2018 metropolitan population estimates

[golden eagle]

To piggyback off of my city population estimates topic from earlier in the week, here's a list of the top ten metros in the US (2010 numbers in parentheses):

1  New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA MSA  19,979,477  (19,567,410)   
2  Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA MSA  13,291,486  (12,828,837)   
3  Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI MSA  9,498,716  (9,461,105) 
4  Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX MSA  7,539,711  (6,426,214)   
5  Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX MSA  6,997,384  (5,920,416)   
6  Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV MSA  6,249,950  (5,636,232)   
7  Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL MSA  6,198,782  (5,564,635)   
8  Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA  6,096,372  (5,965,343)   
9  Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA MSA  5,949,951  (5,286,728)     
10  Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH MSA  4,875,390  (4,552,402)   


You can see the rest here. (Wikipedia has the latest numbers and is far more easier to find than on the Census Bureau's site.)

The New York area is getting closer to 20 million, while Houston is inching closer to 7 million. Atlanta is ready to topple the 6-million mark. Boston is clinging to #10, but Phoenix is within earshot to overtake Boston and sneak into the top ten. While Chicago is third, DFW is making a charge towards the top three. I don't expect this to happen for maybe 15-20 years, if Chicago doesn't pick up the pace. Atlanta has made significant ground in its quest to move up the rankings. Both metros started the decade with a difference of 678,615. Atlanta is now behind by just over 146K.

Denver is getting closer to topping 3 million, while San Jose, at 1,999,107, just missed the 2-million mark. Behind San Jose is Nashville, which will be the next metro poised to hit 2 million.

Grand Rapids and Tucson became millionaire metros earlier in the decade. Fresno (994,400), Tulsa (993,797) and Honolulu (980,080) are next in line to hit 1 million.

Fastest-growing metro: The Villages, FL (37.82% since 2010); fastest disappearing: Pine Bluff, AR (10.72%)

[Revive 755]

What with Terre Haute, IN, loosing population?  Did they have a major employer leave?

[-- US 175 --]

What with Terre Haute, IN, loosing population?  Did they have a major employer leave?

Either that, or major amounts of people looking for major employment somewhere else.  Much of the population growth coming into north TX is relocations from elsewhere (CA, the midwest, the northeast, etc.).

[thspfc]

Orlando is going to break the top 20 very soon, it will pass StL and Baltimore. Cleveland is going to fall multiple spots, to Indianapolis, San Jose, and Nashville. Milwaukee and Providence are going to lose ground to Jacksonville, OKC, and Raleigh. And what's the deal with Decatur and Danville IL both losing people at a very quick rate?

[webny99]

Rochester has been bumped out of the top 50, by Salt Lake City I believe.
But our position in the top 50 was always questionable, given the inclusion of Yates County (!) in our MSA. The other four outlying counties could also be debated. You could convince me that Orleans and Livingston should not be included, but Wayne probably should be (anything west of NY 88 is very much part of the metro), and I will staunchly defend the inclusion of Ontario, given that it's one of the fastest growing counties in the state. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

[Mark68]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

[thspfc]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

At this rate, we're talking about all of MA, RI, VT, NH, and CT, as well as parts of NY and ME, being the Boston metro area. If we want to go even further, then Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, and Richmond could be one big glob.
The point is, Cheyenne and Pueblo are not in the same metro area, at all.

[Max Rockatansky]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

At this rate, we're talking about all of MA, RI, VT, NH, and CT, as well as parts of NY and ME, being the Boston metro area. If we want to go even further, then Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, and Richmond could be one big glob.
The point is, Cheyenne and Pueblo are not in the same metro area, at all.

Those break points in the urban landscape between DC and Boston are almost completely closed, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to call it one urban area as a megalopolis.

[thspfc]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

At this rate, we're talking about all of MA, RI, VT, NH, and CT, as well as parts of NY and ME, being the Boston metro area. If we want to go even further, then Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, and Richmond could be one big glob.
The point is, Cheyenne and Pueblo are not in the same metro area, at all.

Those break points in the urban landscape between DC and Boston are almost completely closed, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to call it one urban area as a megalopolis.

Okay, I guess, but there are lots of break points from Cheyenne to Pueblo, even along I-25.

[Mark68]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

At this rate, we’re talking about all of MA, RI, VT, NH, and CT, as well as parts of NY and ME, being the Boston metro area. If we want to go even further, then Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, and Richmond could be one big glob.
The point is, Cheyenne and Pueblo are not in the same metro area, at all.

Those break points in the urban landscape between DC and Boston are almost completely closed, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to call it one urban area as a megalopolis.

Okay, I guess, but there are lots of break points from Cheyenne to Pueblo, even along I-25.

Not many. And they're closing. Probably the last one to close will be the ridge between Cheyenne & Ft Collins. But there really isn't a break point between Fort Collins/Greeley/Loveland and points south, and the break between Denver (really Castle Rock) and Colorado Springs (Monument) is closing (it's only about 20 miles), and between Fountain & Pueblo West is maybe another 20 miles or so...

Also, I've been to northern NH. It's pretty desolate. Sure, everything within about 50 miles of the coast is built up, but if you go north of about Concord, there isn't much other than beautiful scenery.

[Chris]

A metropolitan area is considered to be something different than an urban area.

An urban area is the region of continuous urbanization. A metropolitan area is an economic and labor market. For example Hong Kong is within the Pearl River Delta urban area, but they are two separate metropolitan areas because of a physical border which reduces economic and labor exchange.

Metropolitan areas are based on counties, so they tend to include large swaths of rural land, in fact I believe I've read somewhere that the average metropolitan area in the U.S. contains over 50% rural land, not only with the super large counties like San Bernardino and Riverside, but also in smaller counties which happen to be in the economic influence of an urban area.

I do wonder why Ventura, San Bernardino and Riverside counties are considered to be a separate MSA from Los Angeles / Orange counties. They are both continuously urbanized and have extensive labor exchange between them. The same counts for the San Francisco Bay Area.

[thspfc]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

At this rate, we're talking about all of MA, RI, VT, NH, and CT, as well as parts of NY and ME, being the Boston metro area. If we want to go even further, then Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, and Richmond could be one big glob.
The point is, Cheyenne and Pueblo are not in the same metro area, at all.

Those break points in the urban landscape between DC and Boston are almost completely closed, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to call it one urban area as a megalopolis.

Okay, I guess, but there are lots of break points from Cheyenne to Pueblo, even along I-25.

Not many. And they're closing. Probably the last one to close will be the ridge between Cheyenne & Ft Collins. But there really isn't a break point between Fort Collins/Greeley/Loveland and points south, and the break between Denver (really Castle Rock) and Colorado Springs (Monument) is closing (it's only about 20 miles), and between Fountain & Pueblo West is maybe another 20 miles or so...

Also, I've been to northern NH. It's pretty desolate. Sure, everything within about 50 miles of the coast is built up, but if you go north of about Concord, there isn't much other than beautiful scenery.

Why did I even try to get my point across? I knew my examples would get picked apart to death anyway, despite them not being the point of the post.

[golden eagle]

The problem with combining Los Angeles, R/SB, Orange County and Ventura County as one metropolitan area is how physically expansive it would be. It'd be roughly the size of Maine.

I do believe metro areas should be redefined so as not to rely solely on county lines in other states not part of New England. I can't imagine someone living in Needles or Blythe commuting everyday to Riverside or San Bernardino, much less Los Angeles.

[Bruce]

By all means, Seattle's MSA should already be over the 4 million mark. Kitsap County should be included as part of it, despite being separated by water (with ferry crossings for all but the Tacoma Narrows), and that adds about 270,000 people.

[Max Rockatansky]

By all means, Seattle's MSA should already be over the 4 million mark. Kitsap County should be included as part of it, despite being separated by water (with ferry crossings for all but the Tacoma Narrows), and that adds about 270,000 people.

I always felt Kitsap was it's own thing going.  There is a lot of open space between Gig Harbor and Port Orchard for it to really have that suburban feel.  Bremerton and Silverdale felt more like the core of a small micropolitan area.  The economy is far more based around the Navy the closer you get to the ship yards. 

[Bruce]

By all means, Seattle's MSA should already be over the 4 million mark. Kitsap County should be included as part of it, despite being separated by water (with ferry crossings for all but the Tacoma Narrows), and that adds about 270,000 people.

I always felt Kitsap was it's own thing going.  There is a lot of open space between Gig Harbor and Port Orchard for it to really have that suburban feel.  Bremerton and Silverdale felt more like the core of a small micropolitan area.  The economy is far more based around the Navy the closer you get to the ship yards. 

The Bremerton-Silverdale-Poulsbo-Bainbridge square is pretty much a micropolitan entity within the Seattle metro area. Ferry traffic is still growing (which prompted the new passenger-only fast ferries), and the area is now a bedroom community for those who work in Seattle as well as the navy workers.

[Max Rockatansky]

By all means, Seattle's MSA should already be over the 4 million mark. Kitsap County should be included as part of it, despite being separated by water (with ferry crossings for all but the Tacoma Narrows), and that adds about 270,000 people.

I always felt Kitsap was it's own thing going.  There is a lot of open space between Gig Harbor and Port Orchard for it to really have that suburban feel.  Bremerton and Silverdale felt more like the core of a small micropolitan area.  The economy is far more based around the Navy the closer you get to the ship yards. 

The Bremerton-Silverdale-Poulsbo-Bainbridge square is pretty much a micropolitan entity within the Seattle metro area. Ferry traffic is still growing (which prompted the new passenger-only fast ferries), and the area is now a bedroom community for those who work in Seattle as well as the navy workers.

It's interesting seeing how much commuter traffic is on the early Bremerton-Seattle ferries.  There was a good mixture of foot and vehicle traffic that is obviously work bound.  I usually catch the car ferry on the way back from work trips since my flights are usually in the afternoon.  I'd like to try the faster ferry but I've always had a car that I've had to lug with me. 

[bing101]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

This map might fit your description though.

[Mark68]

The problem with combining Los Angeles, R/SB, Orange County and Ventura County as one metropolitan area is how physically expansive it would be. It’d be roughly the size of Maine.

I do believe metro areas should be redefined so as not to rely solely on county lines in other states not part of New England. I can’t imagine someone living in Needles or Blythe commuting everyday to Riverside or San Bernardino, much less Los Angeles.

I would agree with this, but I'm not sure what other boundaries could be used. Where/how would you draw the line? You can't use the mountain ridgetops because the Coachella, Victor, & Antelope Valleys are economically tied to Riverside, San Bernardino, & Los Angeles, respectively. So where do Needles & Blythe (and Barstow) fit in? I think Needles, given its proximity to Laughlin (and Bullhead City) should be part of the Vegas Metro (and I would lump Bullhead and maybe even Kingman in there as well...maybe as part of a larger CSA).


But Blythe? Maybe its own micropolitan statistical area with (and I'm just spitballing here) Parker, Lake Havasu City, and Quartzsite?

What about Barstow?

[bing101]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

Here is a Map of the Northern California Mega region.

[Max Rockatansky]

Some of these need to be revised IMO out west given several metro areas have grown together.  San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose ought to be a single metro area along with Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino.  There is literally no break in the urban sprawl in those particular areas of California.

I would actually say San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose/Sacramento/Stockton/Salinas/Modesto/Fresno could easily be one. Another could be Los Angeles/Riverside/San Bernardino/Anaheim/Santa Barbara/Bakersfield/San Diego/Tijuana/El Centro/Mexicali would be another.

You could probably add Denver/Boulder/Fort Collins/Greeley/Cheyenne/Colorado Springs/Pueblo/Canon City as another.

This map might fit your description though.

Aside from Tracy there is too much separating San Joaquin Valley from being part of the Bay Area or Sacramento.  All the communities have a huge geographic barrier from the Bay Area via the Diablo Range.  The farms separate the communities even further into isolated pockets usually alongside CA 99. 

Regarding Phoenix, Flagstaff and Tucson there is way too much mountain, reservation and desert in the way to consider those one metro area. 

[golden eagle]

Looking at the Great Lakes region, there's too much rural space between Kankakee and Champaign-Urbana for C-U to be part of the megalopolis. I can't see the Front Range region stretching all the way to Albuquerque. Isn't there a lot of mountains between Albuquerque and Pueblo?

[golden eagle]

Orlando is going to break the top 20 very soon, it will pass StL and Baltimore. Cleveland is going to fall multiple spots, to Indianapolis, San Jose, and Nashville. Milwaukee and Providence are going to lose ground to Jacksonville, OKC, and Raleigh. And what's the deal with Decatur and Danville IL both losing people at a very quick rate?

You can also lump Pine Bluff with Danville and Decatur.

[bandit957]

The government has a set of rules for defining metropolitan areas. Each metropolitan area is centered on an urbanized area, which is just the contiguous built-up area. A metropolitan area may end up with more than one urbanized area, but it always has at least one. A county is included in the metropolitan area if a significant amount of its population lives in the urbanized area, if a significant amount of its residents work in the counties that have the urbanized area, or if a significant amount of people working in the county live in the counties that have the urbanized area.

It's usually pretty accurate. But some big drawbacks include having huge counties like San Bernardino, or having to use urbanized areas that just go on way too far - for instance, Miami (which includes Palm Beach County) or Boston (which includes Portsmouth, NH).

Each urbanized area has to have at least 50,000 peeps for a metropolitan area. The government also uses these rules to define micropolitan areas around areas with at least 10,000.