Top 200 Most Influential USA Urban Areas (NOT City Proper) (compare, populations, people)

[g500]

Originally Posted by Albuquerque 101

Bridgeport, Charleston, Madison, Des Moines, Fort Meyers, Reno, Worcester, Syracuse, New Haven, Allentown and Sarasota in no way should be ahead of Albuquerque.

Portland, Maine and Boulder, Colorado in no way should be right behind us either. They aren't almost as important or influential as Albuquerque.

Honolulu, Omaha, Grand Rapids, Albany, Tulsa, Tucson and Knoxville are all debatable in relation to Albuquerque. Honolulu I can see above Albuquerque but the others are highly debatable.

A big factor on my list was wealth and income. Albuquerque (#71) does poorly in that regard. El Paso does far worse (#79). I would not put Albuquerque one single spot lower.

I struggle with where Allentown honestly belongs. I feel like they are pretty close peers in many regards.

And keep in mind I am referring to urban area - I am in now way conflating that Allentown city proper would stand up to Albuquerque city proper. The "Lehigh Valley" includes Allentown, Bethlehem, Easton, Nazareth, Quakertown, and has alot of history and influence.

Disagree strongly on Portland, Maine (#72) and Boulder, Colorado (#75) being outwardly too high. These two cities are smaller, but they pack an enormous punch for their size (maybe more than almost any others - Manchester, NH is another one). Portland Maine has incredible old wealth and connections to Europe, England especially. Boulder Colorado is extremely wealthy and well-known as a hipster elite capital. Please also note that Sante Fe, NM (#152) does extremely well in this aspect also, and could be ranked higher too, maybe even in the 120's.

Strongly disagree on Albuquerque outranking either Bridgeport or Charleston, SC. Bridgeport is an extremely wealthy and decently populated county, very old. Charleston has the colonial history and checks all the right boxes.

In the end, I could however see good arguments for jumping Albuquerque at least to #68, maybe as high as #63 even. I definitely would not rank it higher than #63.

[g500]

Originally Posted by Johnhw2

Im not clear on some of the definitions here and did not read all the links. But overall feels like a great list. One rather unique in my view area not shown is NWArkansas which combines Fayetteville, Bentonville, Rogers and Springdale Ark. Maybe include Buena Vista as well

I think this area is more important than Little Rock for example and approaches Tulsa though below them somewhat.

John, Fayetteville is ranked #97 on the list, and at one point I had it up to like #91while I was creating my list. It has an exceptional corporate presence and upward momentum. The only thing that hurts it is cohesion, the fact that there is not one rock solid core city, but rather four cities strung together - Fayetteville being the obvious leader. Bentonville, Rodgers, and Springdale are the others. But overall as an urban area it does do quite well. Another slightly picky thing is that the region does not have a really major highway connecting to it. But having Wal-Mart corporate headquarters (2.3 million employees) in Bentonville is like a hallmark/monument to free-market capitalism. I see Fayetteville doing a lot more in its future.

[g500]

Originally Posted by aries4118

Pretty good!

Really, the only thing/correction...the Top 10 order should be:


1. New York City
2. Los Angeles
3. Chicago
4. Washington
5. San Francisco
6. Boston
7. Atlanta
8. Houston
9. Philadelphia
10. Dallas

I need to say that on my list, #8 Philadelphia and #9 Atlanta are so incredibly close they are practically tied. I gave the nod to Philadelphia based on its urban built form, downtown, and history. Atlanta has the world's busiest airport and is growing fast. I think #'s 7-10 are all pretty close to each other.

[DukeCityDenizen]

Originally Posted by g500

A big factor on my list was wealth and income. Albuquerque (#71) does poorly in that regard. El Paso does far worse (#79). I would not put Albuquerque one single spot lower.

I struggle with where Allentown honestly belongs. I feel like they are pretty close peers in many regards.

And keep in mind I am referring to urban area - I am in now way conflating that Allentown city proper would stand up to Albuquerque city proper. The "Lehigh Valley" includes Allentown, Bethlehem, Easton, Nazareth, Quakertown, and has alot of history and influence.

Disagree strongly on Portland, Maine (#72) and Boulder, Colorado (#75) being outwardly too high. These two cities are smaller, but they pack an enormous punch for their size (maybe more than almost any others - Manchester, NH is another one). Portland Maine has incredible old wealth and connections to Europe, England especially. Boulder Colorado is extremely wealthy and well-known as a hipster elite capital. Please also note that Sante Fe, NM (#152) does extremely well in this aspect also, and could be ranked higher too, maybe even in the 120's.

Strongly disagree on Albuquerque outranking either Bridgeport or Charleston, SC. Bridgeport is an extremely wealthy and decently populated county, very old. Charleston has the colonial history and checks all the right boxes.

In the end, I could however see good arguments for jumping Albuquerque at least to #68, maybe as high as #63 even. I definitely would not rank it higher than #63.

Wealth and income as the end all of influence is completely wrong as far as I'm concerned.

Cities like Bridgeport and New Haven may have population and wealth but they get lost as extensions of New York City. Nobody really thinks of them as major cities in their own right. Fort Meyers and Sarasota are overgrown retirement and vacation spots. And no way Worcester, Massachusetts and Allentown, Pennsylvania are considered major and influential cities in the top of any list. Charleston may be a historic city, but it is quite a bit smaller and is mainly known as a vacation spot. It also competes with at least two other urban areas in its state for prominence.

Albuquerque is by far the largest city in its state, has a major university, a national laboratory, is regional headquarters to many federal agencies, is at the crossroads of two major interstates, has the busiest airport among all these cities except for Fort Meyers and Honolulu (vacation hotspots), is a major center for the entertainment industry and home to two major international hit shows that were filmed and set here. Because of the entertainment industry Albuquerque has lots of cultural influence, certainly more than any of these other cities, excepting Honolulu. Albuquerque also has a very distinct local culture and unique trademarks that help set it apart and make it known. Things like our local cuisine, architecture and traditions. Everything from green chile cheeseburgers to carne adovada to flat enchiladas have been in the spotlight on national cooking shows and websites over the last several years. Green chile roasting is becoming a national phenomena. Local traditions like luminarias at Christmas have been making their way across the country, including at the White House. How many of these cities that the you listed ahead of us are seeing things like that emanate from them into the national consciousness?

There are many things that make up influence, wealth may be one but it's hardly the most important measurement. Besides, that doesn't explain places like Tucson being ahead of Albuquerque on your list. I'd have to look into all these cities to see how they stack up in terms of GDP, etc.

[g500]

Albuquerque 101. In no way would Albuquerque outrank Charleston, SC IMO. Just no. Charleston, SC was the 3rd or 4th largest city in America during the Revolutionary War era. It was a major focal point during the early development of the country. Charleston was still the 2nd largest city in the South behind New Orleans during the Civil War and Reconstruction Era. It is not merely a vacation spot. Charleston performs extremely well in all other categories and I would not place it one spot below where it sits on the list.

Bridgeport and New Haven are located too far away geographically to get pulled into the direct gravity-well of even NYC. They do orbit NYC though (and Boston to an extent also). I will admit Bridgeport does not have much in the way of name brand recognition, but the numbers are there. Bridgeport (Fairfield County, CT) is a gold mine of refined old money, think Long Island. Hard to argue that money and influence are not intertwined.

I will admit to you that Tucson and Albuquerque should not be that far apart on the list. They should be a bit closer. I guess you could swap Sarasota and Albuquerque. That seems fair. Sarasota is very multi-nodal, very new in its development, and it is actually a vacation spot. Allentown is also a possible swap, I am still calculating what and where it fully belongs. As a lifelong Pennsylvanian myself, Allentown (and Bethlehem) was known for being involved in the iron/steel industry, and today serves as a bedroom community for commuters to areas north of Philadelphia or even to NYC. It plays a key role in trucking, warehousing, and logistics with straight-shots to big places. It has a corporate presence of PP&L (large utility).

Also, as for money and wealth not counting, yes they do. That is probably the single most important factor for creating a list of influence. Ultimately this may tend to favor the northeast for obvious reasons.

I guess another thing I did not mention is that ABQ does not totally dominate the state of New Mexico as you say it does. Santa Fe does extremely well in tourism and I actually think a huge mistake on my list was not putting Sante Fe much higher than where it was ranked.

Edit: I have no issue whatsoever bumping ABQ up to #70 and possibly even higher, but I definitely need to know where Worcester, New Haven, Syracuse and Allentown belong then in your opinion? I am not in favor of swapping them in favor of ABQ at this time myself, but I may change my mind.

[DukeCityDenizen]

Originally Posted by g500

Albuquerque 101. In no way would Albuquerque outrank Charleston, SC IMO. Just no. Charleston, SC was the 3rd or 4th largest city in America during the Revolutionary War era. It was a major focal point during the early development of the country. Charleston was still the 2nd largest city in the South behind New Orleans during the Civil War and Reconstruction Era. It is not merely a vacation spot. Charleston performs extremely well in all other categories and I would not place it one spot below where it sits on the list.

Bridgeport and New Haven are located too far away geographically to get pulled into the direct gravity-well of even NYC. They do orbit NYC though (and Boston to an extent also). I will admit Bridgeport does not have much in the way of name brand recognition, but the numbers are there. Bridgeport (Fairfield County, CT) is a gold mine of refined old money, think Long Island. Hard to argue that money and influence are not intertwined.

I will admit to you that Tucson and Albuquerque should not be that far apart on the list. They should be a bit closer. I guess you could swap Sarasota and Albuquerque. That seems fair. Sarasota too multi-nodal, and it is actually a vacation spot. Allentown is also a possible swap, I am still calculating what and where it fully belongs. As a lifelong Pennsylvanian myself, Allentown (and Bethlehem) is known for being involved in the iron/steel industry, and today serves as a bedroom community for commuters to areas north of Philadelphia or even to NYC. It plays a key role in trucking, warehousing, and logistics with straight-shots to big places. It has a corporate presence of PP&L (large utility).

Also, as for money and wealth not counting, yes they do. That is probably the single most important factor for creating a list of influence. Ultimately this tends to favor the northeast for obvious reasons.

I guess another thing I did not mention is that ABQ does not totally dominate the state as you say it does. Santa Fe does extremely well in tourism and I actually think a huge mistake on my list was not putting Sante Fe much higher than where it was ranked.

Edit: I have no issue whatsoever bumping ABQ up to #70 and possibly even higher, but I definitely need to know where Worcester, New Haven, Syracuse and Allentown belong then in your opinion? I am not in favor of swapping them in favor of ABQ at this time, but I may change my mind.

This is completely absurd. Charleston may have been an historically important city but how does that relate to influence in the present day? As I said, it competes with other similarly-sized cities in its state for influence. And trying to equate the relationship between Santa Fe and Albuquerque with Charleston, Columbia and Greenville is absolutely absurd. Santa Fe is a small town that is a tourist hotspot. Try to come up with ways it competes substantially with Albuquerque or within the context of Charleston to the other two major South Carolina cities. Albuquerque even hosts the headquarters of many state agencies despite Santa Fe being the capital. Santa Fe is not nearly on the same level as Albuquerque.

I forgot to mention that Albuquerque has a top 50 DMA and is the head city of that DMA, the TV stations broadcast from here. Albuquerque also has top-tier minor league teams in baseball and soccer. Some of these cities you put ahead of us don't have those things.

[rnc2mbfl]

Originally Posted by g500

Perhaps due to history, early development of the country. Connecticut in particular is very difficult to set Urban Area groupings. I wonder IF over enough time would the same thing also happen to Raleigh and Durham? Or will it always been seen as one region?

Interestingly enough, Raleigh and Durham were a single MSA until 2003 when they were actually less connected to each other than they are now. There's chatter that the data methodology that separated them in 2003 (commuting patterns by %) are coming into line to recombine them. If I had to state in layman's terms why I think there's so much confusion over the Triangle. it is the strange combination of one side growing much more rapidly than the other (Raleigh over Durham), while the majority of the combined area's economic engine, RTP, residing more in Durham Co. than in Wake (Raleigh) in a ~70%/30% split.
Since the split, the growth on Raleigh's side of the metro has greatly outpaced Durham's to the point where
the Raleigh side alone today is now 200,000+ larger than the combined area was in 2000.

Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill MSA in 2000: 1,187,941
Raleigh-Cary MSA in 2019: 1,390,785
Durham-Chapel Hill MSA in 2019: 644,367
The combined MSAs (not the CSA) in 2019: 2,035,152

[g500]

rnc2mbfl excellent points. Agree 100%. I also think history plays a role with CT's cities in establishing their own personal identities.

The argument for combining Raleigh and Durham seems very strong. It is my bad for not realizing this. I actually started my list months ago and have worked on it almost daily. Originally I had Raleigh as one unit above New Orleans. But my wife said there's no way New Orleans is below Raleigh. This started a massive battle between us until she got her way. SO! I thought about it some more, and after realizing the Census Bureau separated them, my solution was to separate R&D.

So my question is if a revisited list placed Raleigh (combined w/ Durham) in the # 30-35 category: would New Orleans (a cultural/historical heavyweight) get bested by Raleigh (more economically important on its own, and FAR more economically important with Durham in tow)??? I need to know this information so I can share it with my wife who will probably disagree anyway lol.

[Matt Marcinkiewicz]

It truly depends on how you define influential. What influence does Riverside have? I'm not sure that the average American could tell you one thing about it (or more than one, anyway, outside of 'kinda near LA'). There are people and money there, sure, but that's a place that could probably move way down the list, if it's treated as an entirely separate entity from the metro which borders it to the west.

[rnc2mbfl]

Originally Posted by g500

So there is alot of synergy between the two, but they also do stand alone somewhat too. I mean Durham has Duke University, and countless other universities, and the Research Triangle is closer to Durham. Raleigh is the state capital and has NC State. You do get a bit of 2+2=5 with them situated near each other.

Even so, combining Raleigh and Durham could seem inconsistent if I do not also combine Bridgeport and New Haven? In that case Bridgeport would be substantially higher, maybe even #27 above Pittsburgh, which for some reason I do not think it is.

More or less, why do so many publications separate R&D from each other? US Census, IRS tax tables, others I have seen. What is their line of reasoning?

I used Demographia for some of it.

From my previous post, it's looking likely the OMB is considering recombination of the Triangle in 2023. As for Demographia, didn't they already recombined them into one UA a few years ago?

As for talking about the Research Triangle, that refers to the triangle that is created by connecting NC State in Raleigh, Duke in Durham, and UNC in Chapel Hill. There is no Research Triangle without all 3 of them. It's a nuance, but the Research Triangle as a regional and economic identifier is broader than Research Triangle Park is as a specific place.

As for the whole walking metric from place to place, the Triangle is a matrix of municipalities. It's not 8 hours to walk from Durham to Cary, and it's certainly not 8 hours to walk from Raleigh to Cary. It's also not 8 hours to walk from Cary to Chapel Hill, and it's certainly not 8 hours to walk from the region's unifier: RTP to any of the 4 largest municipalities. Interestingly enough, the Triangle has invested heavily over the decades in walking and biking trails among all of the municipalities.