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.
Yes. As Lakeland/Polk County continues to explode, the overlap between Orlando and Tampa metros will continue to grow. I wouldn't be surprised if it soon becomes one mega region, the way Miami is (WPB to Miami, which is a similar distance.)
That's already happening and is sprawled the hell out. I think someone on another thread pointed out that sprawl stretches up from Tampa/Orlando via the turnpike and I-4. The only empty area is the green swamp.
That does seem odd. I get that the sprawl is significant in both Orlando and Tampa, but still.
Yeah, Lakeland has always been much more connected to Tampa than Orlando. Polk County is huge though, and the far Northern reaches do have spillover from Orlando. I can't wait for Brightline to be expanded to Tampa from Orlando, I refer to I-4 as Death Race 2021.
It's ridiculous that Lakeland was added to Orlando as well.
Username checks out. LOL
But yeah, it seems like the Census Bureau errs on the side of combining muSAs/small MSAs that are adjacent to two large MSAs with the larger of the two. I've heard Trenton is really more culturally connected to Philly despite being in the NYC MSA. Monroe County MI, home of Toledo's north suburbs and actually touching the city of Toledo, is in Detroit's CSA instead of Toledo's. Douglas County NV, which lies along Lake Tahoe's shoreline, was in Sacramento's CSA (2 hrs away) even though Reno is Tahoe's home base and is much closer (1 hr) --- although it looks like they've moved it to Reno's CSA now.
Birmingham-Tuscaloosa could conceivably become a CSA. They're about 50-55 miles apart, depending on where you're traveling within the metros.
I was wrong, it may happen sooner rather than later, as of 2018 the commuter rate from Tuscaloosa County to Jefferson and Shelby Counties is actually 14.2% and has risen from the 13.6% from 2012
Yep, there are certainly a number of people who work in North Austin / Round Rock / Cedar Park, and live in Killeen for cheaper housing, but there are also people who work at the hospital systems in Temple or perhaps at Fort Hood and choose to live in the Austin area because they prefer the amenities.
With San Antonio the metros may be growing together, but I don't think that there is much commuting between them. Mainly because 1.) living in Austin and working in San Antonio makes no sense and 2.) Austin doesn't have a ton of employers in South Austin, most are either downtown or north. San Antonio may be cheaper but not enough to be worth that commute.
Perhaps with Tesla opening up in southeast Austin you will see some commuting from San Antonio for that, though. (San Antonio does have an existing automotive and manufacturing labor force).
San Antonio-Austin have a better chance of forming a CSA than Killeen/Ft. Hood. Texas Toll 130 is situated in both the Austin and San Antonio metro areas. There might not be as much commuters that live in far north Austin that will commute to central S.A. for work, but a higher percentage that live in the suburban cities in between that will commute.
San Antonio has a huge manufacturing base in NE S.A. and I'm sure there is a lot of commuting into the S.A. area from throughout the region. I'm sure there are thousands of companies that have representatives that service both markets. I used to commute to southern metro Austin for work as well as many other employees from the same company that would commute to S.A. from metro Austin.
I would think the percentage is lower for commuters from the Austin area to S.A.'s far southern plants like Toyota and Navistar, those plants are a bit out of the way. But I think there would be a lot commuters from the Austin area that would commute to places like Seguin(Metro SA) which is along Texas toll 130, there is a huge Caterpillar plant there. There is definitely commuting pattern going on between both metros and I-35 being one of the most congested corridors in the U.S. is an indictor that the metros are intertwined with each other economically. Another indicator that these metros are growing together in different ways is the the forming of the Austin-San Antonio corridor council that was formed decades ago.
I found the following paragraph below about the current traffic conditions for logistics through the Greater Austin-San Antonio Corridor.
Today, 48% of the nation’s $900 billion in NAFTA trade either originates in or is destined for Texas – the vast majority of it traveling by truck up Interstate 35 through our region. This river of trade fuels millions of Texas jobs, but it comes with a price: Interstate 35 in the Austin-San Antonio Corridor has been ranked as the 4th most congested Interstate in the US, and the 3rd most-congested spot for trucks anywhere on the US Interstate System.
The Corridor council projects the corridor to reach 6-7 million people by 2030. Its safe to say that the Austin-San Antonio Corridor will eventually become at least a CSA and probably never an MSA. With this many people living in an area the size of many existing metro areas, one would think it would be destined to be designated as one unified area in some way for having such a large population.
A map of the region from several years back.
Last edited by SweethomeSanAntonio; 10-14-2021 at 10:59 PM..
I was wrong, it may happen sooner rather than later, as of 2018 the commuter rate from Tuscaloosa County to Jefferson and Shelby Counties is actually 14.2% and has risen from the 13.6% from 2012
I get why for statistical reasons CSA's exist, but man if that ever happens I hope folks don't start using the CSA metric to boost Birmingham as the anchor for a 1.4-6 million person metro. Birmingham's current CSA is already more than 6,700sq mi! CSA would then be almost as worthless as city pop for comparisons.
Birmingham MSA: 1,115,289 at 4,488sq mi Tuscaloosa MSA: 268,674 at 3,493sq mi
(57 miles downtown to downtown)
Combined CSA: 1,383,963 at 7,981sq mi!!! (This is only metro to metro and doesn't include outlying CSA county's to Bham's north.)
Say that their CSA's merged:
Birmingham CSA: 1,350,646 at 6751sq mi
Tuscaloosa MSA 268,674 at 3,493sq mi
Combined: 1,619,320 at 10,244sq mi
By comparison:
The state of Connecticut: 3,605,944 at 4,848 sq mi
The state of Massachusetts 7,029,917 at 7,801sq mi
Current CSA's for some of Bham's peers: Grand Rapids Michigan CSA: 1,423,632 at 4,573sq mi Milwaukee WI CSA: 2,053,232 at 3,775 sq mi Memphis TN CSA: 1,360,869 at 5,213sq mi Louisville KY CSA: 1,512,133 at 5,035sq mi Jacksonville FL CSA: 1,733,937 at 4,559sq mi Greenville SC CSA: 1,487,610 at 5,506sq mi
I'm not trying to single Birmingham out, but more use it as an example. If two statistical areas like Birmingham and Tuscaloosa were actually combined as one CSA they would cover more land area than several states. What would it actually change? Could anyone with intellectual honesty argue them a larger market than these peer cities that cover less than HALF the land area?
I get why for statistical reasons CSA's exist, but man if that ever happens I hope folks don't start using the CSA metric to boost Birmingham as the anchor for a 1.4-6 million person metro. Birmingham's current CSA is already more than 6,700sq mi! CSA would then be almost as worthless as city pop for comparisons.
Birmingham MSA: 1,115,289 at 4,488sq mi Tuscaloosa MSA: 268,674 at 3,493sq mi
(57 miles downtown to downtown)
Combined CSA: 1,383,963 at 7,981sq mi!!! (This is only metro to metro and doesn't include outlying CSA county's to Bham's north.)
Say that their CSA's merged:
Birmingham CSA: 1,350,646 at 6751sq mi
Tuscaloosa MSA 268,674 at 3,493sq mi
Combined: 1,619,320 at 10,244sq mi
By comparison:
The state of Connecticut: 3,605,944 at 4,848 sq mi
The state of Massachusetts 7,029,917 at 7,801sq mi
Current CSA's for some of Bham's peers: Grand Rapids Michigan CSA: 1,423,632 at 4,573sq mi Milwaukee WI CSA: 2,053,232 at 3,775 sq mi Memphis TN CSA: 1,360,869 at 5,213sq mi Louisville KY CSA: 1,512,133 at 5,035sq mi Jacksonville FL CSA: 1,733,937 at 4,559sq mi Greenville SC CSA: 1,487,610 at 5,506sq mi
I'm not trying to single Birmingham out, but more use it as an example. If two statistical areas like Birmingham and Tuscaloosa were actually combined as one CSA they would cover more land area than several states. What would it actually change? Could anyone with intellectual honesty argue them a larger market than these peer cities that cover less than HALF the land area?
I actually think the CSA is the best indicator for size/influence of a city. For another comparison though, New Orleans has 1.5 million in 11,000 sq mi, although only 6384 sq mi is actual land.
I wonder if any mergers could happen in southern Michigan. Most of the metro areas are adjacent to each other.
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.
