U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-28-2013, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,153,902 times
Reputation: 7598

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
What's funny to me is that defining the boundaries of your metro area does not change its actual size whatsoever....only it's perceived size! If you metro gobbles up a few neighborhing metros/micros and your population is now "bigger", does that change anything about the look and feel of the city you live in? No.

Sometimes I wish they would change the way they measure metros, either stick with urbanized areas or do some kind of population radius (e.g. within 30 miles of the core, 50 miles, etc.).
I think you mean the opposite. Redefining metros changes the actual size, literally, but the perceived size may not change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-28-2013, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,458,635 times
Reputation: 5397
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
I think you mean the opposite. Redefining metros changes the actual size, literally, but the perceived size may not change.
I don't know about that "Htownlove". A lot of people would still perceive Houston as a city of 6 million either way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,153,902 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
I don't know about that "Htownlove". A lot of people would still perceive Houston as a city of 6 million either way.
Not necessarilly. Tacking on 6 empty counties would increase the population but the feel of the city won't change. Austin, Walker, Chambers, San Jacinto, etc doesnt really add anything to the metro other than boosting the actual number by 40k each. Now if you are talking about Harris, Montgomery, Fort Bend or Brazoria, those account for 5.5M of the metro population.

Adding counties most often simply increases actual pop but does little to perceived pop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 03:22 PM
 
4,677 posts, read 8,046,080 times
Reputation: 1236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
What's funny to me is that defining the boundaries of your metro area does not change its actual size whatsoever....only it's perceived size! If you metro gobbles up a few neighborhing metros/micros and your population is now "bigger", does that change anything about the look and feel of the city you live in? No.

Sometimes I wish they would change the way they measure metros, either stick with urbanized areas or do some kind of population radius (e.g. within 30 miles of the core, 50 miles, etc.).
The only problem is that what if a city is such an economic center of an area that it attracts workers from 60 miles away? Like Htown said, I think adding counties may not change the perceived feel of that city. Of this is the metric you want, then urban area is definitely the metric you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 03:41 PM
 
21,180 posts, read 30,336,326 times
Reputation: 19590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Sometimes I wish they would change the way they measure metros, either stick with urbanized areas or do some kind of population radius (e.g. within 30 miles of the core, 50 miles, etc.).
That would make far too much sense for those who clearly sit back with a lit up crack pipe to conjure up the list of MSAs. Prime example, the Orlando MSA has over 2 million people and is lacking in much of what one would constitute as urban in any way, shape or form yet includes a wide swath ranging east to Daytona Beach and over 4000 square miles. Raleigh and Durham on the other hand, which actually have city limits that meet in some areas have been separated as MSAs, makes sense right?....Anyone else want to take a puff?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 06:32 PM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,790,027 times
Reputation: 11136
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle19125 View Post
That would make far too much sense for those who clearly sit back with a lit up crack pipe to conjure up the list of MSAs. Prime example, the Orlando MSA has over 2 million people and is lacking in much of what one would constitute as urban in any way, shape or form yet includes a wide swath ranging east to Daytona Beach and over 4000 square miles. Raleigh and Durham on the other hand, which actually have city limits that meet in some areas have been separated as MSAs, makes sense right?....Anyone else want to take a puff?
...and both Raleigh's and Durham's city limits actually extend into the other's MSA. Even Cary extends into Chatham County in the Durham/Chapel Hill MSA

The disconnection of the two MSAs prevents the Triangle from being seen as the metro it is: a very fast growing metro of over 1.8 million that will easily pass 2 million before the end of the decade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 07:45 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,310,239 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
I think you mean the opposite. Redefining metros changes the actual size, literally, but the perceived size may not change.
I meant what I said but clearly misspoke......but clearly you get the point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,310,239 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by adavi215 View Post
The only problem is that what if a city is such an economic center of an area that it attracts workers from 60 miles away? Like Htown said, I think adding counties may not change the perceived feel of that city. Of this is the metric you want, then urban area is definitely the metric you want.
Then make that radius 60 miles....

I think a city's size should be relative to how it is within certain boundaries, but I think those boundaries shouldn't be as loosely defined as counties, I prefer radius and especially urbanized areas. But it is just one person's opinion.

I guess my main point is that if Milwaukee and Chicago (or Philly and NYC, Austin and SA, Tampa and Orlando, etc.) were to be considered one big city one day, would that change the way either city felt? No. It's not growing organically, it's growing according to definition -- a growth that one cannot "feel". It's especially apparent with two cities like SA and Austin. Combined they are around 4 million -- a pretty big city by most standards -- but individually they are 2 mid-major cities that CLEARLY don't feel like metros of 4 million (to me, at least). If they were combined according to the definition of MSA/CSA, it wouldn't change that for me, and I think it'd be misleading to call that city "big", or bigger than say Seattle. Does that make sense?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 07:51 PM
 
21,180 posts, read 30,336,326 times
Reputation: 19590
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post
...and both Raleigh's and Durham's city limits actually extend into the other's MSA. Even Cary extends into Chatham County in the Durham/Chapel Hill MSA

The disconnection of the two MSAs prevents the Triangle from being seen as the metro it is: a very fast growing metro of over 1.8 million that will easily pass 2 million before the end of the decade.
Makes one wonder about potential palm-greasing somewhere along the line. Raleigh-Durham-Cary-Chapel Hill is clearly much more of an MSA than Orlando (with half the square miles) yet the "numbers" now don't reflect that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2013, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 28,153,902 times
Reputation: 7598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Then make that radius 60 miles....

I think a city's size should be relative to how it is within certain boundaries, but I think those boundaries shouldn't be as loosely defined as counties, I prefer radius and especially urbanized areas. But it is just one person's opinion.

I guess my main point is that if Milwaukee and Chicago (or Philly and NYC, Austin and SA, Tampa and Orlando, etc.) were to be considered one big city one day, would that change the way either city felt? No. It's not growing organically, it's growing according to definition -- a growth that one cannot "feel". It's especially apparent with two cities like SA and Austin. Combined they are around 4 million -- a pretty big city by most standards -- but individually they are 2 mid-major cities that CLEARLY don't feel like metros of 4 million (to me, at least). If they were combined according to the definition of MSA/CSA, it wouldn't change that for me, and I think it'd be misleading to call that city "big", or bigger than say Seattle. Does that make sense?
CSA dont make sense to begin with.
I don't know why people use them so much. The msa by definition is the reflection of the city. The CSA by definition is the refkection if close cities. Baltimore certainly didn't feel like a city of 8million. Still two separate cities. CSA is short for combined metropolitan area. It just reflects the MSAs near each other. Why people would use it as a city and then say stuff like the baltimore is similar sized to Chicago is beyond me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top