# Megalopolis



## Ya Mar (Nov 15, 2005)

In a pervious post, now closed, people were disscussing how Philly and New York are now considered one metro area. Well acutally the term Megalopolis has been used since the 80's describing the area from Boston to Washington DC (Therefore including Boston, Conn., New York, Newark, Trenton, Philly, Balitmore, and DC). The Term reffers to this area as one large metro area. So if you want to get technical you have some 55 million in this metro area.


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

By the same argument a megalopolis stretching from South Yorkshire in England to the Rhein-Ruhr in Germany via Northern France, the Netherlands and Belgium also exists.

The overall density is probably pretty much the same, and it must have easily the same population.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

To me, a megapolis is a city/metro area with a population of 10 million or more. Or a large urban area.


----------



## Butcher (Dec 13, 2004)

I don't think you can combine New York and Philly into one city. Otherwise, like kinda like Tubeman said, why wouldn't we make London and Paris one city? Or all of Western Europe for that matter?


----------



## Giorgio (Oct 9, 2004)

Personally, I consider a Metropolitan Area an Unbroken chain of cities (no undeveloped gaps) even though this is geographically incorrect. 

The idea of a Megalopolis (Literally Big City) is silly.


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

vs


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

Tubeman said:


> By the same argument a megalopolis stretching from South Yorkshire in England to the Rhein-Ruhr in Germany via Northern France, the Netherlands and Belgium also exists.
> 
> The overall density is probably pretty much the same, and it must have easily the same population.


The Blue Banana even skips the Alps and includes urban Switserland and northern Italy.


----------



## SHiRO (Feb 7, 2003)

WANCH said:


> To me, a megapolis is a city/metro area with a population of 10 million or more. Or a large urban area.


Mega*lo*polis...


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

Tubeman said:


> vs


I think the European megalopolis could expand to Central Poland and Denmark. That means all region from Netherlands, Northwest Germany, Sachsen-Brandenburg- South-Central Poland are considered as a megalopolis.

Also Italy and Switzerland with the alps are really dense.

Also countries like Austria, Hungary, Slovakia, Serbia, Slovenia, Croatia--- they eventually form a future megalopolis.

Amazed to see Spain with low density--- which is not the fact because Spain has a quite large rural population.

The American megalopolis is less impressive because their megalopolis area only include those with 300+ people in a sq.mile, while in Europe, 100+ people in a sq.km. It's the same but the pic is biased.


----------



## i_am_hydrogen (Dec 9, 2004)

Ya Mar as in the Phish tune "Ya Mar"?


----------



## snot (May 12, 2004)

I once heard a nice term from a Dutchman on TV for an urbanized region: *urban field.*
An urban field is a complex of cities and metro area's in between rural area's
England, most of Belgium, most of the netherlands, vast parts of Germany and Switserland, Northern Italy but also coastal regions on the mediterean and small parts everywere in Europe are sort of 'Urban Fields'.
Nearly everybody has in fact a city life in such regions.


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

In my opinion, darker gray regions are considered urban and actually either megalopolis or a major suburban+urban areas.

Europe: (30% of its area excluding Russia)










Eastern US: (25% of its area) (Darker blue regions are considered major suburban + urban areas)










For Europe:

(1) A large megalopolis from Italy to Denmark, from Poland to Southern Wales.

(2) Smaller urban areas: Northern France (It will eventually merged with the large megaloplis)

(3) Coastal Spain, which is not likely to form a large megalopolis.

(4) Madrid, also not likely to form a large megalopolis.

(5) Central Scotland area.

(6) Northern Serbia.

(7) Greece (Athens)

(8) Istanbul (Turkey)

Other urban areas, some are prominent, but mostly isolated from other large cities and impossible to form a megalopolis. Exception: Central Europe is likely to merged with the large megalopolis if it continues to expand.

For Eastern US,

(1) A large megalopolis spreads from Massachusetts to DC-Richmond.

(2) A belt from Syracuse to Greater Detroit. (Megalopolis)

(3) Chicago-Milwaukee megalopolis.

(4) North Carolina megalopolis.

(5) Florida megalopolis.

Smaller urban areas:

(6) Atlanta (Further expansion could lead to a megalopolis, merged with North Carolina megalopolis)

(7) Cincinnati (Could be merged with those medium-sized cities around Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky to form a megalopolis)

Other areas are unlikely to form a megalopolis.


----------



## Xeni-2 (Jan 20, 2004)

There are three major megalopolis in the world.
Japan has also a megalopolis. Greater than 1 000 km, it does represent 44% of the Japanese population, concentrated on 6% of the territory


----------



## staff (Oct 23, 2004)

xantarcx,

I'm pretty surprised you decided to include Øresund-metro (Copenhagen-Malmö) in that megalopolis...


----------



## Cobucci (Jun 30, 2005)

Rio de Janeiro-São Paulo-Belo Horizonte (Brazil) Megalopolis has more than 60 million people...


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

staff said:


> xantarcx,
> 
> I'm pretty surprised you decided to include Øresund-metro (Copenhagen-Malmö) in that megalopolis...


West of Copenhagen, there are some densely populated rural-town mosaic areas 
Further Southwest into Northwestern Germany (Hamburg and Schleswig-Holstein), there becomes somewhat denser populated and have strong links to Niedersachsen area to its southwest. And, the Niedersachsen area is very close to the core of this megalopolis- The classic core between Birmingham and Ruhr area, the densest part of Europe. 

So, Malmo-Ruhr is like a chain of rural-urban mosaic, which is about 30% urban + 50% suburban. North/East from Malmo, the region becomes sparsely populated, with dense forest and small farms... we could not consider that part to be a megalopolis.


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

xantarcx said:


> In my opinion, darker gray regions are considered urban and actually either megalopolis or a major suburban+urban areas.
> 
> Europe: (30% of its area excluding Russia)
> 
> ...


This pretty much highlights the lunacy of the "Megalopolis" concept... to assert that all of Italy is one big Megalopolis is daft.

Even the "Blue Banana" concept of the megalopolis traversing the rugged and sparsely populated Alps seems a little odd, just as there seems to be a large and sparsely-populated gap between Washington DC and the rest of the NE US "Megalopolis".

Moreover for the concept to have any worth I think there needs to be a high level of interdependence between the constituent cities to create a larger whole, which I don't see in either instance.


----------



## Ya Mar (Nov 15, 2005)

hydrogen said:


> Ya Mar as in the Phish tune "Ya Mar"?


Yes as in the phish song. Phan since '98.

Hydrogen as in the tune "I am Hydrogen"? All we need is a mike's song and alittle weekapau groove.


----------



## Rene Nunez (Mar 14, 2005)

The allusive term that is the"megalopolis" is thrown around easily and has lost it's meaning. If what iis being said about hartford to washington dc is applied, most of the urban world would fall into a megalopolis sooner or later. aside from northern n.j. and westchester country and parts of long island, there is no way penn. or even conneticut is part of the nyc agglomeration.I say this being a newyorker and not even hearing about any other city or state mentioned in the supposed"megalopolis" in an a daily forecast or local news program.this basic aspect certainly will disqualifiy them from this metro area.


----------



## DarkFenX (Jan 8, 2005)

Is China's eastern coast one big megalopolis?


----------



## *Sweetkisses* (Dec 26, 2004)

Yea, the word megalopolis is being used too loosely now.


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

Butcher said:


> I don't think you can combine New York and Philly into one city. Otherwise, like kinda like Tubeman said, why wouldn't we make London and Paris one city? Or all of Western Europe for that matter?


There are no undeveloped places between them because they are so close, therefore they are now considered to have the same metro area, Which is the second largest in the world with a pop of 33.5 million, Just inches behind Tokyo/Yokohama with 33.6


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

A friend of mine used to work in city planning, If I remember correctly a Megacity is a real term, Meaning 5 million or more in the Metropolitan area.

Cities like Philly, Madrid, Chicago, Miami etc. are all Technically "Megacities" 

Megalopolis is kind of a corny name if you ask me.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

Jo48 said:


> There are no undeveloped places between them because they are so close, therefore they are now considered to have the same metro area, Which is the second largest in the world with a pop of 33.5 million, Just inches behind Tokyo/Yokohama with 33.6



This "no undeveloped place between them" is highly exagerated, I went from Philly to New York by train, and there was a lot of countryside between the two metros, with the occasional town


----------



## AcesHigh (Feb 20, 2003)

Jo48 said:


> A friend of mine used to work in city planning, If I remember correctly a Megacity is a real term, Meaning 5 million or more in the Metropolitan area.
> 
> Cities like Philly, Madrid, Chicago, Miami etc. are all Technically "Megacities"
> 
> Megalopolis is kind of a corny name if you ask me.


actually, I think MEGACITY is the cheese name... it seems they took the name from the Judge Dredd comics!


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

virtual said:


> This "no undeveloped place between them" is highly exagerated, I went from Philly to New York by train, and there was a lot of countryside between the two metros, with the occasional town


No it's not. If you go to maps.google.com and look at the development level between Morris and Middlesex counties in NJ you will see why NYC Metro and Philly Metro are now considered one.


----------



## AJphx (Sep 13, 2002)

Well obviously this is all very debatable.


The man who coined the term megalopolis deemed Tokyo-Osaka, Rhein-Ruhr, and NE USA, to be the orignal three megalopoli.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

polako said:


> No it's not. If you go to maps.google.com and look at the development level between Morris and Middlesex counties in NJ you will see why NYC Metro and Philly Metro are now considered one.



I trust more what I saw on the train (and by road by the way) than what is showed on a density map, you can twist those the way you want.


----------



## rocky (Apr 20, 2005)

virtual said:


> I trust more what I saw on the train (and by road by the way) than what is showed on a density map, you can twist those the way you want.


a few month ago, i did the google maps.com between NYC and PHILLY, and honestly, its continuisly build up.
theires fields here and here and forest here and here , but suburbs and towns everywhere. looking like the paris outer suburbs. so im not surprised at all


on google maps you can see 2 train lines, one going trought some country side and another where the less dense area between NYC and PHILLY is that


----------



## CrazyCanuck (Oct 9, 2004)

The area from Toronto to Montreal might be defined as a megalopolis. Look at the denisty compared to the rest of Canada, its hillarious. I think about half of Canada's population lives in this corridor.


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

virtual said:


> This "no undeveloped place between them" is highly exagerated, I went from Philly to New York by train, and there was a lot of countryside between the two metros, with the occasional town



No not really, You go thru NE philly, Then to Trenton, Elizabeth, Newark then you're in NY. Do you pass Stripmalls? Yes. Truly Rural Areas? Not by a longshot.


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

AcesHigh said:


> actually, I think MEGACITY is the cheese name... it seems they took the name from the Judge Dredd comics!



I think Megacity rolls off the tounge better


----------



## mad_nick (May 13, 2004)

Jo48 said:


> No not really, You go thru NE philly, Then to Trenton, Elizabeth, Newark then you're in NY. Do you pass Stripmalls? Yes. Truly Rural Areas? Not by a longshot.


LOL, didn't you miss a few cities there, it's a long way between Trenton, at the NJ/PA border, and Elizabeth, just south of Newark. 
Anyways, the area between New Brunswick and Trenton is the least developed along the entire route, but there's still development, if somewhat sporadic compared to that north of New Brunswick and south of Trenton.

This is New Brunswick, you can see a pretty big difference between development patterns north of the city and south of it.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=New+Brunswick,+NJ&spn=0.090543,0.206131&t=k&hl=en


----------



## bay_area (Dec 31, 2002)

Los Angeles and San Francisco are the centers of 2 distinct Megalopoli.


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

virtual said:


> This "no undeveloped place between them" is highly exagerated, I went from Philly to New York by train, and there was a lot of countryside between the two metros, with the occasional town


From NYC to Philly, you will eventually get into Northwest NJ, which is just barely a part of this megalopolis. (That region is supported by towns and remain a part of the megalopolis)


----------



## Jay (Oct 7, 2004)

mad_nick said:


> LOL, didn't you miss a few cities there, it's a long way between Trenton, at the NJ/PA border, and Elizabeth, just south of Newark.
> Anyways, the area between New Brunswick and Trenton is the least developed along the entire route, but there's still development, if somewhat sporadic compared to that north of New Brunswick and south of Trenton.




It's not all Urban but it's all at least suburban or Stripmall, It's developed enough to be part of the metro area.


----------



## Effer (Jun 9, 2005)

The NYC Metro and the Philly Metro are different Metros! :rant:


----------



## ROCguy (Aug 15, 2005)

In a 1997 encyclopedia I have, they say there are 5 "urban clusters" in the US. The Coastal NE.... from Boston to DC.... the Great Lakes, from Rochester, NY and Pittsbrugh, PA to Chicago, IL and Milwaukee, WI. The Florida Peninsula, Eastern Texas, and the California coast.


----------



## i_am_hydrogen (Dec 9, 2004)

Butcher said:


> I don't think you can combine New York and Philly into one city. Otherwise, like kinda like Tubeman said, why wouldn't we make London and Paris one city? Or all of Western Europe for that matter?


Sorry, but you seem to be missing the point. When we speak of combining NY to Philly, we're not just taking about merely connecting the dots between big cities and arbitrarily lumping a bunch of them together. Rather, there is a consistently dense stretch of land from Philly to New York that is interconnected in the same way as the Bay Area metro area, which also is quite extensive geographically. The same thing is occurring with the Chicago and Milwaukee metro areas, which are very close to touching and would comprise an urbanized area of around 11 million people.


----------



## Kazurro (Jan 23, 2005)

xantarcx said:


> I think the European megalopolis could expand to Central Poland and Denmark. That means all region from Netherlands, Northwest Germany, Sachsen-Brandenburg- South-Central Poland are considered as a megalopolis.
> 
> Also Italy and Switzerland with the alps are really dense.
> 
> ...


I don't think Spain has a large rural population. Actually near the 80% of the population lives in municipalities which more than 10.000 inhabitants


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

How can a megalopolis skip the English Channel? I don't think so...


----------



## mad_nick (May 13, 2004)

hydrogen said:


> Sorry, but you seem to be missing the point. When we speak of combining NY to Philly, we're not just taking about merely connecting the dots between big cities and arbitrarily lumping a bunch of them together. Rather, there is a consistently dense stretch of land from Philly to New York that is interconnected in the same way as the Bay Area metro area, which also is quite extensive geographically. The same thing is occurring with the Chicago and Milwaukee metro areas, which are very close to touching and would comprise an urbanized area of around 11 million people.


That's not how metro areas are defined though. Even if the New York and Philly urbanized areas were to merge, they would still be separate metro areas. Metro areas are defined by commuter percentages, and no matter how densely developed the area between New York and Philly is, it doesn't change the fact that it takes over an hour by train between the two cites, and most people won't commute that far when they have large established employment centers in their own cities.


----------



## Ya Mar (Nov 15, 2005)

samsonyuen said:


> How can a megalopolis skip the English Channel? I don't think so...



Much agreed. And with the canada density map its max color only represents 50 people per sqaure mile. Unlike other that max out at 1000 people per square mile.


----------



## ♣628.finst (Jul 29, 2005)

CrazyCanuck said:


> The area from Toronto to Montreal might be defined as a megalopolis. Look at the denisty compared to the rest of Canada, its hillarious. I think about half of Canada's population lives in this corridor.


No. That Toronto is linked with Niagara Falls and the rest of the megalopolis on the other side of the lake. Windsor is linked to Detroit. And by the Lake Huron is actually not dense at all. 

But the trend is Toronto, Windsor, Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City would eventually form a megalopolis if they continue to expand. But now we can still see 5 separate metro regions, which Toronto and Windsor are closely linked with the US. And between Montreal and Quebec City is still rather sparse as I know. When we go further Northeast, to Chicoutimi or Rimouski, the density is really low and dense forest can be seen by train or an mobile.

Notice North of these denser region, almost everywhere is sparsely populated. If you did go to Thompson, you will cross the dense boreal forest that you never seen in Southern Ontario and Quebec.


----------



## Tom_Green (Sep 4, 2004)

Someone said in a other thread that the Hong Kong/ Guangzhou area has around 80million people.


----------

