[bay_area]

Oldie but goody-from Jun 2004, Courtesy of the good folks over at SSP

US Urbanized Areas to scale..

New York

Los Angeles

Chicago

Washington

San Francisco

Philadelphia

Dallas

Boston

Detroit

Houston

Miami

Atlanta

Seattle

Phoenix

Minneapolis

Cleveland

San Diego

St Louis

Denver

Pittsburgh

Cincinnati

Portland

Kansas City

Indianapolis

Columbus

San Antonio

Milwaukee

Las Vegas

New Orleans

 

[Shawn]

Boston-Providence CSA 2010! (map is the same used above, not a 2010 projection)

 

[chicagogeorge]

.....................

This is Chicago/Milwaukee in 2004? I now believe that this region will become a combined statistical area before 2020!

Here is another look at Chicago sprawl....

 

[bay_area]

good job george, I was trying to combine those two but kept messing up..LOL

 

[chicagogeorge]

Hey Bayarea,

That outer ring of urbanization in the Bay Area map, is that Sacramento and other adjacent areas? If so, I am very impressed at how close the sorrounding urbanized areas have become with the Bay Area itself.

 

[samsonyuen]

It's amazing how some of these are so large. Some are larger than you'd think (the Bay area is huge!), and some are smaller than one would think too (DFW).

 

[bay_area]

Toronto

London

Paris

Mexico City

Hong Kong

Sao Paulo

 

[bay_area]

Hey Bayarea,

That outer ring of urbanization in the Bay Area map, is that Sacramento and other adjacent areas? If so, I am very impressed at how close the sorrounding urbanized areas have become with the Bay Area itself.

Yeah,
that big red blob in the upper right corner is Sacramento in all its glory. Stockton and Modesto are in the middle to lower right.

I have really mixed feelings about the valley. First and foremost, it is some of the richest agricultural land in the world-and here we are destroying it because snooty Assholes here in the bay area are unwilling to allow development closer in-they seek to preserve something that doesnt really belong to them and in the process-are doing more harm then good. 30 years ago, the suggestion of Stockton being a bedroom community of San Francisco would be greeted by raucous laughter-on both sides of the Coastal Range-now its becoming a reality.

Now excuse me while I get off my soapbox....LOL

 

[chicagogeorge]

Yeah,
that big red blob in the upper right corner is Sacramento in all its glory. Stockton and Modesto are in the middle to lower right.

I have really mixed feelings about the valley. First and foremost, it is some of the richest agricultural land in the world-and here we are destroying it because snooty Assholes here in the bay area are unwilling to allow development closer in-they seek to preserve something that doesnt really belong to them and in the process-are doing more harm then good. 30 years ago, the suggestion of Stockton being a bedroom community of San Francisco would be greeted by raucous laughter-on both sides of the Coastal Range-now its becoming a reality.

Now excuse me while I get off my soapbox....LOL

And from what I know about California politics, I doubt any anti-sprawl legislation will ever be passed to prevent the urban build up of the valley between the Bay and Sac town. We are dealing with the same shit here (as you can see on the maps).

 

[bay_area]

from those maps and projections, it wouldnt be a shock to see Chicago cross into Iowa someday.

It would appear that the biggest urban areas agglomerations int the whole world are New York, Tokyo(The Map is a red x so I cant copy but its HUGE), Los Angeles and Chicago. Tokyo cause we're talking 30 Million people, and the US cities cause that's just how we build.

Mexico City is smaller then The Twin Cities and Cincinatti covers more developed land then Paris....LOL

 

[chicagogeorge]

from those maps and projections, it wouldnt be a shock to see Chicago cross into Iowa someday.

Iowa would be a stretch for sure, but what has been known as the Chicago tri-state area, will definetly be called the quad -state area (Michigan) by 2020.

 

[chicagogeorge]

A similar situation is occuring in the Southland, where the Great Los Angeles area is merging with San Diego via the Inland Empire, bypassing Camp Pendleton. My question is how much moutainous land is there east of the military base and in between the two metros, which my prevent a complete merger situation that is occuring in Chicago/Milwuakee and NYC/Philly?

 

[Xusein]

It seems New York's sprawl is creeping slowly more closer to Hartford every day...that fateful day, it will swallow us whole.

New York

Those red spots in the extreme northeast are the cities of Waterbury and Meriden, which are both about 25 miles away from Hartford, and are considered part of NYC's Metro. I already see it today, the once divisions from the metros are blurring more, New York has a bigger chance of swallowing us more than Boston.

 

[Avian001]

from those maps and projections, it wouldnt be a shock to see Chicago cross into Iowa someday.

It would appear that the biggest urban areas agglomerations int the whole world are New York, Tokyo(The Map is a red x so I cant copy but its HUGE), Los Angeles and Chicago. Tokyo cause we're talking 30 Million people, and the US cities cause that's just how we build.

Mexico City is smaller then The Twin Cities and Cincinatti covers more developed land then Paris....LOL

These are fun comparisons, but we also have to remember that they do not account for differences in density. That's why Mexico City appears smaller than the Twin Cities for example.

And I'm not sure that Chicago's march into Iowa would be a good thing.

 

[chicagogeorge]

It seems New York's sprawl is creeping slowly more closer to Hartford every day...that fateful day, it will swallow us whole.

New York

Those red spots in the extreme northeast are the cities of Waterbury and Meriden, which are both about 25 miles away from Hartford, and are considered part of NYC's Metro. I already see it today, the once divisions from the metros are blurring more, New York has a bigger chance of swallowing us more than Boston.

The New York Metro area is one big ass monster that will swallow many smaller metros in the years to come........

 

[JBOB]

I like the Density Maps, here's another map for you all, add this which is also one of my favorite density maps.

 

[Avian001]

I like the Density Maps, here's another map for you all, add this which is also one of my favorite density maps.

Sorry man, but this map has almost nothing to do with density.

Consider that this is a satellite map. And it shows - more or less - the distribution of streetlighting. Not necessarily building density.

Streetlighting is widely variable. There are no national standards, so one city might stand out above a neighbor simply because it has a more aggressive streetlighting campaign.

And now ask yourself when this map was made. Was it in the winter, when deciduous trees dropped their leaves and so favors the northern cities? Or was it summer, when trees are in full leaf and thus might favor the narrow-leafed trees of the south that give the illusion that they are more brightly lit?

All I'm saying is that these kinds of maps cannot be taken at face value.

Do not rely upon them for definitive information!

However, the claim in the key seems to indicate that each dot represents a certain number of people. But ask yourself, how was this information obtained? This is clearly a satellite map and is therefore subject to the criticisms above. Who determined the density distribution that is claimed?

 

[JBOB]

Well let's it makes sense to me and my other billion maps, so I'll stick with this. LOL.

 

[UWMilwaukeeJay]

walworth co. wisconsin is in chicago's msa now too? yikes. Im glad Milwaukee claimed racine before you gathered hold of it.

 

[bay_area]

These are fun comparisons, but we also have to remember that they do not account for differences in density. That's why Mexico City appears smaller than the Twin Cities for example.

And I'm not sure that Chicago's march into Iowa would be a good thing.

1. Absolutely, this has nothing to do with density-just built up land.

2. Chicago marching into Iowa isnt a good thing-but we need to acknowledge things as they are, not how they should be.