San Francisco, officially City and County of San Francisco and colloquially known as SF, San ... statistical area in the United States, the San Jose–San Francisco–Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area (9.67 million residents in 2018).
Yea, I think the greater Bay Area has close to 10 million people, but that's stretching it a lot distance wise.
It takes like 2 - 2.5 hours to drive from Santa Rosa down to San Jose. When I think of SF metro I think of SF, Daly City and East Bay, maybe some South Bay cities.
Yea, I think the greater Bay Area has close to 10 million people, but that's stretching it a lot distance wise.
It takes like 2 - 2.5 hours to drive from Santa Rosa down to San Jose. When I think of SF metro I think of SF, Daly City and East Bay, maybe some South Bay cities.
How CSA's are determined can be debated for sure but as far as an interconnected economic/urban region I would say the Bay Area is pretty clearly defined
Even if the Bay Area CSA is a hair away from 10 million, a CSA is a not a metro area. The actual urbanized region of the Bay Area is most definitely not yet a megacity.
Even if the Bay Area CSA is a hair away from 10 million, a CSA is a not a metro area. The actual urbanized region of the Bay Area is most definitely not yet a megacity.
Yeah, SF doesn't feel like a mega city. In terms of urban areas, SF comes in at #13 in the U.S. When you combine SF with San Jose it jumps to #8, but that's still not mega-city status. There are only 3 cities in the U.S. that are even debatably mega cities:
New York - definitely
Los Angeles - probably
Chicago - possibly
Yea, I think the greater Bay Area has close to 10 million people, but that's stretching it a lot distance wise.
It takes like 2 - 2.5 hours to drive from Santa Rosa down to San Jose. When I think of SF metro I think of SF, Daly City and East Bay, maybe some South Bay cities.
The Modesto or Merced MSA was added, I don't remember which one, to the bay area CSA recently.
Largest for me would be NYC.
By whose estimates? I assume you mean by metro area and not city proper, although listing city proper could be interesting, too.
If we use Wikipedia's lists, this is probably the best page to start with as it discusses "city proper," "urban area" and "metro area" as distinct definitions.
For me, the five largest cities I've visited for each category from that Wikipedia page, in order, are below. I don't know what I expected, but I thought there'd be more than just 1 variant city between the lists. Between the different measures, there are seven cities that appear in my top five, depending on how they're measured.
Averaged overall, order for the seven:
Shanghai
Beijing
New York
Mexico City
Moscow
Istanbul
Los Angeles
I think that that list fits the subjective "feel" of each of those cities pretty well.
Ranked "Six ways to Sunday ..."
City proper (from page above):
Shanghai
Beijing
Istanbul
Moscow
Mexico City
Urban area (from page above):
New York
Shanghai
Mexico City
Beijing
Moscow
Urban area (from Demographia)
Shanghai
New York
Mexico City
Beijing
Moscow
Urban area (from citypopulation.de)
Shanghai
Mexico City
New York
Beijing
Los Angeles
Metro area (from page above):
Beijing
Shanghai
Mexico City
New York
Moscow
Metro area (from dedicated Wikipedia metro areas list page):
Shanghai
Beijing
New York
Mexico City
Los Angeles
__________________
[SIZE="1"]I like travel and photography - check out my [URL="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ericmathiasen/"]Flickr page[/URL].
CURRENT GEAR: Nikon Z6, Nikon Z 14-30mm f4 S, Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S, Nikon 50mm f1.4G
STOLEN GEAR: (during riots of 5/30/2020) Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm F2.8G, Nikon 85mm f1.8G, Nikon 50mm f1.4D
[/SIZE]
Yeah, SF doesn't feel like a mega city. In terms of urban areas, SF comes in at #13 in the U.S. When you combine SF with San Jose it jumps to #8, but that's still not mega-city status. There are only 3 cities in the U.S. that are even debatably mega cities:
New York - definitely
Los Angeles - probably
Chicago - possibly
Then everybody else.
So is your measure of a "Mega City" Density? because there are small cities in Europe and Asia that feel much larger than comparable cities in North America due to density
But in terms of a city as a population and economic region I would still put San Francisco as a "mega city" for its population, economic impact and cultural impact. At least its right on the edge in the respect I dont know why 10 million is seen as the dividing line but in my mind thats what I was counting.
Houston is still bigger than Toronto; 7 million compared to about 6.5 million though Toronto proper is quite a bit bigger than Houston proper.
Well, I'm talking the cities themselves. Anyway, Toronto is a lot "bigger" than Houston in the same way that Dallas is "bigger" than San Antonio. And 50 years ago Toronto was DEFINITELY more urban and urbane than Houston was then. In truth, Toronto in 1971 was more urban and urbane, and forward-thinking than Houston is to this day.
Well, I'm talking the cities themselves. Anyway, Toronto is a lot "bigger" than Houston in the same way that Dallas is "bigger" than San Antonio. And 50 years ago Toronto was DEFINITELY more urban and urbane than Houston was then. In truth, Toronto in 1971 was more urban and urbane, and forward-thinking than Houston is to this day.
Dallas is "bigger" than San Antonio because DFW is much larger than San Antonio's MSA. Not because it feels bigger or is more urban.
Houston is still bigger than Toronto; 7 million compared to about 6.5 million though Toronto proper is quite a bit bigger than Houston proper.
I'll open that can of worms. The GTA is currently at 7 million. The GTHA (includes Hamilton) is currently 7.5 million. The area of the GTA is 2,751 sq. mi. and the GTHA is 3,183 sq. mi.
The urbanized portion of the GTHA is 6.7 million in 888 sq. mi.
__________________
Public transit is the lifeblood of every healthy city.