlotte and Raleigh).
Charlotte
725,000 city
1.8 million MSA
2.4 million CSA
Charlotte's MSA could change to included two counties that border Charlotte's home county. If this change occurs, Charlotte's 2010 MSA population would be 2 million even (8 counties with roughly 4,000 sq/mi of land)
Charlotte's CSA could merge with the Hickory NC MSA (located about 45 minutes NW of Charlotte's downtown). If this change occurs, Charlotte's 2010 CSA population would be 2.8 million (16 counties with roughly 8,000 sq/mi of land).
Raleigh
415,000 city
1.2 million MSA
1.8 million CSA
Raleigh's MSA could merge again with the Durham NC MSA. If this change occurs, Raleigh's MSA would have 1.8 million people (8 counties with 4,500 sq/mi of land).
Raleigh's CSA could add Wilson county NC (as well as a few others in Eastern NC). I would expect the CSA to gain 200,000 from this addition. If this happens, Raleigh's CSA could be 2 million even with nearly 10 or 11 counties (5,500 to 6,200 sq/mi of land total).
As far as I am concerned, NC has two MSA areas with over 2 million people. MANY cities in the Midwest and the South has TONS more land in their current MSAs than the larger cities of NC. For example, the MSA of Atlanta has over 8,000 sq/mi (however, Atlanta can back up such a large MSA). Smaller cities than Atlanta also have rather large MSA land areas. Nashville covers 5,700 sq/mi. Kansas City covers 8,000. Las Vegas covers 8,000. Compare that to the 3,100 sq/mi MSA of Charlotte and the 2,100 sq/mi MSA of Raleigh, and it is EASY to see that MSAs fail at telling just how many people live in a certain area. I would LOVE for folks to post the land area of some of these MSA/CSA regions on this thread. Posting land area will help explain a lot when it comes to certain cities appearing to be "bigger" on paper.
If Raleigh is going to be reunited with Durham to form one Triangle MSA, we may as well estimate 2010 populations for the three other municipalities that make up its core. So, here are my guesses for them:
Durham: 235,000
Cary: 150,000
Chapel Hill: 59,000
That said, I don't think Raleigh will be 415,000 at Census time. I think it will be closer to 400,000-405,000 based on slower mobility nationally based on the recession. That said, if the city annexes a significant amount of its ETJ, the 415,000 number might be reached or surpassed.
California is interesting because the State's estimates are really much more accurate. I say that because once the Census is actually taken and the bureau isn just estimating, the results are that CAs own estimates were right all along. Currently the state says the Bay Area CSA has 7.702 Million
Just like in 1999 when the Census said we only had 6.6 Million-the 2000 Census revealed 7 Million.
And so based on California's estimates I'll say:
SF City 860,000
SF MSA 4,600,000
SF CSA 7,800,000
And then there's the question of San Joaquin County, which is very likely to combine with the SF CSA soon(currently sending 13% of all its workers15 as of the latest estimates to the Bay Area-once it hits 15% it will be added as a part of the Bay Area)
Adding San Joaquin could raise the CSA population to as high as 8.5 Million
But who knows.
LOL san joaquin is seperated by 20 odd miles of mountain range from exurban livermore and is nothing but cow towns. Stockton is not the bay area,. Tracy maybe an exurb but thats about it.SJ county is like 600k people. When you factor in the populations of mountain house and tracy which is about 90k its easy to assume more than half of all commuters to the bay area from sj live in south sj county. By the time you hit Places like Lathrop and French Camp (before stockton) it is clearly an agricultural area/
LOL san joaquin is seperated by 20 odd miles of mountain range from exurban livermore and is nothing but cow towns.
San Joaquin County is forecast to hav 682,500 people in 2010 and as of 2000, 13% of its workers commuted to the Bay Area. Once that number reaches 15% the county will combine with the Bay Area. That's what matters.
Cows are totally irrelevent.
Quote:
By the time you hit Places like Lathrop and French Camp (before stockton) it is clearly an agricultural area/
Napa County is almost totally rural, much of Sonoma, Solano, Santa Cruz and San Benito Counties are too, but they are all still part of the Bay Area Combined Statistical Area. And Hollister is 20 miles further away from SF than Lathrop is so distance really doesnt matter either.
Its all a matter of where people work and money flowing from one place to another.
City Proper 3,100,000- Estimates always show Chicago as if it was losing population but it's not. People move to Chicago from all parts of the world. That's what happened during the 2000 Census when they said Chicago was losing population but in reality it wasnt.
City Proper 3,100,000- Estimates always show Chicago as if it was losing population but it's not. People move to Chicago from all parts of the world. That's what happened during the 2000 Census when they said Chicago was losing population but in reality it wasnt.
Chicago's metropolitan area - 10.3 Million.
I am not very optimistic that Chicago will ever see 3 million again, I think your guess of +200,000 new residents is not likely, while people may be moving downtown, most of the working class/poor neighborhoods are actually loosing many people. The avg household size is shrinking in Chicago.
I do however think we will break the 10 million mark for metro area.
City Proper 3,100,000- Estimates always show Chicago as if it was losing population but it's not. People move to Chicago from all parts of the world. That's what happened during the 2000 Census when they said Chicago was losing population but in reality it wasnt.
Chicago's metropolitan area - 10.3 Million.
The problem is Chicago is losing more than gaining.
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.
I am gonna start with the two largest metros in my state (Charlotte and Raleigh).
