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 did combine the areas of Detroit/Windsor and San Diego/Tijuana because I consider those single urban continuos areas however I didn't include any other areas in Mexico.
ARRGG! San Diego and TJ are absolutely not never one urban continuous area! That is so so so so wrong!
Laredo/Nuevo Laredo, yes. El Paso/Juarez yes.
There is the underground (illegal) economy in TJ that is filtered throughout SD County but believe me. San Diego is very white, esp. compared to the above TX towns and completely ignores the Mexican side. I would say LA has more in relation to TJ than SD as those illegals run straight up there.
How are these ranked? I mean DFW has more sq. miles and is less dense then Houston, yet is ranked higher....I get that it had a bigger population, but taken into the fact continuous urban development, then density is more important than overall population,right?
I can given the fact that UA (Urbanized Area) is used to describe areas with non-stop census blocks with densities greater than 1,000 people per sq/mi. I personally don't like this number because in theory it can make certain cities appear "larger" or "more important" than they really are.
For example, the UA of Hickory NC is larger than the UA of Greenbay Wisconsin, Laredo TX, and Lafeyette, LA. Who the heck (outside of NC) has heard of Hickory? That's my point.
UAs are fun to look at, and they do tell how an area is developed when it comes to non-stop development without any RESIDENTIAL breaks, however don't confuse UA with city status or importance. It just doesn't always work out that way.
Quote:
The U.S. Census Bureau defines an urban area as: "Core census block groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile (386 per square kilometer) and surrounding census blocks that have an overall density of at least 500 people per square mile (193 per square kilometer)."
^^^By THIS definition, every "census block" surrounding the "core" with a density greater than 500 people per sq/mi (borderline rural if you ask me) is also included in the total UA population. This is why a city like Atlanta has an "urbanized area" that is more populated than a city like San Fran.
Last edited by urbancharlotte; 12-12-2009 at 09:11 AM..
Many people who buy furniture have heard of Hickory, NC...btw, who would have heard of Green Bay if it didn't have the NFL?
I'm trying to figure out what a city's urban area and a city's fame have to do with one another...
That was my point Deacon. The importance or fame of a city often has little to do with a city's urban area. Honestly, the OP's ego has been bruised a little and he is now seeking "easy wins" for his city. Have you not noticed a pattern in the treads he has started lately? I have.
You have to look at all these kinds of stats knowing the differences. I think UA stats come in handy as one way to compare cities.
MSA and CMSA stats can be JUST as misleading, if not more so.
Charlotte is a prime example of this having drastic changes in stats from UA to MSA to CMSA.
At the end of the day, it's just another stat in the tool box that I thought people would find interesting. Sorry Charlotte doesn't rank high in this regard, don't sweat it. Charlotte ranks very high when you compare it in other ways such as GNP, but I think this really does show the city lack some urban density and continuous development outside the immediate core. I'm sure that is and will continue to improve.
And yea, the numbers are old, but that's all I got.
You have to look at all these kinds of stats knowing the differences. I think UA stats come in handy as one way to compare cities.
MSA and CMSA stats can be JUST as misleading, if not more so.
Charlotte is a prime example of this having drastic changes in stats from UA to MSA to CMSA.
At the end of the day, it's just another stat in the tool box that I thought people would find interesting. Sorry Charlotte doesn't rank high in this regard, don't sweat it. Charlotte ranks very high when you compare it in other ways such as GNP, but I think this really does show the city lack some urban density and continuous development outside the immediate core. I'm sure that is and will continue to improve.
And yea, the numbers are old, but that's all I got.
Trust me, I am not "sweating" anything my friend. It is YOU that have been starting these silly "Kansas City needs more love" threads every since a couple of posters (that don't even live in Charlotte) described Charlotte as being "more major" than KC. Why don't you start a Charlotte vs KC thread and get it over with? You might just learn why one city is leap-frogging the other one when it comes to "major city" status. THAT IS the question in your head right? Why is Charlotte being considered "more major" than KC by some folks?
Start a thread on this topic and you WILL get your answer. I can promise you that much my friend. Oh, and I WILL NOT post on such a thread if you do start it. You'll get your answer to that question from others (not me).
10-year-old statistics are just not very useful in proving anything.
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.
