2011 US city population estimates

[english si]

^ How does China handle suburban areas - under the main central city government, or under many separate local governments?

Varies. Chongqing, for instance, claims to be the most populous city in the world at 28,846,170. The actual met population is more like 6 or 7 - hardly small but nowhere near the size. The city itself covers 31,815 sq mi - mostly rural hinterland - a similar area to places like Maine, South Carolina, Portugal and the UAE.

Beijing and Shanghai also have a similar set up, but have larger met areas and less hinterland administered by them.

Most of the other large cities in China probably include the entire Met area plus some hinterland, but don't form provinces in their own right - a quick look on wikipedia suggest that while these cities are big, they also are inflated with places outside the metro area.

Don't forget that these large cities outside the countries formerly known as the First World are also huge due to a lack of planning regs stopping sprawling growth. Certainly if it wasn't for WW2 and the Green Belt Act, London would reach Birmingham and the South Coast as continuous urban area - the 30s sprawl would have just kept on going. As it is, people commute from cities like Leicester and Southampton (80-100 miles) daily into London.

[golden eagle]

Out of curiosity, I see that San Diego's metro area is now called San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos. Yet, Oceanside and Chula Vista, which are both larger than Carlsbad and San Marcos, are not mentioned. Why is that?

Also, I was looking at the populations of micropolitan areas and a few had over 100K people. Why weren't they designated as metro areas?

[agentsteel53]

is Oceanside its own metro area?

Chula Vista - because nobody cares about it 

[DTComposer]

Out of curiosity, I see that San Diego's metro area is now called San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos. Yet, Oceanside and Chula Vista, which are both larger than Carlsbad and San Marcos, are not mentioned. Why is that?

is Oceanside its own metro area?

Metropolitan areas use counties as their building blocks, so all of San Diego County is one metro area. Of course, using counties is fundamentally flawed, since those boundaries don't reflect patterns of development. Classic example: Blythe, CA is part of the Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area.

As to the naming, the Census Bureau has some formula for choosing what they call "Principal Cities" (of which up to three may be used in a metro area's title) that involve employment numbers as well as population, so the largest cities population-wise may not always be in the title.

[golden eagle]

Metropolitan areas use counties as their building blocks

Except for New England

Of course, using counties is fundamentally flawed, since those boundaries don't reflect patterns of development. Classic example: Blythe, CA is part of the Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area.

In the case of Riverside and San Bernardino counties, I do agree with you there. However, most other American counties are not nearly as big. Just imagine if Riverside and San Bernardino counties were a part of L.A.'s metro area, it could be possibly be the largest in the world with over 31,000 square miles (closer to 34K if you want to throw in Orange County).

As to the naming, the Census Bureau has some formula for choosing what they call "Principal Cities" (of which up to three may be used in a metro area's title) that involve employment numbers as well as population, so the largest cities  population-wise may not always be in the title.

In a way, that does make sense. Atlanta's metro area is officially called Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta. Both the Marietta and Sandy Springs area do have a large number of jobs (particularly Alpharetta, north of Sandy Springs).

[jgb191]

My hometown of Corpus Christi, Texas is the same size as Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.....furthermore, we're larger than pro-sports cities of Orlando, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Salt Lake, Newark, and Green Bay.

The third largest city in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex -- and the seventh largest city in Texas -- is Arlington, which is larger than seven, yes that's right, seven NFL cities alone not counting cities labeled on other pro-sports teams.

Austin and Fort Worth are the largest cities in the nation that are not themselves explicitly labeled on a pro-sports team.

[swbrotha100]

Can San Jose, CA ever top the 1 million mark? When I think of the Bay Area, it's usually San Francisco, then Oakland, then San Jose, and everything else there.

[golden eagle]

The latest estimates show San Jose getting closer to a million, at 967K, up from 945K in 2010. If the trend continues at the current pace, then there could be a million by next year. Had the dot-com bubble not busted, maybe San Jose could've already been there.

[6a]

Mesa is the 38th largest city, it's even larger than Atlanta or Miami.

It is rather mind-blowing knowing that the historically big cities are now being passed by places like Mesa. Just a couple of decades ago, who'd thought Austin, Charlotte and Jacksonville would become larger than Wasington, Baltimore and Detroit?

I have a dictionary my dad gave me - it was printed in 1967.  Here are the top 20 cities:

New York - 7,781,984
Chicago - 3,550,404
Los Angeles - 2,479,015
Philadelphia - 2,002,512
Detroit - 1,670,144
Baltimore - 939,024
Houston - 938,219
Cleveland - 876,050
Washington, DC - 763,956
St. Louis - 750,026
Milwaukee - 741,324
San Francisco - 740,316
Boston - 697,197
Dallas - 679,684
New Orleans - 627,525
Pittsburgh - 604,332
San Antonio - 587,718
San Diego - 573,224
Buffalo - 532,759

Other cities of note, in no particular order:
Charlotte - 201,564
Columbus - 471,316
Nashville - 170,874
Memphis - 497,524
Phoenix - 439,170
Salt Lake City - 189,454
Austin - 186,545
El Paso - 276,687
Oklahoma City - 324,253

edit: San Jose - 204,196, Corpus Christi - 167,690.

Georgia is listed as having 3,943,000 people, Arizona 1,302,000, Texas 9,580,000.

[6a]

Hell, might as well add the biggest metros as well:

New York - 10,694,633
Los Angeles-Long Beach - 6,742,696
Chicago - 6,220,913
Philadelphia - 4,342,897
Detroit - 3,762,360
San Francisco-Oakland - 2,783,359
Boston - 2,589,301
Pittsburgh - 2,405,435
St. Louis - 2,060,103
Washington, DC - 2,001,897
Cleveland - 1,796,595
Baltimore - 1,727,023
Newark - 1,689,420
Minneapolis-St. Paul - 1,482,030
Buffalo - 1,306,957
Houston - 1,243,158
Milwaukee - 1,194,290
Paterson-Clifton-Passaic - 1,186,873
Seattle - 1,107,213
Dallas - 1,083,601
Cincinnati - 1,071,624
Kansas City - 1,039,493
San Diego - 1,033,011
Atlanta - 1,017,188

These are ALL the metros over one million.

[huskeroadgeek]

I'd like to know how they defined some of those metro areas back then. Some of the populations seem low even for 1967. Like Dallas for instance-since Ft. Worth isn't mentioned, it must not include Tarrant County.

[golden eagle]

Haven't Dallas and Fort Worth always been considered separate metros? I'm guessing Dallas' metro may've only included Dallas County and perhaps one other county or two. In 1960, Dallas County had a population of just over 950K; it jumped to over 1.3 million by 1970. Of course, a lot of metros weren't as physically large then as they do now, like Atlanta.

I didn't realize Baltimore was as close to a million people as it was. It is rather startling to see how far down some cities have fallen, especially Detroit. From a city that was approaching two million to now that's close to falling below 700K...wow!

One thing of note: Nashville's huge population rise in the 60s is as a result of them merging with Davidson County (minus a few independent cities that didn't merge).

[6a]

You might be right re: Fort Worth.  It was listed as having 356,268 people.  Added with Dallas, that's 1.03 million...not much room there for the rest of Dallas County!

The one thing that blows my mind is how some metros today have more people than the entire state did back then.

[golden eagle]

Even now, Atlanta's metro makes up more than half of Georgia's population. There aren't too many states than can say that. Nevada and Delaware can. Perhaps, a couple of others too.

[blawp]

Even now, Atlanta's metro makes up more than half of Georgia's population. There aren't too many states than can say that. Nevada and Delaware can. Perhaps, a couple of others too.

Arizona probably too.

[huskeroadgeek]

Haven't Dallas and Fort Worth always been considered separate metros? I'm guessing Dallas' metro may've only included Dallas County and perhaps one other county or two. In 1960, Dallas County had a population of just over 950K; it jumped to over 1.3 million by 1970. Of course, a lot of metros weren't as physically large then as they do now, like Atlanta.

The census bureau currently defines Dallas-Ft. Worth as one metropolitan area. But I don't know how long that designation has been around.

[DTComposer]

Haven't Dallas and Fort Worth always been considered separate metros? I'm guessing Dallas' metro may've only included Dallas County and perhaps one other county or two. In 1960, Dallas County had a population of just over 950K; it jumped to over 1.3 million by 1970. Of course, a lot of metros weren't as physically large then as they do now, like Atlanta.

The census bureau currently defines Dallas-Ft. Worth as one metropolitan area. But I don't know how long that designation has been around.

http://www.census.gov/population/metro/data/pastmetro.html

Looks like they were combined beginning with the 1970 census.

[empirestate]

Even now, Atlanta's metro makes up more than half of Georgia's population. There aren't too many states than can say that. Nevada and Delaware can. Perhaps, a couple of others too.

New York, most famously. (I don't know exactly how the NYC metro population breaks down by state, but it's certainly very close to half the state's population.)

[huskeroadgeek]

Even now, Atlanta's metro makes up more than half of Georgia's population. There aren't too many states than can say that. Nevada and Delaware can. Perhaps, a couple of others too.

New York, most famously. (I don't know exactly how the NYC metro population breaks down by state, but it's certainly very close to half the state's population.)

Illinois as well.

[golden eagle]

If you combine New York with Nassau-Suffolk and the counties immediately north of NYC, it would take up over more than half the state. Really, NYC and Nassau-Suffolk can make that up just by themselves.

Food for thought: All of New Jersey is part of a metro area.

[Road Hog]

Rhode Island also.

[Brandon]

Even now, Atlanta's metro makes up more than half of Georgia's population. There aren't too many states than can say that. Nevada and Delaware can. Perhaps, a couple of others too.

New York, most famously. (I don't know exactly how the NYC metro population breaks down by state, but it's certainly very close to half the state's population.)

Illinois as well.

Illinois is about 3/4 of the population in just seven counties in NE Illinois (Cook, DuPage, Lake, Will, Kane, McHenry, and Kendall).

[swbrotha100]

Metro Phoenix makes up 2/3 of Arizona's population.

[CL]

The Wasatch Front (which is really three metropolitan areas in one enormous urban area) comprises eighty percent of Utah's population.

[Chris]

Washington contains all of D.C.'s population.