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.
I’ve realized that I’ve been holding American cities to standards way too high.
With but a handful of exceptions (which keep showing up in city-data lists), most U.S. cities would probably be considered marginally urban by global standards.
With but a handful of exceptions (which keep showing up in city-data lists), most U.S. cities would probably be considered marginally urban by global standards.
Exactly. By Global standards, they can be counted on one hand. And the other top U.S. cities shouldn't be measured by them.
By contrast, Boston's city limits could have easily absorbed Chelsea, Somerville Everett, Revere, Winthrop, Malden, Medford, Brookline, and Quincy, which would have pushed the city's population closer to 1,000,000 +. A lot of Boston's built urban form and neighborhoods have spilled right over into all of those cities, and its all a fairly unbroken urban belt. I'll leave the people's republic across the Charles out of the conversation of being absorbed by Boston, as I'd risk getting tarred and feathered for stating Cambridge as anything other than Cambridge, but it's just as urban as any abutting neighborhood to downtown Boston. I think Philadelphia's boundaries match the transition between urban and suburban pretty well.
Yep, Boston's very small boundaries are definitely deceiving to understanding the whole scale of the metro area's urbanity, and I'd also agree that it's very strikingly similar to Philadelphia's urban scale and the structure of their suburbs.
Not only in terms of the number of areas that are structurally dense, but the fact that you can also find much lower-density leafy and wealthy suburbia essentially abutting some of these very urban neighborhoods. It's a very interesting contrast.
I'd agree with that. When I drove through San Jose on my way back from Big Sur up to SF, I looked around the core/downtown and it really didn't match the 1,000,000 + within its city limits. Albuquerque's downtown looks more like a city of 100K, than 500K+. Colorado Springs, Tucson, and Vegas all fall into that category of inflated city limits for suburban development's sake.
By contrast, Boston's city limits could have easily absorbed Chelsea, Somerville Everett, Revere, Winthrop, Malden, Medford, Brookline, and Quincy, which would have pushed the city's population closer to 1,000,000 +. A lot of Boston's built urban form and neighborhoods have spilled right over into all of those cities, and its all a fairly unbroken urban belt. I'll leave the people's republic across the Charles out of the conversation of being absorbed by Boston, as I'd risk getting tarred and feathered for stating Cambridge as anything other than Cambridge, but it's just as urban as any abutting neighborhood to downtown Boston. I think Philadelphia's boundaries match the transition between urban and suburban pretty well.
I definitely agree with you concerning Boston and Philly. I'm not sure if there are any other pairs of true peer cities/metros out there that look more disparate on paper in terms of municipal and MSA populations than is the case in reality.
I'd agree with that. When I drove through San Jose on my way back from Big Sur up to SF, I looked around the core/downtown and it really didn't match the 1,000,000 + within its city limits. Albuquerque's downtown looks more like a city of 100K, than 500K+. Colorado Springs, Tucson, and Vegas all fall into that category of inflated city limits for suburban development's sake.
By contrast, Boston's city limits could have easily absorbed Chelsea, Somerville Everett, Revere, Winthrop, Malden, Medford, Brookline, and Quincy, which would have pushed the city's population closer to 1,000,000 +. A lot of Boston's built urban form and neighborhoods have spilled right over into all of those cities, and its all a fairly unbroken urban belt. I'll leave the people's republic across the Charles out of the conversation of being absorbed by Boston, as I'd risk getting tarred and feathered for stating Cambridge as anything other than Cambridge, but it's just as urban as any abutting neighborhood to downtown Boston. I think Philadelphia's boundaries match the transition between urban and suburban pretty well.
A part of that is due to buildings in downtown San Jose being limited to 30 stories, however San Jose is basically a big suburb.
I'm thinking maybe because it has smaller city limits and a more intact historical core than the others.
Atlanta has about the same density as the king of Suburban living, Raleigh. They are both virtually the same size in both population and area. It’s the rest of the Atlanta metro area which makes Atlanta the monster magnet that it is. There is no Perimeter Center in Raleigh.
Atlanta has about the same density as the king of Suburban living, Raleigh. They are both virtually the same size in both population and area. It’s the rest of the Atlanta metro area which makes Atlanta the monster magnet that it is. There is no Perimeter Center in Raleigh.
And when you look at other things like office space, attractions, venues, retail, daytime population, etc. it's very clear the two aren't peers in any real sense despite a similar residential population.
And when you look at other things like office space, attractions, venues, retail, daytime population, etc. it's very clear the two aren't peers in any real sense despite a similar residential population.
This is true, they aren’t really peers. The most similar thing they have in common is they are textbook cases of Giant Suburbs. Atlanta’s downtown is bigger, but then Atlanta’s suburbs are bigger as well. And it’s the suburbs which make Atlanta ‘Atlanta’.
This is true, they aren’t really peers. The most similar thing they have in common is they are textbook cases of Giant Suburbs. Atlanta’s downtown is bigger, but then Atlanta’s suburbs are bigger as well. And it’s the suburbs which make Atlanta ‘Atlanta’.
I wouldn't call Atlanta a "textbook case of a giant suburb." Of course it's not close to being the most urban city out there, but the historic downtown core, rapid infill, HRT, and projects like the Beltline give the city enough of an urban form to disqualify it from being a "giant suburb."
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.
