Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesnt. It is just a fact. There are still gaps between DC and bmore. There is virtually some between SF and SJ. I can tell when I leave the DC area going to Bmore. I challenge you to do the same with SF and SJ.
Where is the demarcation between DC and Baltimore?
Suburbanites from South Jersey can get away with saying they are from Philly.
Brrr? I don't know about that. Kobe Bryant is from Ardmore and we STILL don't consider him to be a Philadelphian. So people from Jersey definitely do not count.
Where is the demarcation between DC and Baltimore?
IMO, right around Glen Burnie or Jessup area. Once I know I left the Laurel area, I know the DC area is about to come to a sudden halt. Development is not as consistent for a few miles. Do admit it picks up but not for about 5-7 miles.
North Jersey is definitely kind of in a weird position culturally as far as identifying with the city goes. Suburbanites from South Jersey can get away with saying they are from Philly. Suburbanites from Nova and MD can get away with saying they are from DC. Same with Baltimore and Boston. But if someone from NNJ says they are from NY, they get their ---- handed to them by everyone, including New Yorkers, other New Jerseyans, and outsiders of the region altogether.
I've heard very few pople from South Jersey claim to be part of Philadelphia, but rather claim to be part of "New Jersey". Though it becomes awkward when its NHL playoff time and the Devils and Flyers play (as in like right now), and most Devils fans are from Northern NJ while South NJ is definitely Flyer territory.
Also, I've never heard anyone in CT claim to be part of the NY area either, nor have I heard anyone in RI claim to be Boston area.
I think its a Northeastern thing, since most of the settlements out here are so much older than they are out West.
In California, the first identity most people have is "California" which is fine, but also terribly misleading since its a large state. "California" could mean somewhere like SF or LA..or somewhere smaller like Eureka or Blythe. I don't see it out here as much.
IMO, right around Glen Burnie or Jessup area. Once I know I left the Laurel area, I know the DC area is about to come to a sudden halt. Development is not as consistent for a few miles. Do admit it picks up but not for about 5-7 miles.
Glen Burnie is all the way on the other side of I-97. You don't expect to have solid development that spans 40 miles long and 20 miles wide, do you? The unique thing about much of the Bay Area is that it's situated on a small peninsula with mountains on one side. So all of the development has to be concentrated in an almost straight line from SF to SJ. Most of the development runs the same way from DC to Baltimore; it's just concentrated along the 95 corridor.
The Exit for 197 has a lot of apartments. So does 198 (Ft. Meade). And the MD-100. And MD-32. And the Arundel Mills exit. And West Nursery Road. I know this route extremely well because, well, I drive it at least once a month. I don't think there's any one point where you can say, "I'm in DC now." The transition from the Baltimore suburbs to the DC suburbs is pretty seamless.
Dude, I never said DC and Bmore was not built up. I said it is not as built up as the Bay Area consistently and I still stand by that. I also wasn't talking exact area as well as the demarcation. I also full and well how built up the SF and SJ areas are.
I've heard very few pople from South Jersey claim to be part of Philadelphia, but rather claim to be part of "New Jersey".
I've never heard this either. If you're from Camden, you say "Camden" or "New Jersey." It's not like Atlanta where you ask somebody where they're from and they say "Atlanta," then you ask "What part?" and they respond "Stone Mountain."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huge Foodie 215
Also, I've never heard anyone in CT claim to be part of the NY area either, nor have I heard anyone in RI claim to be Boston area.
The closest you'll get is someone from White Plains claiming they're from New York. And that's technically true because they're from New York State. People from Long Island do the same sometimes.
Dude, I never said DC and Bmore was not built up. I said it is not as built up as the Bay Area consistently and I still stand by that. I also wasn't talking exact area as well.
But again, what does that have to do with the connectedness of the two cities? The suburbs surrounding DC are not dense. It's mostly sub-divisions. But there's a steady infill of those subdivisions between DC and Baltimore. So it's hard to tell when you're leaving one metro area and entering another.
So can we at least all agree that if you combine all 6 metro areas of the 'Bay Area' region, they barely have more relevance than Houston, Boston, Miami, and Philadelphia?
If you compare it MSA to MSA (San Francisco MSA vs. Boston, Houston, Miami, Philadelphia, etc.) I don't think it would come anywhere NEAR the relevance of the latter cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huge Foodie 215
Technically, a huge chunk of Silicon Valley is half in SF MSA (Atherton, Woodside, Menlo Park, et. al are all in San Mateo County) and half in SJ MSA.
Bulk of it is in Santa Clara County though.
It's sad because San Francisco MSA wouldn't be able to really stand up on its own without San Jose MSA.
So yeah, 6 metro areas need to be combined to even be mentioned with Philadelphia, Houston, Boston, Miami, etc.
I'm glad people are starting to wake up!
Well, going by just the MSA GDP alone, ignoring other pertinent factors, SF is greater than Boston or Miami, and just a notch below Philadelphia, so I would say SF is certainly near relevant or more relevant than some of your latter cities.
Well, going by just the MSA GDP alone, ignoring other pertinent factors, SF is greater than Boston or Miami, and just a notch below Philadelphia, so I would say SF is certainly near relevant or more relevant than some of your latter cities.
By population, SF MSA is about to be the 3rd largest metropolitan area in California after San Bernardino-Riverside (which is also in SoCal).
By city population, San Francisco is the 4th largest city in the state of California, after LA, SD, and SJ (2 of which are in SoCal, and 1 of which is a distinct city in Northern California)
SF by itself has no marquis industry like tech, finance, or even a functioning port. So no, SF is not more relevant than the latter city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
