[urbanguy]

Here are the largest cities in the US in 2004 according to the US Census.

1 New York city: 8,104,079
2 Los Angeles city: 3,845,541
3 Chicago city: 2,862,244
4 Houston city: 2,012,626
5 Philadelphia city: 1,470,151
6 Phoenix city: 1,418,041
7 San Diego city: 1,263,756
8 San Antonio city: 1,236,249
9 Dallas city: 1,210,393
10 San Jose city: 904,522
========================
11 Detroit city: 900,198
12 Indianapolis city (balance): 784,242
13 Jacksonville city: 777,704
14 San Francisco city: 744,230
15 Columbus city: 730,008
16 Austin city: 681,804
17 Memphis city: 671,929
18 Baltimore city: 636,251
19 Fort Worth city: 603,337
20 Charlotte city: 594,359
21 El Paso city: 592,099
22 Milwaukee city: 583,624
23 Seattle city: 571,480
24 Boston city: 569,165
25 Denver city: 556,835
26 Louisville-Jefferson County city: 556,332
27 Washington city: 553,523
28 Nashville-Davidson (balance): 546,719
29 Las Vegas city: 534,847
30 Portland city: 533,492
31 Oklahoma City city: 528,042
32 Tucson city: 512,023
33 Albuquerque city: 484,246
34 Long Beach city: 476,564
35 New Orleans city: 462,269
36 Cleveland city: 458,684
37 Fresno city: 457,719
38 Sacramento city: 454,330
39 Kansas City city: 444,387
40 Virginia Beach city: 440,098
41 Mesa city: 437,454
42 Atlanta city: 419,122
43 Omaha city: 409,416
44 Oakland city: 397,976
45 Tulsa city: 383,764
46 Miami city: 379,724
47 Honolulu CDP: 377,260
48 Minneapolis city: 373,943
49 Colorado Springs city: 369,363
50 Arlington city: 359,467
51 Wichita city: 353,823
52 St. Louis city: 343,279
53 Santa Ana city: 342,715
54 Anaheim city: 333,776
55 Raleigh city: 326,653
56 Pittsburgh city: 322,450
57 Tampa city: 321,772
58 Cincinnati city: 314,154
59 Toledo city: 304,973
60 Aurora city: 291,843
61 Riverside city: 288,384
62 Bakersfield city: 283,936
63 Buffalo city: 282,864
64 Corpus Christi city: 281,196
65 Newark city: 280,451
66 Stockton city: 279,888
67 St. Paul city: 276,963
68 Anchorage municipality: 272,687
69 Lexington-Fayette: 266,358
70 St. Petersburg city: 249,090
71 Plano city: 245,411
72 Jersey City city: 239,079
73 Norfolk city: 237,835
74 Lincoln city: 236,146
75 Glendale city: 235,591
76 Birmingham city: 233,149
77 Greensboro city: 231,543
78 Henderson city: 224,829
79 Hialeah city: 224,522
80 Baton Rouge city: 224,097
81 Chandler city: 223,991
82 Scottsdale city: 221,792
83 Madison city: 220,332
84 Fort Wayne city: 219,351
85 Garland city: 217,176
86 Chesapeake city: 214,725
87 Rochester city: 212,481
88 Akron city: 212,179
89 Lubbock city: 207,852
90 Modesto city: 206,769
91 Orlando city: 205,648
92 Chula Vista city: 204,879
93 Laredo city: 203,212
94 Fremont city: 202,373
95 Durham city: 201,726
96 Glendale city: 201,326
97 Montgomery city: 200,983
98 Shreveport city: 198,675
99 San Bernardino city: 198,406
100 Reno city: 197,963

[NorthStar]

These annual Census estimates are pretty much worthless. Other than keeping count of destroyed residences, the Bureau doesn't do much to actually keep an accurate, annual population count. Minneapolis - St. Paul is proof because during the 90s, the Census estimated that both cities were losing population annually. When the official numbers were released, it turned out that the Bureau was off by over 15,000 for each city! Why can't they do their job? Does it have to do with the fact that they don't count immigrants? Does it have to do with the fact that they don't take into account all new residential units? Whatever the case, these estimates are total b.s. so, wait for the official numbers to be released.

[Recchia]

Yeah Northstar, the numbers are pretty innaccurate in some cases. In the 90's they had Providence, RI down from 160,000 to 150,000, when really by 2000 it was up to 173,000.

[PeninsulaKiddo]

I was born in Fort Worth, TX and absolutely adore the city, but no way in HELL did it go from mid-30s on the ranking to number 19 since the '00 census!!! WTH? Where are these numbers coming from? Also, as fast as Detroit is shrinking---it isn't shrinking THAT FAST. A lot of estimates said that it would fall off the top-10 list by 2010-2015, NOT 2005.

J/w, but where the heck is Henderson? Colorado?

[ironchapman]

Quote

J/w, but where the heck is Henderson? Colorado?

There's a Henderson outside of Las Vegas.

[PeninsulaKiddo]

81 Chandler city: 223,991

?????

[ironchapman]

There's a Chandler, Arizona.

[cheeriokid61]

This is fun to look at, but it can give you a wrong impression of the city. The MSAs define the size of a city much more accurately. For example:

15 Columbus city

46 Miami city
52 St. Louis city
56 Pittsburg city
91 Orlando city

You see, sometimes, the city limits are very small, making the population very small, even if the city's population is huge.

[dixiecupdrinking]

Exactly, cheerio. Perhaps the classic example is

13 Jacksonville city: 777,704

I mean.. please. Any statistic that gives the impression that Jacksonville is more of a city than San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Washington, Portland, ANYPLACE is almost inexcusably flawed.

[sleepy]

dixiecupdrinking, on Jun 30 2005, 10:13 PM, said:

Exactly, cheerio. Perhaps the classic example is

13 Jacksonville city: 777,704

I mean.. please. Any statistic that gives the impression that Jacksonville is more of a city than San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Washington, Portland, ANYPLACE is almost inexcusably flawed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not the statistic that gives the impression. It's the people who read it who make that impression.

The census just reports the number of people who live inside the corporate boundaries of a given city. If 777,704 people live inside the city limits of Jacksonville, the census reports that. What should the census do? Have an asterisk by the city saying that it's not really as urban as San Francisco? That's not the census's business or concern.

The census doesn't editorialize or comment on the virtues of annexation or county-city consolidation.

This post has been edited by sleepy: 01 July 2005 - 12:20 AM

[Recchia]

sleepy, on Jul 1 2005, 01:17 AM, said:

It's not the statistic that gives the impression.  It's the people who read it who make that impression.

The census just reports the number of people who live inside the corporate boundaries of a given city.  If 777,704 people live inside the city limits of Jacksonville, the census reports that.  What should the census do?  Have an asterisk by the city saying that it's not really as urban as San Francisco?  That's not the census's business or concern.

The census doesn't editorialize or comment on the virtues of annexation or county-city consolidation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True. A lot of people are ignorant to this fact though, and don't realize that much of "city" growth today is due to annexation and consolidation, not densification within the original city limits.

[bobliocatt]

NorthStar, on Jun 30 2005, 03:33 PM, said:

These annual Census estimates are pretty much worthless.  Other than keeping count of destroyed residences, the Bureau doesn't do much to actually keep an accurate, annual population count.  Minneapolis - St. Paul is proof because during the 90s, the Census estimated that both cities were losing population annually.  When the official numbers were released, it turned out that the Bureau was off by over 15,000 for each city!  Why can't they do their job?  Does it have to do with the fact that they don't count immigrants?  Does it have to do with the fact that they don't take into account all new residential units?  Whatever the case, these estimates are total b.s. so, wait for the official numbers to be released.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Census was thousands of citizens off for just about every city during the 90's, even the booming Sunbelt cities. I wouldn't get too concerned over it, as some of you all are because they're only estimates.

[jazzman]

cheeriokid61, on Jun 30 2005, 08:27 PM, said:

This is fun to look at, but it can give you a wrong impression of the city. The MSAs define the size of a city much more accurately.

You see, sometimes, the city limits are very small, making the population very small, even if the city's population is huge.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another good example of this is Las Vegas.

Las Vegas metro.... 1,783,625..... 2003 estimate

Las Vegas city............534,837 (heck, the Strip isn't even in the city, it's on unincorporated land governed by the county

Does anyone know of a list of largest metro areas? I've been looking for one (to no avail) That would be more informative. What are the MSAs

B)

This post has been edited by jazzman: 01 July 2005 - 05:02 AM

[dixiecupdrinking]

sleepy, on Jul 1 2005, 02:17 AM, said:

It's not the statistic that gives the impression.  It's the people who read it who make that impression.

The census just reports the number of people who live inside the corporate boundaries of a given city.  If 777,704 people live inside the city limits of Jacksonville, the census reports that.  What should the census do?  Have an asterisk by the city saying that it's not really as urban as San Francisco?  That's not the census's business or concern.

The census doesn't editorialize or comment on the virtues of annexation or county-city consolidation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, you're right, obviously. I guess what I should have said is that such a statistic is inexorably flawed as a measure of anything practically meaningful regarding the nature of a city. It would be ridiculous to hold a vendetta against a raw number.

[Pennguy09]

jazzman- I think the top 5 metro areas are in order (and I'm guestimating pop.)

New York City- 20 mill
Los Angeles - 16 mill.
Chicago - 9 million
Philadelphia - 6 million
Boston (?) - 5 and 1/2 million

[Spartan]

You guys are forgetting one of the most obvious:

42 Atlanta city: 419,122
Atlanta Metro: 4 million

City populations don't mean that much anyway. UA and MSA populations are the only statistic worth analyzing.

[pepperjack]

http://www.urbanplan...php/t10509.html

found, oddly enough on this site</a>


RANK MSA 2004
1 New York-Newark-Edison, NY-NJ-PA 18709802
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 12925330
3 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI 9391515
4 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 5800614
5 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 5700256
6 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL 5361723
7 Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX 5180443
8 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 5139549
9 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 4708297
10 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 4493165
11 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 4424649
12 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 4153870
13 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 3793081
14 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 3715360
15 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 3166828
16 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 3116206
17 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 2931714
18 St. Louis, MO-IL 2764054
19 Baltimore-Towson, MD 2639213
20 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 2587967
21 Pittsburgh, PA 2401575
22 Denver-Aurora, CO 2287245
23 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 2137073
24 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA 2064336
25 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN 2058221

and:

Consolidated Rankings

RANK CMSA 2004
1 New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 21858830
2 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 17516110
3 Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI 9608458
4 Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV 7986615
5 San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 7159693
6 Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD 5951797
7 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 5899336
8 Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH 5809111
9 Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI 5428855
10 Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX 5280752
11 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA 5034362
12 Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA 3763569
13 Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI 3437464
14 Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH 2942303
15 St. Louis-St. Charles-Farmington, MO-IL 2824778
16 Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO 2566162
17 Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA 2494949
18 Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Truckee, CA-NV 2159756
19 Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN 2100501
20 Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury, NC-SC 2067810
21 Kansas City-Overland Park-Kansas City, MO-KS 1992836
22 Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN 1939349
23 Orlando-The Villages, FL 1922412
24 Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH 1920601
25 Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI 1709926

This post has been edited by pepperjack: 01 July 2005 - 01:09 PM

[jazzman]

I found a list at nationmaster.com of metro populations.

Figures are based on rough estimates for the year 2005, and rounded to the nearest 10,000.

Of the top 100 largest metro areas in the world, 15 are in the USA:

NY.......................22,310,000
LA.......................17,540,000
Chicago.................9,420,000
Washington DC.....8,040,000 (includes Baltimore)
San Francisco........7,530,000
Philadelphia...........6,250,000
Boston..................5,910,000
Dallas...................5,900,000
Detroit..................5,890,000 (includes Windsor, Ontario)
Houston................5,190,000
Atlanta..................4,720,000
San Diego.............4,690,000
Miami................. ..4,290,000
Phoenix........... .....3,790,000
Seattle............. ....3,770,000

This post has been edited by jazzman: 01 July 2005 - 01:32 PM

[jazzman]

An interesting side note:
If it Camp Pendleton didn’t gobble up 125547 acres (more than 200 square miles) of land between metro LA and metro San Diego (including 17 miles of coastline), it would all be counted as one and rival NY for ranking.

[RiversideGator]

Quote

Exactly, cheerio. Perhaps the classic example is

13 Jacksonville city: 777,704

I mean.. please. Any statistic that gives the impression that Jacksonville is more of a city than San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Washington, Portland, ANYPLACE is almost inexcusably flawed.

Jacksonville has a bigger CITY population than all of those. We do not have as big a METRO area population though obviously. And, we dont have as many amenities as these cities either (although Portland isnt that much bigger than Jax). As Sleepy stated, these are just city populations, not MSA populations. Relax.