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 12-03-2013, 07:34 AM
 
Location: VB
421 posts, read 365,471 times
Reputation: 263

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovinDecatur View Post
I think all the numbers look way dated.
As was stated previously, the population numbers posted are for urban areas, not MSAs or other related "metro total" counts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff1 View Post
Why is Va Beach listed when it should be Norfolk instead?
Maybe it's that despite Norfolk being the "urban core" of Hampton Roads, VB has a significantly higher population (as of 2012, only ~5.6% less than Norfolk and Chesapeake combined). VB passed Norfolk in the 1990 Census, but wasn't made the "first primary city" of the MSA (VB-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA) until 2010. (What made them come to that decision, besides population? Commuting patterns?)

I don't get why the other cities are dropped from the name of the "VB urban area", while other UAs have more than one city listed. I think it makes VB seem a lot larger than it really is. It appears that the VB UA includes Hampton and NN across the water, with a separate, new-for-2010 Williamsburg UA for that city and its surrounding population in James City and York Counties.

I'd say that while I agree that Hampton Roads is large (and if it were all one city, it would be a large city), none of its individual cities are large. Listing the UA with just VB seems inaccurate, as nobody from HR would consider Hampton and NN to be in the "Virginia Beach area."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-03-2013, 11:18 AM
 
183 posts, read 238,043 times
Reputation: 245
I think it's a combination of gdp and metro population. I'm from the Cleveland area and I don't really consider Cleveland a "big city" anymore. I just think of America's primate cities as "big"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 01:44 PM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,835,055 times
Reputation: 11141
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
Using urbanized populations (while still not perfect, I find this better than MSA or CSA rankings) how would you break this list of 400k plus metros down? I tend to call a lot of metro areas "big cities" when some people think only the top ten are big metros while others think that a metro of 200k is "big". So I was just curious to see what others thought.. Personally, I think I would draw the line with New Orleans being the last city I would consider a Big City even though some of those cities are considerably smaller than the ones near the top. They are still big cities in my mind.

New York, NY - 18,351,295
Los Angeles, CA - 12,150,996
Chicago, IL - 8,608,208
Miami, FL - 5,502,379
Philadelphia, PA - 5,441,567
Dallas--Fort Worth, TX - 5,121,892
Houston, TX - 4,944,332
Washington, DC - 4,586,770
Atlanta, GA - 4,515,419
Boston, MA - 4,181,019
Detroit, MI - 3,734,090
Phoenix, AZ - 3,629,114
San Francisco--Oakland, CA - 3,281,212
Seattle, WA - 3,059,393
San Diego, CA - 2,956,746
Minneapolis--St. Paul, MN - 2,650,890
Tampa--St. Petersburg, FL - 2,441,770
Denver, CO - 2,374,203
Baltimore, MD - 2,203,663
St. Louis, MO - 2,150,706
Riverside San Bernardino, CA - 1,932,666
Las Vegas, NV - 1,886,011
Portland, OR - 1,849,898
Cleveland, OH - 1,780,673
San Antonio, TX - 1,758,210
Pittsburgh, PA - 1,733,853
Sacramento, CA - 1,723,634
San Jose, CA - 1,664,496
Cincinnati, OH - 1,624,827
Kansas City, MO - 1,519,417
Orlando, FL - 1,510,516
Indianapolis, IN - 1,487,483
Virginia Beach, VA - 1,439,666
Milwaukee, WI - 1,376,476
Columbus, OH - 1,368,035
Austin, TX - 1,362,416
Charlotte, NC - 1,249,442
Providence, RI - 1,190,956
Jacksonville, FL - 1,065,219
Memphis, TN - 1,060,061
Salt Lake City, UT - 1,021,243
Louisville, KY - 972,546
Nashville, TN - 969,587
Richmond, VA - 953,556
Buffalo, NY - 935,906
Hartford, CT - 924,859
Bridgeport--Stamford, CT - 923,311
New Orleans, LA - 899,703
^ BIG CITIES
Raleigh, NC - 884,891
Oklahoma City, OK - 861,505
Tucson, AZ - 843,168
El Paso, TX - 803,086
Urban Honolulu, HI - 802,459
Birmingham, AL - 749,495
Albuquerque, NM - 741,318
McAllen, TX - 728,825
Omaha, NE - 725,008
Dayton, OH - 724,091
Rochester, NY - 720,572
Allentown, PA - 664,651
Tulsa, OK - 655,479
Fresno, CA - 654,628
Sarasota--Bradenton, FL - 643,260
Springfield, MA - 621,300
Concord, CA - 615,968
Albany--Schenectady, NY - 594,962
Baton Rouge, LA - 594,309
Mission Viejo--Lake Forest--San Clemente, CA - 583,681
Grand Rapids, MI - 569,935
Akron, OH - 569,499
New Haven, CT- 562,839
Colorado Springs, CO - 559,409
Knoxville, TN - 558,696
Columbia, SC - 549,777
Charleston, SC - 548,404
Ogden--Layton, UT - 546,026
Cape Coral, FL - 530,290
Bakersfield, CA - 523,994
Toledo, OH - 507,643
Worcester, MA - 486,514
Provo--Orem, UT - 482,819
Wichita, KS - 472,870
Palm Bay--Melbourne, FL - 452,791
Des Moines, IA - 450,070
Harrisburg, PA - 444,474
Murrieta--Temecula--Menifee, CA - 441,546
Little Rock, AR - 431,388
Poughkeepsie--Newburgh, NY - 423,566
Syracuse, NY - 412,317
Lancaster, PA - 402,004
Madison, WI - 401,661
Greenville, SC - 400,492
These are 2010 urban area numbers, right? If so, it wouldn't surprise me if Raleigh's urban area (even without adjacent Durham like it's stated above) is now larger than New Orleans. Both areas are growing but Raleigh is growing more rapidly. If Raleigh and Durham weren't separated by the enormous research park that unites them and at the same time causes them to be considered two distinct urban areas, Its urban area would be right below Charlotte's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 02:57 PM
 
5,368 posts, read 5,163,798 times
Reputation: 3314
Metro population has to be greater than 2 million. I would get bored in a city with any less than that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,375 posts, read 21,948,539 times
Reputation: 33615
I've always considered that if I hit anything by shooting my guns down Main St, then it's probably a big city........YEEEEEE-HAH!!!! BLAM, BLAM, BLAM
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 05:01 PM
 
Location: Jersey City
6,490 posts, read 16,181,014 times
Reputation: 5646
Quote:
Originally Posted by jobber123rd View Post
As was stated previously, the population numbers posted are for urban areas, not MSAs or other related "metro total" counts.



Maybe it's that despite Norfolk being the "urban core" of Hampton Roads, VB has a significantly higher population (as of 2012, only ~5.6% less than Norfolk and Chesapeake combined). VB passed Norfolk in the 1990 Census, but wasn't made the "first primary city" of the MSA (VB-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA) until 2010. (What made them come to that decision, besides population? Commuting patterns?)

I don't get why the other cities are dropped from the name of the "VB urban area", while other UAs have more than one city listed. I think it makes VB seem a lot larger than it really is. It appears that the VB UA includes Hampton and NN across the water, with a separate, new-for-2010 Williamsburg UA for that city and its surrounding population in James City and York Counties.

I'd say that while I agree that Hampton Roads is large (and if it were all one city, it would be a large city), none of its individual cities are large. Listing the UA with just VB seems inaccurate, as nobody from HR would consider Hampton and NN to be in the "Virginia Beach area."
Yeah, the Hampton Roads area is so weird, because many of the cities formed from city-county mergers. Virginia Beach is the largest city in Virginia because it covers such a huge land area. The whole city is suburban or rural in character. Yet, according to the Census, it's the primary city, just because it covers enough subdivisions and corn fields to eclipse tiny Norfolk's population. Think if Fairfax County incorporated itself into a city the same way Virginia Beach did, we wouldn't have a Washington, DC metro area, we'd have a Fairfax, VA metro area. Or if the suburban parts of Fulton County incorporated into a city, we'd have a Fulton metro area instead of an Atlanta metro area. Washington and Atlanta would still be the urban cores of their areas, but their neighboring, more populous suburban cities would be the regions' namesakes. Weird, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2013, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,565 posts, read 2,573,861 times
Reputation: 1655
If a city needs to have a case made for its bigness, then it's not big. It may be a fantastic place to live, but it's not a big city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 11:01 AM
 
21,224 posts, read 30,452,593 times
Reputation: 19691
There seems to be confusion over the use of the term "big city" and "MSA" (Metropolitan Statistical Area). The OP's list is of MSAs and doesn't reflect actual city population size. A shining example is Orlando which gets credit for a population of 1.5 million people. The City of Orlando has a mere population of 240,000 and the extra 1.25 million or so is cobbled together from the 6000 square miles of suburban sprawl surrounding Orlando which by definition doesn't equate to "big city".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 11:06 AM
 
21,224 posts, read 30,452,593 times
Reputation: 19691
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl View Post
If Raleigh and Durham weren't separated by the enormous research park that unites them and at the same time causes them to be considered two distinct urban areas, Its urban area would be right below Charlotte's.
Most bizarre MSA situation ever. The two cities have areas where their city limits adjoin and residents live in one and commute to the other. How is that two distinct MSAs???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2013, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,850 posts, read 19,460,966 times
Reputation: 5711
I don't get the love for Raleigh being so "big". The place just not feel big city at all to me. Des Moines feels like a larger city than Raleigh does. I know the Raleigh area has a lot of people now, but it sure doesn't act or feel like its population stats. Just by visiting, I would peg the metro at 500-800k if I didn't know any better.

New Orleans on the other hand feels like a city of 2-3 million. So just the opposite. And why NO is smaller than Raleigh, I would consider it a big city long before Raleigh.
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.
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