Possibilities
-LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield
-SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
-Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore

Chicago, Milwaukee

Possibilities
-LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield
-SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
-Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore
Kill me if that happened in this century.

Possibilities
-LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield
-SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
-Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore

Hmm. The more likely of those three sets is the second one.

Raleigh annex Knightdale PLZ PLZ PLZ

Unfortunatly, the San Francisco Bay Area is spreading out to Sacramento, Stockton & even Modesto. Hopefully though, not to Fresno!

Raleigh annex Knightdale PLZ PLZ PLZ

What would that do? lol, raise Knightdale's taxes? I'm sure they'll want that.

None in England, we have Green Belts to prevent this

HK and Shenzen...perhaps?

Gold Coast and Brisbane definately. That'll happen before 2050.

Newcastle-Sydney-Penrith-Campbeltown-Wollongong-Goulborn?-Yass?-Jervis Bay?

Bellarine Peninsula-Geelong-Melbourne-Ballarat?-Seymour-Mornington Peninsula

Den Haag, Delft & Rotterdam in the Netherlands. There are green belts, but those are just to small

Is SF spreading nortward into Marin and Sonoma?

lille-lens-douai-bethune

marseille- toulon


nice-monaco-cannes


cairo alexandria?

NY and Philly already are one contiguos area. There is no separation of empty land whatsoever in the 80 miles between them.

Chicago, Milwaukee

Imagine if the skyline stretched all the way up the lakefront and through Milwaukee. :drool:

Actually, Marin & Sonoma are already included in consolidated SF Bay metro area. Marin has lots of protected areas, such as Point Reyes National Seashore, and has discouraged development, so that county has seen little population growth. Most of the growth has leapfrogged further north, to Sonoma, which has jumped way ahead of Marin populationwise. Real key to smart growth of Bay Area is building up, not out, which devours open space & agricultural land.

yea but then id live in raleigh!

HongKong-Macao-Guangzhou-Shenzehn

Kraków-Katowice-Bielsko Biała-Ostrava

Seattle-Vancouver

LOL. San Diego will merge with Los Angeles, but there's no way in hell Phoenix and Las Vegas would.

The most likely mergers are Milwaukee-Chicago, San Diego-Los Angeles, Boston-Providence, Detroit-Toledo, Cincinnati-Dayton, et al. In the future we may see Tampa-Orlando, San Antonio-Austin, New York-Philadelpha, etc.

LOL. San Diego will merge with Los Angeles, but there's no way in hell Phoenix and Las Vegas would.

The most likely mergers are Milwaukee-Chicago, San Diego-Los Angeles, Boston-Providence, Detroit-Toledo, Cincinnati-Dayton, et al. In the future we may see Tampa-Orlando, San Antonio-Austin, New York-Philadelpha, etc.

NY-Philly is one contiguous area now. It doesn't have to wait for the future.
Also, the train ride from Manhattan to Center City Philadelphia is 1 hr., 6 mins on Amtrak's Acela Express.

Imagine if the skyline stretched all the way up the lakefront and through Milwaukee. :drool:

I could dig it!

Gold Coast and Brisbane definately. That'll happen before 2050.

Newcastle-Sydney-Penrith-Campbeltown-Wollongong-Goulborn?-Yass?-Jervis Bay?

Bellarine Peninsula-Geelong-Melbourne-Ballarat?-Seymour-Mornington Peninsula

Goulburn and Yass? Is this a plan just to make Sydney become the capital of Australia by eventually reaching Canberra? :D

The Mornington Peninsula has been considered a part of Melbourne's metropolitan area for quite some time now. But the Melbourne 2030 plan has set an urban growth boundary.

Oh, and with the SEQ conurbation, I think it'll be Ballina-Byron Bay-Tweed Coast-Tweed Heads-Gold Coast-Brisbane-Beaudesert-Boonah-Warick-Ipswich-Rosewood-Caboolture-Sunshine Coast(filling in the gaps between Nambour, Maleny, Caloundra, Maroochydore, Noosa ect)-Gympie-Maryborough?

The NY - Philly merge?

Okay, well I can say NY and Jersey City because those two skylines are so close to each other, when driving on the NJ Turnpike, both skylines seem to merge and become one huge dense area of sky towers.

On the other hand, you can't see the Philly skyline from NY or vise versa.

Now, I do manage to pick up radio stations from both NY and Philly, so you could technically say so.

I wish Seattle & Vancouver but there's a border and some mountains preventing it from happening.

NY-Philly is one contiguous area now. It doesn't have to wait for the future.
Also, the train ride from Manhattan to Center City Philadelphia is 1 hr., 6 mins on Amtrak's Acela Express.

It's not quite contiguous, though the urban areas are so close that they almost touch. In fact, why the census bureau kept Trenton NJ as a separate UA is beyond me. It is and should be included in Philadelphia's UA. In the next two or so decades the New York-Philadelphia area will probably be on contiguous area, but it's possible the census bureau may change its standards by then.

In the very distant future, Manchester and Liverpool and possibly Leeds

It's not quite contiguous, though the urban areas are so close that they almost touch. In fact, why the census bureau kept Trenton NJ as a separate UA is beyond me. It is and should be included in Philadelphia's UA. In the next two or so decades the New York-Philadelphia area will probably be on contiguous area, but it's possible the census bureau may change its standards by then.

It is contiguous. I live in NY and go to Philly a lot. There is no break between the N.J. suburbs of NY and those in Philly, and there is no undeveloped, empty land in the 80 miles between the two cities.

In all due respect, if you're from Detroit, what's the basis of your claim? I'm curious.

Perhaps LA and SF in a million years since the San Andreas fault is moving LA to the direction of SF right?

Isn't merged cities something of a bad idea?

The entire Gulf Coast o the UAE is rapidly approaching a situation where all the cities will 'merge'

I hope one day in my life time, Belligham-Everette-Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia-Centralia-Kelso-Portland-Salem-Eugene could be a long urban chain.

Porto-Gaia

Chicago-Milwaukee
Los Angeles-San Diego
New York-Philadelphia

These are the most likely, I think, and for each of them you could argue that they already are connected to a certain degree.

NY and Philly already are one contiguos area. There is no separation of empty land whatsoever in the 80 miles between them.

I would say, almost touch. Definetely by 2020 they two metros will be one combined metro. However, New Jersey did pass several conservation/anti-sprawl laws recently, which would keep some land in central New Jersey reserved for agricultural use.

http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/86/46554686.gif

Chicago-Milwaukee
Los Angeles-San Diego
New York-Philadelphia

These are the most likely, I think, and for each of them you could argue that they already are connected to a certain degree.

Yes, I would also add the Bay Area with Sacramento to that list as well.

By 2020-30 Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford, Madison, and South Bend should be one continous metro of about 15-16 million people.
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/60/46554760.gif

Los Angeles and San Diego will also be one combined metro.
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/09/46554809.gif
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/16/46554816.gif

Bay Area and Sacramento:
http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/31/46554831.gif

yea but then id live in raleigh!


lol. how old are you? What at all would be exciting about Knightdale being annexed to Raleigh? It's not going to make any difference at all. Raleigh isn't a dense city, living in the city of Raleigh is not going to make you an urban dweller. At least not if it's just because Knightdale gets annexed by it.

Boston and Providence are 45 minutes driving apart, and have frequent commuter rail between them- there is some open land south of boston however.


Hartford/Springfield?
Share an Airport- I 91 connects them, about 20 miles.

HongKong-Macao-Guangzhou-Shenzehn

If you look at it, these cities are sort of merged forming the Pearl River Delta metro area. Also, Dongguan as well.

Except Hong Kong and Macau are still SAR.

Toronto-Hamilton-Niagria Peninsula-Buffalo NY

^^Actually you can drive between these cities without ever knowing you left the city. It's one long urban area.

San Diego and LA might merge....and it would be tragic :cry:

I would say, almost touch. Definetely by 2020 they two metros will be one combined metro. However, New Jersey did pass several conservation/anti-sprawl laws recently, which would keep some land in central New Jersey reserved for agricultural use.

http://factfinder.census.gov/leg2/86/46554686.gif

They do touch and are one, contiguous area. I drive or take the train between the two cities almost once per month. I am a New Yorker and have superior knowledge of my city than someone who's not from here.

In all due respect, if you're from Detroit, what's the basis of your claim? I'm curious.


Oh, I'm sorry. You're right, I'm just some dumb yokal who lives in fly-over country. I can't possibly know anything besides cows and cornfields.

For one, the two urban areas do not touch. They are separated by the Trenton, NJ UA. Secondly, you are right that development exists non-stop between the two cities, however, that development is not completely contiguous. There are large enough gaps between the developments that the Census Bureau is able to effectively delineate urban boundaries for the four UAs in the area (Trenton, Hightstown, New York, and Philadelphia). Who knows if even more development in that area will make it harder for the Census Bureau to delineate the urban boundaries by 2010, but it will happen. Granted, I personally think the Trenton UA shouldn't have been separate from the Philadelphia UA. If the two were combined than Philadelphia's UA and New York's UA would technically be adjacent, but that's not how the Census Bureau delineated the UAs.

Originally Posted by michal-skoczen
HongKong-Macao-Guangzhou-Shenzehn
Hong Kong will definitely not merge with Macau. They are 2 separate special administrative regions. The border with Shenzhen will not disappear either.

Durban-Pietermaritzburg

Vereeniging-Johannesburg-Pretoria-Soshanguve (Already happened pretty much)

Taos-Espanola-Los Alamos-Santa Fe-Albuquerque-Belen-Soccorro-Truth or Concequences-Las Cruces-El Paso-Ciudad Juarez ( I hope this NEVER happens!!!, more likely Santa Fe-Espanola-Albuquerque-Belen-Soccorro....)

Gold Coast and Brisbane definately. That'll happen before 2050.

Newcastle-Sydney-Penrith-Campbeltown-Wollongong-Goulborn?-Yass?-Jervis Bay?

Bellarine Peninsula-Geelong-Melbourne-Ballarat?-Seymour-Mornington Peninsula

Goulburn is 200 kilometres from Sydney and there's not much inbetween. Maybe you need to go to Europe to see what can fit it 200 kilometres? Australia is too sparsely populated for something like that to happen.

I doubt Sydney will join to Newcastle, due the Hawkesbury River and the rocky mountains and national parks. Rather, I think the Central Coast will join Newcastle (rather than looking to Sydney) and form their own greater metropolitan area.

Penrith and Campbelltown joining Sydney seems far more likely. I'd throw Camden, Richmond and Windsor in there as well. I think all these areas are already 'officially' part of Greater Sydney, but I think they are really their own places at present.

Wollongong? Like Newcastle, there are rocky mountains and national parks inbetween, so I think Wollongong will continue to develop on its own.

Brisbane-Gold Coast seems destined to happen - very unfortunate though, as it will be one gigantic and very boring suburban mess full of the elderly and unhappy Victorians. Visit Florida to see South-east Queensland's future.

Abu Dhabi, Jebel Ali, Dubai, Sharjah, Ajman, Umm AlQaiwain and Ras Al Khaima!!!!
_____
Al-Khore-Doha-Wakra

Oh, I'm sorry. You're right, I'm just some dumb yokal who lives in fly-over country. I can't possibly know anything besides cows and cornfields.

For one, the two urban areas do not touch. They are separated by the Trenton, NJ UA. Secondly, you are right that development exists non-stop between the two cities, however, that development is not completely contiguous. There are large enough gaps between the developments that the Census Bureau is able to effectively delineate urban boundaries for the four UAs in the area (Trenton, Hightstown, New York, and Philadelphia). Who knows if even more development in that area will make it harder for the Census Bureau to delineate the urban boundaries by 2010, but it will happen. Granted, I personally think the Trenton UA shouldn't have been separate from the Philadelphia UA. If the two were combined than Philadelphia's UA and New York's UA would technically be adjacent, but that's not how the Census Bureau delineated the UAs.

Don't be defensive. No offense was intended. My point was that I live here, and you don't. Therefore, I am in a better position to know about my city.

I don't care what the census bureau says. Trenton is part of the Philly metro, and there is no gap whatsoever between NY and Philly. NJ suburbs lie between them, and NJ is by far the most densely populated state. Also, its population is concentrated in the eastern part of the state which "separates" NY and Philly.

I don't have to live in New Jersey to know how the census bureau delineates urban areas, and it doesn't matter where you live either. Obviously you aren't in a better position to determine whether or not the two are consolidated, otherwise you wouldn't think they have already merged.

I don't have to live in New Jersey to know how the census bureau delineates urban areas, and it doesn't matter where you live either. Obviously you aren't in a better position to determine whether or not the two are consolidated, otherwise you wouldn't think they have already merged.

That's an illogical statement, but you're entitled to your opinion.

Yeah! in Australia, Brisbane and the GC (Gold coast) i would say in ten years tops it will become a conurbation... the development in this gap corridor is phenomenal, well for Australian standards.

And... nitro2038 The way Brisbane will be planed is worked around a growth corridor and urban village type structure which will help combat the problem you just mentioned... see for yourself... http://www.zone4.com.au/dev/cityshape/site/
:eek2:
and for the old Victorian statement... unlike Sydney, Brisbane actually has a sustainable future to look forward to... And speak for yourself geeeess, Sydney is just a dieing city will poor weather and economic growth, i mean like I'm sorry to say but all the young people are moving up here because everything in Sydney is ridiculously overpriced! try getting from St Leonards to the airport without paying a toll... hmmm might take you a couple of hours...

Detroit-Toledo is very likely (Detroledo). So is Cincinnati-Dayton (Cinday).

These cities are already somewhat linked. Detroit and Toledo are only 54 miles apart. Cincinnati and Dayton are 49 miles apart. Sprawl has created a lot of suburbs in between these cities.

Toledo and Detroit also share media channels. Ditto with Cincinnati and Dayton. All four cities have their own TV and radio stations, but there is a lot of overlap.

Amsterdam-Almere.
There's still quite some water between it. But Amsterdam is growing eastward on artificial islands (IJburg) and Almere is a very fast growing new town and also planning to build in the water between those cities. There are plans to make a tramway between the cities. And sowieso the distance over water is not more than maybe 10 kilometer. You can see the skylines easily over the water.
Like Wssps said Rotterdam/Delft/Den Haag is the same story. It's all called Randstad. Hardly any green space left there between those cities/towns.
I am new here and not sure how to post pictures/maps, hope in future to be able, I will show you more...

Shenzhen and Shanghai is def on the list and Taipei, Seoul,

China will takeover the world market trust me on that

Maybe some German cities,

- The Ruhrarea
- Koln, Bonn and Leverkusen
- Frankfurt, Mainz, Wiesbaden and Darmstadt

There close to each other and most have already an integrated transportsystem



You can always see greenbelts as cityparks.

The biggest city of the future looks set to be the Pearl River Delta from Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau with already 60 million in an area smaller than LA and with explosive growth and infrastructure projects 'connecting the tissues'. When China suburbanises the cities are going to be seriously HUGE: Beijing-Tianjin, Shanghai-Suzhou-Hangzhou etc. Ive travelled between those cities and there really isnt that much room between them, just endless new suburbs. The ones in Hangzhou were already so 'endless' and new I mistook it for Shanghai proper.

However if the Tokyo megalopolis creeps that little bit more outward and connects up to the Osaka megalopolis thats going to take out the topspot again.

I hope one day in my life time, Belligham-Everette-Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia-Centralia-Kelso-Portland-Salem-Eugene could be a long urban chain.

Why would you wish this? Isn't Everett-Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia good enough!!?? Even so, it'd be at least 100 years until something like this may even start to occur... But if it did that'd be one long metro area!!! LIke what? 400 miles?

Shenzhen and Shanghai is def on the list and Taipei, Seoul,

China will takeover the world market trust me on that

Taipei and Seoul??

Pakistan's capital Islamabad's merger with its sister city Rawalpindi is likely. It was even in Islamabad's major plan that some day in the future both the cities wud merge.

..

..

None in Thailand right now. In the future, BKK+ others provinces around BKK.

Well I am from Philly and I went to New York 3 times last summer via I-95. The argument abt NY and Philly...well in my opinion isn't fully contiguous. Takin' I-95 as I arrive NJ...well there's alotta farms...but I see some homes but mostly trees and farms for about half an hour then I start seeing urbanity pick up as I get closer. I believe in a way, it's contiguous but not fully contiguous. I mean if it was contiguous then why wouldn't the census bureau add the metros?

That's an illogical statement, but you're entitled to your opinion.

It made sense to me.

Personally, I hope that NONE of these metros merge. Sprawl is already horrible, why add to it? I would much prefer retrenchment to the city cores and densification within metro areas, than miles and miles of additional and anonymous (anywhere USA) Walfarts, McShitties, and track housing subdivions.

Winnipeg-Bangkok-Aukland-Santiago-Odessa

Odessa Ukraine or Odessa Texas? ;)

Hartford, CT and Springfield, MA are basically one metro already. We're only like 25 miles apart.

By the year 2050?

Definitely the Greater Santiago Area with the Greater Valparaíso Area.

These are 10 of the largest metropolitan regions (although, some I don't see fully "merging"--they'll cooperate alot, though) that I see either already formed or currently forming in the United States.

New York-Philadelphia (New York, Philadelphia, Bridgeport, et al.)
Greater Southern California (Los Angeles, Riverside, San Diego, et al.)
Greater Chicagoland (Chicago, Milwaukee, Madison, et al.)
Greater Northern California (San Francisco, Sacramento, San Jose, et al.)
Capital Metropolis (Washington, D.C., Baltimore, et al.)
Greater New England (Boston, Providence, Hartford, et al.)
Northern Florida (Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, et al.)
Greater Detroit (Detroit, Toledo, Lansing, etc.)
Southern Florida (Miami, Port St. Lucie, et al.)
Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex (Dallas, Fort Worth, et al.)

Of course, there are others, including (in no particular order):
Ohio Triangle (Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton, et al.)
Carolina Quadrangle (Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro, et al.)
Phoenix-Tucson (et al.)
Twin Cities (Minneapolis, St. Paul, St. Cloud, et al.)
Northern Ohio (Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, et al.)
Las Vegas-Paradise (et al.)
Northern New York (Buffalo, Rochester, et al.)
Denver Springs (Denver, Colorado Springs, et al.)
Louisville-Lexington (et al.)
Greater Kansas City (Kansas City, Topeka, St. Joseph, et al.)
Flatwater Metroplex (Omaha, Lincoln, Sioux City, et al.)
Oklahoma City-Tulsa (et al.)
San Antonio-Austin (et al.)

Copenhagen and Malmo - if it hasn't happened yet...

Winnipeg-Bangkok-Aukland-Santiago-Odessa
:hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious :hilarious
Well, in this case, I would say, New York+Dubai+Paris+Sydney+beijing.

TORONTO, HAMILTON, AND OSHAWA?!.. In other countries they would be in our metro... But you cannot merge metros in Canada.

San Antonio & Austin

Holla for the Cedar Rapids - Iowa City Metro!

Cedar Rapids is around 210,000 now and Iowa City is maybe 120,000. There is still about 10 miles of undeveloped land between them, but what's that in the car age. I grew up right in the middle of them, it's so cute to hear people back home talk about the "explosive" growth - even though it's always been about 15%-20% a decade for decades now. 35,000 people over the past 10 years seemed almost silly when I came to Chicago where it was around 950,000 over the same period.

They're good people though, I just had to give the love where the love was due.

Beirut, Lebanon and Malmo

In northern Italy, Padua is slowly merging with Venice.

At least, the dry part of Venice :weird: :hahano:

Hong Kong- Vancouver

Islamabad-Toronto





j/k

looking at a map--Miami/Tampa/Orlando/Jacksonville could easilly in the near future become a super metro region.

No they couldn't. They may become what many refer to as a "megalopolis", but even that wouldn't happen for many, many decades. There are other areas of the country that are denser, yet aren't one metro. The stretch of land between Saginaw and Pittsburgh has quite a few cities. So does the area stretching between Atlanta and Raleigh.

Is SF already connected to sacremento by sprawl, or is there a significant amount of space between them? I know the diablo mountains form a buffer to the east, but what about the highway connecting sacremento to SF via Solano County?

Not even close. Along I-80, there are a few cities (Fairfield, Vacaville, Dixon, and Davis) between Vallejo and Sacramento, but there are still several miles of undeveloped land in between. Going the other way (along various stretches of highway), you have Pleasanton, Livermore, Tracy, Manteca, Stockton, Lodi, and Galt before you reach Sacramento.

True, there are still several miles miles of undeveloped land between SF Bay & Sacramento along I-80. Maybe even a bit more. But that's not really much when you consider that the distance is over 80 miles.

Actually there are only three significant vacant stretches left along that route. The fairly steep hill passes both north & south of Fairfied & the Yolo Causeway between Davis & Sacramento. Davis, home of a UC campus, lies mostly within the Sacto CMSA, but also has a tiny leg within the SF Bay CMSA. So these two areas are rapidly merging physically as well as demographically & economically.

However, there's no more reason to consolidate Sacto within the Bay Area than to fold Philly within NYC. Even though the urbanized areas are connecting, each retains it's own distinctive regional identies.

The Bay Area derives its uniqueness from the body of water for which it is names, the dramatic surrounding topography & and at least for the inner portions, & the year-round coolness. Sacto derives its identity from the flat Central Valley agriculture, the rivers, & the contrasting seasons, particularly the long hot, dry, summers.

MANILA is now called MEGA MANILA, with the rapid growth of its population and development in my opinion, it will have a possibility to merge with the SUBIC BAY Metopolitan Area in the North.

Other major urban areas in the Philippines are now growing into metropolitan areas, soon the population will be shifting from Manila to these cities.

chances are the cities of durres and tirana will merge in the next decade. both cities have seen rapid growth and expansion towards eachother. durres is on the adriatic coast west of tirana and dures is expanding to the east towards tirana. tirana our capital is to the east of durres and has a mountain to it's east which only gives the city the chance to expand to the west towards durres.

http://i1.tinypic.com/v42bnr.jpg

Within 20 years, the diamond-shaped area between Madison-Rockford-Chicago-Milwaukee will increasingly start to grow together. Virtually every town, village and small city within that area is already growing at very fast rates.

It would have about 14 million people-

^^ And that metro area would be, what? The most sprawled in the world?

^^ And that metro area would be, what? The most sprawled in the world?

Yeah, Chicagoland is taking over the Midwest, but it's ok because 14 million is a number I can get used too. :D

I'd rather have 5 million people metro, with a density of 2,000/km2.. Than a 14 million metro with a density of 300/km2....

People from LA always say that they have the densest metro in North America, yet they still boast about having 14 million in the metro area, it cant go both ways. In the end, a number is just a number, and where you put borders of a CMA, or a city wont determine anything. Toronto's population is 2.5 million, LA's population is 3.5, if Toronto were to annex surrounding cities to have the same area as LA, Toronto would have nearly 3.3 million. People put boarders everywhere, but they don't mean shit. Now how a city feels, that's a different story.

Actually Los Angeles is dense and also has a lot of people. The Southern portion of Los Angeles county has 9.01 million people in just 1,414 sq. mi. That doesn't even include the northern portion of Orange County which is just as dense. In all, the core of Los Angeles fits nearly 12 million people in less than 2,000 sq. mi. In comparison New York fits about 10 million people in 600 sq. mi. Toronto fits about 5 million in 2,000 sq. mi.

http://www.downriverdetroit.net/losangelescounty.jpg

Bangkok-Nonthaburi-Samutprakran-Samutsakhon-Pratumthani-Rangsit-Nokhonprathom.

^^ And that metro area would be, what? The most sprawled in the world?

True, but there are dense pockets that could form the basis of rail development such as Elgin, Rockford, Beloit, Janesville Racins, Kenosha and Waukegan.

If it is done right. If you are in the middle of this triangle, maybe around Lake Geneva, the four cities are all within an hour's drive, so folks living there have tons of options for work or leisure. Who knows, maybe Lake Geneva could actually grow into a real city someday. But they probably wouldn't like that.

Actually Los Angeles is dense and also has a lot of people. The Southern portion of Los Angeles county has 9.01 million people in just 1,414 sq. mi. That doesn't even include the northern portion of Orange County which is just as dense. In all, the core of Los Angeles fits nearly 12 million people in less than 2,000 sq. mi. In comparison New York fits about 10 million people in 600 sq. mi. Toronto fits about 5 million in 2,000 sq. mi.

http://www.downriverdetroit.net/losangelescounty.jpg

Yes actually the Northern portion of Orange county is almost as dense as the Southern portion of LA county. There are 2.05 million people in 330 sq. mi.,with a density of 6212 ppsm. The Southern portion of Orange County has 796,000 people and 618 sq. miles, with a density of 1288 ppsm.

Is SF already connected to sacremento by sprawl, or is there a significant amount of space between them? I know the diablo mountains form a buffer to the east, but what about the highway connecting sacremento to SF via Solano County?
No but in order to consolidate, they dont have to be. Santa Rosa is divided from San Francisco by lots of undeveloped land. Santa Cruz too as well as Hollister. The reasons they are combined with San Francisco is because of commuter percentages meeting a certain threshold.

San Joaquin County(not part of the Bay Area) has miles of open space between it and Livermore-Pleasanton but traffic between the two places ranks among the worst in the nation.

This is one of the clear differences between Northern California and just about all the other places that are tossed around as places that may or may not consolidate in the future-very strong emerging commuter patterns, evidenced by very bad traffic jams at our metro fringes both on 80 at the Solano/Yolo County Line and at the Alameda/ San Joaquin County Line and these visible signs of regional ties being increasing are expected to increase at a rapid pace. Some even think it will become necessary to create a HOV lane from Auburn to San Francisco-that's over 130 miles long.

Also,
Its interesting to note that the latest population growth numbers released show strong growth in the valley while the bay grows slower, but then the bay area does far better then the valley in job growth-two factors that are totally related to each other.

Copenhagen-Malmö-Lund-Eslöv-Trelleborg-Landskrona-helsingborg-Helsingör?

Yes actually the Northern portion of Orange county is almost as dense as the Southern portion of LA county. There are 2.05 million people in 330 sq. mi.,with a density of 6212 ppsm. The Southern portion of Orange County has 796,000 people and 618 sq. miles, with a density of 1288 ppsm.


To be more fair, I split Orange County closer to the center of the county. In doing so, North Orange County has about 2.31 million in about 418 sq. mi. for a density of 5,520 ppsm. When you add that to South Los Angeles County you have 11.3 million people in 1,832 sq. mi. for a density of just under 6,200 ppsm. In comparison the Toronto CMA has a population of 4.7 million in 2,279 sq. mi. for a density of just over 2,000 ppsm.

Californians that Live in One County but Work in Another...
Per US Census Bureau

Here's an interesting list of the number of residents of counties who work in other counties. Counties in different Metropolitan Areas are in bold letters.

5,000+
Orange to Los Angeles........................185,145
Los Angeles to Orange........................160,279
San Bernardino to Los Angeles............111,439
Contra Costa to Alameda......................95,938
Alameda to San Francisco....................72,035
San Mateo to San Francisco.................71,702
Alameda to Santa Clara.........................69,669
Ventura to Los Angeles.........................68,505
Riverside to San Bernardino...................60,412
San Mateo to Santa Clara......................55,473
San Bernardino to Riverside...................52,016
Riverside to Orange...............................51,609
Contra Costa to San Francisco..............49,525
San Francisco to San Mateo..................43,306
Los Angeles to San Bernardino..............41,162
Santa Clara to San Mateo.....................40,666
Santa Clara to Alameda.........................37,015
Riverside to Los Angeles.......................36,802
Alameda to Contra Costa.......................35,517
Placer to Sacramento.............................35,458
Alameda to San Mateo...........................33,501
Los Angeles to Ventura..........................31,867
Marin to San Francisco..........................30,894
Sacramento to Placer............................29,788
San Bernardino to Orange......................28,914
Sacramento to Yolo...............................23,681
Solano to Contra Costa..........................22,018
Santa Cruz to Santa Clara......................21,540
San Francisco to Alameda......................20,834
San Joaquin to Alameda.........................19,954*
El Dorado to Sacramento.......................19,353
Riverside to San Diego...........................18,641*
Sonoma to Marin...................................18,336
Yolo to Sacramento................................17,347
San Francisco to Santa Clara.................15,868
San Mateo to Alameda...........................14,783
Stanislaus to San Joaquin.......................13,993*
Solano to Alameda.................................12,588
San Diego to Orange..............................12,277*
Orange to Riverside...............................11,451
Solano to San Francisco........................10,386
Contra Costa to Santa Clara...................10,145
Madera to Fresno....................................9,765
Orange to San Bernardino........................9,486
Los Angeles to Riverside..........................9,293
Contra Costa to San Mateo......................9,279
Ventura to Santa Barbara.........................9,009*
Merced to Stanislaus...............................8,827*
Solano to Napa.......................................8,256
Sonoma to San Francisco.......................8,192
San Benito to Santa Clara........................8,054
Santa Clara to San Francisco...................7,946
San Diego to Los Angeles........................7,768*
Fresno to Madera....................................7,674
Monterey to Santa Cruz...........................7,601*
San Luis Obispo to Santa Barbara............7,480*
Sacramento to San Joaquin.....................7,317*
Kern to Los Angeles................................7,206*
San Joaquin to Santa Clara......................7,046*
Stanislaus to Alameda.............................6,840*
Contra Costa to Marin..............................6,803
Orange to San Diego...............................6,786*
San Joaquin to Stanislaus........................6,640*
Contra Costa to Solano............................6,506
San Francisco to Marin............................6,450
Tulare to Fresno......................................6,418
San Joaquin to Sacramento......................6,296*
Los Angeles to Kern................................6,075*
San Diego to Riverside.............................5,882*
Monterey to Santa Clara...........................5,799*
Sutter to Yuba.........................................5,703
Fresno to Tulare.......................................5,374
Nevada to Placer......................................5,215*
Santa Cruz to Monterey............................5,164*
Santa Barbara to San Luis Obispo.............5,045*

Southern Wisconsin Counties to Chicago Metro
1,000+Commuters
Kenosha, WI to Lake, IL................15,342*
Rock, WI to Winnebago, IL..............4,871
Walworth, WI to McHenry, IL...........3,164
Kenosha, WI to McHenry,IL............1,660*
Racine, WI to Lake, IL....................1,422
Walworth, WI to Cook, IL................1,102

*Kenosha is already part of Chicago.


Other Northern California Counties to The Bay Area
1,000+Commuters
San Joaquin to Alameda..................19,954
Monterey to Santa Cruz....................7,601
San Joaquin to Santa Clara...............7,046
Stanislaus to Alameda......................6,840
Monterey to Santa Clara...................5,799
Stanislaus to Santa Clara.................3,822
San Joaquin to Contra Costa.............3,669
Sacramento to Solano......................3,233
Yolo to Solano.................................3,065
Sacramento to Alameda...................1,974
Sacramento to Santa Clara...............1,486
San Joaquin to San Mateo................1,434
Lake,CA to Sonoma.........................1,415
Sacramento to Contra Costa.............1,370
Sacramento to San Francisco...........1,359
San Joaquin to San Francisco...........1,194
Monterey to San Benito....................1,187
Mendocino to Sonoma......................1,023

To be more fair, I split Orange County closer to the center of the county. In doing so, North Orange County has about 2.31 million in about 418 sq. mi. for a density of 5,520 ppsm. When you add that to South Los Angeles County you have 11.3 million people in 1,832 sq. mi. for a density of just under 6,200 ppsm. In comparison the Toronto CMA has a population of 4.7 million in 2,279 sq. mi. for a density of just over 2,000 ppsm.

What I did was split the North and the South by highway 55. The sort of old industrial North and new high-tech South.

Bay Area what is the link to that county to county commuting data?

Here ya go...
http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/commuting.html

^ That list came out before the dot.com bust i wonder what it would be today.

That's the funny thing. Freeway Traffic between the valley and the Bay Area has doubled from 2000 to 2004. Tens of thousands of people left the Bay Area from 2000 to 2004, but they didnt quit their jobs.

Its interesting to note that the latest population growth numbers released show strong population growth in the valley while the bay grows slower, but then the bay area does far better then the valley in job growth-two factors that are totally related to each other.

I think the numbers have increased substantially since 2000. The Census will do a commuter survey in 2008 to determine the new Metro Boundaries for 2010...guess we'll see at that time what their findings are. :)

Here is the Alameda-San Joaquin County Line.

580 through the Altamont Pass is the entrance into The Bay Area for commuters coming in from San Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties and points east. Originally a country highway that ushered in LA-SF travelers, big trucks and produce-580 today is a major Trans-Metropolitan artery and is supposed by The New York Times to be the worst commute in the nation often backing up for miles from deep in the valley floor all the way over the pass and into suburban Alameda County.
http://www.wildnesswithin.com/Resources/image1.gif

it can be possible that berlin for germany east can merged with nauen and fürstenwalde and eberswalde but not before 2022

Liverpool & Manchester.

Johannesburg and Pretoria have almost grown together.

Sao Paulo, Campinas and Santos Metro areas and plus, dozens of other cities in between, this is about to happen already as Sao Paulo international airport is about to move to Campinas and Santos metro inhabitants already work in Sao Paulo metro and vice-versa, and this happens with Campinas and other cities arround, this is so real that many consider as one only metro area.

NY PHILLY

CHI MILWAUKEE

LA SD

How about the Canadian Golden horseshoe?. Toronto, Hamilton, on to Buffalo?

How about the Canadian Golden horseshoe?. Toronto, Hamilton, on to Buffalo?

it will for sure its almost connected now but will it ever stretch out to London or windsor/detriot??

Sacramento/San Francisco/Stockton/Modesto?

Sacramento/San Francisco/Stockton/Modesto?
Probably Salinas-Monterey too.

Dubai-Sharjah if they havn't already.

Golden Horseshoe will not grow together. Most of the Cities outside of the GTA are stopping urban boundry expansion.

I do see a Greater toronto regional municipality (Toronto, York Region, PeelRegion, and Durham Region)

as well as a Hamilton-Halton Regional Municipality(Hamilton, Burlington, and two or more merged towns(hips) in North Halton

I hope no cities merge because no city should be expanding outward... Outward expansion not only means sprawl and not only aids in hurting the inner-cities, it also contributes to destruction of habitats and severely hurts out environment.

Charleston and Huntington Wv.

Holland
Amersfoort, Zeist, Utrecht,
Hilversum, Amsterdam, Almere
Rotterdam, The Hague, Delft
Zwolle, Kampen

Porto-Gaia-Matosinhos in portugal. They already form a Metropolitan Area but are still three different cities officially .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Porto

In the South:

*Miami-Ft.Lauderdale-West Palm Beach....pretty much already there.
*Tampa-St.Pete-Orlando....not in the near future, but not far off.
*Charlotte-Raleigh/Durham-Greensboro/Triad....same as Tampa.
*Atlanta-Chattanooga...only one county currently separates the current MSAs, but it'll take a while

In the very distant future, Manchester and Liverpool and possibly Leeds


OMG, Liverpool and Manchester? Could you imagine all the hooligans stabbing their neighbors when LFC and MANU play? All the herion addicts and stolen cars? Oh, and the new accent that come about? :runaway:

^^
haha

heres a picutre of Boswash, what cities do you think will merge, or already merged?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Boswash.png

Toronto and area???

The BoWash Megalopolis of 60 million people (today), will be officially one urbanized area by the end of this century. Within the next 30 years, I see Boston and Hartford merging, New York and Philly merging. Baltimore and Washington have already merged.

L.A will merge with San Diego,then it will start working it's way North and East.

^^
haha

heres a picutre of Boswash, what cities do you think will merge, or already merged?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Boswash.png
That area is already one interconnectec motropolis, but there will most likely be areas inbetween that will be preserved fro mdevelopment. Are there plans to conect those cities ex.DC NY Boston, by high speed rail?

L.A will merge with San Diego,then it will start working it's way North and East.
Camp Penelton serves as a barrier to prevent the two metropolisis for mmerging, but they may merge via the temecula valley. The Tahachapi mountains prevent LA from spreading North into the central valley, but there is growth in the Mojave region.

San Antonio and Austin...

in cyprus in the near future(about 8-10 years from now) will merge
1) the capital nicosia with tseri and geri
nicosia has about 240,000 pop. , geri about 6,000 and tseri around 5,000 also.
before the merge though they have to be declared as municipalities,the law here states that for a village or a town to become a municipality it must have more than 5,000 voters.
so both geri and tseri need a few more years of growth before they become one with nicosia.
most recent maps of nicosia already include both tseri and geri.
tseri is about 2min from nicosia by car, driving through not built up area
geri is about 5 min

2) larnaka with meneou and kiti
larnaka is the third largest city with around 78,000 pop.
the two small villages are about 5 min driving from larnaka.
i dont know their populations.

3) paralimni with ayia napa
paralimni has about 12,000 pop and ayia napa around 2,000.
they are about 4 min driving from each other but several small industries exist between them.
it will take them around 7-8 years before they become one

Hmm when people mean merge do they mean urbanized merged(1000 people per square mile) or suburb sprawl merge(scatering of houses and development here and there)?

Oh and that map above is off quite a bit. The corridor not in a stright line like that.

That area is already one interconnectec motropolis, but there will most likely be areas inbetween that will be preserved fro mdevelopment. Are there plans to conect those cities ex.DC NY Boston, by high speed rail?

the only high speed train in amtrak's fleet is the Acela between boston and DC. but it doesn't go as fast as it could for as long as it could because they can't afford to upgrade the tracks. This is because the Boswash line (and a couple others) subsidize all the other amtrak lines in the US.

DC and Baltimore really are practically one city. The housing market in DC is so expensive that its very, very common for people to commute in from downtown B-more, where its much cheaper. Plans are underway to connect the two with one of those MagLev high speed lines, which is probably the only place in the country where it could actually work. We'll see if it goes.

Providence and Boston have a similar relationship, but on a smaller and further apart scale. The other core cities maintain some independence from each other, though the suburbs and smaller cities between philly and nyc have people commuting to both cities.

Boston and Providence are slowly integrating further with the extension of MBTA to TF Green Airport. Now all we need is for T.F. Green to be renamed, Boston Metro South Airport :)

Hmm when people mean merge do they mean urbanized merged(1000 people per square mile) or suburb sprawl merge(scatering of houses and development here and there)?

Oh and that map above is off quite a bit. The corridor not in a stright line like that.

They are in a straight line. It's just not a north-south line. Most of those major cities lie at or near the the fall line, the point where colonial ships could go no further inland and where later industry could use power from waterfalls to power industry.

Oh and that map above is off quite a bit. The corridor not in a stright line like that.

lol no shit, its cropped so you can just the urban areas and tilted so you see it vertically.

L.A will merge with San Diego,then it will start working it's way North and East.

A bit more diffcult for a L.A. San Diego merger than A NYC/ Phily merger, or a Chicago/Milwaukee merger. For one ther is a huge military base in between. and on the other hand if I'm not mistaken, it's pretty hilly east of Camp Pendelton, between San Bernardino/Riverside and San Deigo County. I think the high rate of growth and sprawl in the Inland Empire will continue, and eventually there will be nothing but urbanized area from Ventura County to the north, all the way south to the Mexican border.

Golden Horseshoe will not grow together. Most of the Cities outside of the GTA are stopping urban boundry expansion.

I do see a Greater toronto regional municipality (Toronto, York Region, PeelRegion, and Durham Region)

as well as a Hamilton-Halton Regional Municipality(Hamilton, Burlington, and two or more merged towns(hips) in North Halton


I agree that for the most part they can not merge together as a whole, but Burlington is connected to Toronto via Oakville via Mississauga and the town(ships) in North halton are actually towns and they are Milton and Halton Hills. Milton is one of the fastest if not fastest growing municipality in Canada by percentage. It has gone from 32000 in 2001 to 65000 in 2006

But I do see Hamilton joining with Burlington, even if it is a thin piece of urbanized land

How about instead of sprawling... We think about something not so impossible for some cities... Which city will be next to have over 750,000 people living in their official CBD/Downtown/City Centre boundaries.


Let's start a campaign... DENSIFY, SPRAWL SUX!

Although I don't think it could be considered merging, I think Seoul-Incheon could grow into a megalopolis. Possibly later in the 21st century, their will be a megalopolis through Busan (the Southern port city of Korea) and curve through N. Korea and down to Shanghai. If the Koreas get united that is.

Seoul and Inchon are already merged, they are MORE MERGED than is downtown Manhattan with the Upper West Side!!!!



You can walk from central Seoul (heck, even 1o miles east/southeast of it) for another 15 miles westward until you reach the Incheon Harbor and NEVER leave a neighborhood that has a population density lower than the island of Manhattan.
And the cool thing about Seoul is, that no one 1. notices 2. cares about or 3. feels good or bad about..........said fact.

It simply is a city that outthumps the entire western world without even trying. end of story.

new york- los angeles- chicago- miami- hong kong

Big Cities I would have to say Chicago/Milwaukee. Too much competition on the N.E. corridor to merge they are already connected with migration between the cities. For census sake I serious doubt it one city being belittled by the other too many egos for that to happen. With the exception of a special case like D.C. and Baltimore.