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.
The area between NYC is almost continuously developed and is also littered with smaller cities like Trenton, Princeton, etc. So what's stopping the two cities from being one gigantic CSA? There are CSAs out there with a bigger gap between their constituent cities' development, such as LA and Riverside/San Bernadino. Why isn't that section of the east coast considered one single megametro then?
As others have said, the term CSA would be meaningless if they did this. The vast majority of people in the New York and Philadelphia areas have nothing to do with the other area except for the occasional trip.
Now if Trenton/Mercer County was the big developed city in the center and NYC and Philadelphia were the satellite cities on the outside then it would make more sense to combine them. But right now the central area between the two metros is mostly suburban and even rural in many cases.
They technically meet the requirement I believe (kidphilly can you confirm?), but I don't see it happening anytime soon. Both cities have too strong of an identity to share a CSA. I do think the UN and/or Demographia classifies them as one urban agglomeration of 29+ million, though. And New Jersey IS viewed as one big suburb because, well, it is.
And nope. Our cities aren't known because NYC, which sits maximum 15 miles away from our best known/most populated ones, overshadows them. Sure, Newark isn't really desirable and Jersey City is only in parts, though it is becoming more popular IMO, but these cities can, at one point did, and will hold their own. Newark is the home of the Devils, and was once home of the Nets before they moved to (surprise) New York. It's tough being in NY's shadow but only someone who doesn't know NJ and our identity would say we are just one big suburb.
Newark was once known as a very great city. It was well-known and was a great city to live in. All of my grandparents grew up there. Many people of older generations trace their roots to Newark, because there was a time when people actually wanted to live there and the city was made up of mostly respectable, good people, and had its own industry and was a huge job center and a place of growth. NJ also has plenty of pretty rural space, so while we are dense overall it is really only constant density in a certain core area around NYC, sort of around Philly, and connecting the two. On the outskirts, though, it's pretty damn empty in parts.
As for the two metros combining... just no. I don't think it would be fair to anyone that we would have that official designation... but especially Philadelphia because we all know New York would be "the city" of that large metro.
EDIT: I see two other people have already pointed out essentially what I just said in defense of NJ being called "one big suburb" so it's nice I'm not the only one. And yes NJ is extremely urbanized as a whole, as one of you said. The density and urbanity in a place like Hudson County is unreal. Very few places in the US beat that type of dense and urban setting you find in Hudson County.
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,177,862 times
Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415
Nope.
And nope. Our cities aren't known because NYC, which sits maximum 15 miles away from our best known/most populated ones, overshadows them. Sure, Newark isn't really desirable and Jersey City is only in parts, though it is becoming more popular IMO, but these cities can, at one point did, and will hold their own. Newark is the home of the Devils, and was once home of the Nets before they moved to (surprise) New York. It's tough being in NY's shadow but only someone who doesn't know NJ and our identity would say we are just one big suburb.
Newark was once known as a very great city. It was well-known and was a great city to live in. All of my grandparents grew up there. Many people of older generations trace their roots to Newark, because there was a time when people actually wanted to live there and the city was made up of mostly respectable, good people, and had its own industry and was a huge job center and a place of growth. NJ also has plenty of pretty rural space, so while we are dense overall it is really only constant density in a certain core area around NYC, sort of around Philly, and connecting the two. On the outskirts, though, it's pretty damn empty in parts.
As for the two metros combining... just no. I don't think it would be fair to anyone that we would have that official designation... but especially Philadelphia because we all know New York would be "the city" of that large metro.
EDIT: I see two other people have already pointed out essentially what I just said in defense of NJ being called "one big suburb" so it's nice I'm not the only one. And yes NJ is extremely urbanized as a whole, as one of you said. The density and urbanity in a place like Hudson County is unreal. Very few places in the US beat that type of dense and urban setting you find in Hudson County.
Na, a lot of New Jersey IS one big suburb--and I say this non-derisively, as NJ is annually in the top 3 wealthiest states in the country (if not THE wealthiest), along with being one of the most educated. I don't view large parts of the state being functional suburbs of NYC and Philadelphia as a bad thing, especially since Jersey has established its own strong identity in spite of it.
Because let's face it, your once great satellite cities are not at their peak and blighted, though they are gentrifying and rapidly turning a corner. Jersey has its own identify, sure (and something Delaware really doesn't have comparatively), but you're kidding if you don't think your state functions as one big suburb. Neither Newark nor Camden nor Trenton nor AC nor Jersey City really dominate things on either end of the state (or middle), though they do greatly contribute to New Jersey's success. It's like your state is a ton of wealthy suburbs and beach towns, with your core cities acting as cheaper alternatives for New Yorkers/Philadelphians/native New Jersians/ businesses. Again, not a bad thing, IMO.
And funny bringing up the Devils, New Jersey's sole remaining pro team (in the least popular of the big 4, to boot). I can't think of any other area in this country that has THREE separate pro teams from another state playing in its borders. True, that's indicative of North Jersey's strong relationship with NYC, but it's also indicative of Jersey's suburb status.
Again, don't take this negatively. I love Jersey, and think your state is far superior to mine in so many ways. NJ definitely has its own identity, which most "suburbs" lack. But I have to call a spade a spade (from my point of view). NJ has a strong identity, but a large portion of the state intertwined with NYC and Philadelphia. Not dependent, of course, but not exactly independent, either. Obviously, it's not exactly a bad thing
CSA's serve little purpose in size comparisons. They are meaningless outside of whatever statisticians at the OMB need them for. (Assuming they are needed at all). Except for the few traditional MSA's that were broken up in the 2003 metro realignment. They could create a NYC-Philly CSA and it would really mean nothing. Although we'd have to suffer through a few insecure size queen posters that think we are dumb enough not to know the difference. Well I guess in that sense there'd be no change at all.
The BOLDED is TOTALLY REDICULAS.. Philly is a 65% Row home city..... much tight walled Rows on narrow streets and no yards and housing to the sidewalks..... Nothing like San Diego....
Doesn't mean squat. The contiguously developed trail from Philadelphia to New York bypasses all those areas; those areas are the periphery of the metro, not the core. NYC to Philly is a straight, contiguous shot.
The only things really preventing a giant CSA designation are Philadelphia and New York's separate labor markets, and, more importantly, pride. Riverside, Californians might be happy being LA's *****, but not Philadelphians. The uproar would be insane if Philly was added to NYCs metro and I think the Census wisely recognizes this.
Then why is it not like what San Diego is to LA. There is contigously developed trail from LA through OC to SD. I count Camp Pendleton as developed because it is an installation designed to serve a purpose for man only. Even if they leave it mostly shrubs. That is done on purpose. So you can count it like someone with an enormous backyard.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,749 posts, read 23,822,981 times
Reputation: 14665
Quote:
Originally Posted by nep321
I think the concept of a CSA is pointless and bogus. MSA makes a lot more sense for the everyday lives of most people.
Most of the tine it does. Like DC and Baltimore have their own distinctions as MSAs, however there are some weird quirks. Denver and Boulder have separate MSA's and they feel very much connected to me, and really the whole Front Range CSA from Denver to Boulder, and Colorado Springs is all a metro area on the same corridor to me. But yeah, I see no purposeful reason to have NY and Philly in the same CSA.
The Census bureau specifically made the recomendation to keep the legacy Metros in place with Trenton as a stand alone and to not combine Philly and NYC into one CSA
Really? The Census Bureau is not usually responsible for metro or csa boundaries and I dont ever remember seeing that in the OMB recommendations where they made exceptions for any regions. Could you provide a link?
Really? The Census Bureau is not usually responsible for metro or csa boundaries and I dont ever remember seeing that in the OMB recommendations where they made exceptions for any regions. Could you provide a link?
will track it down DANNYY had the original link, was a UA designation white paper and their rationale, Trenton, NYC, and Philly were all referenced as they met the critieria for a CSA and combined US but the decision was made to keep them seperate
there was a thread called the NEW UAs shows NYC over 30 million or something in there if you read the full UA document the reference is there
Trento meets MSA today and with that Philly meets CSA connection with NYC, purely on cross county and multi modal job centers in the area. Philly and NYC are distinct but have developed an overlap in the space between due to proximity and large populations in the area
all this is more academic than reality, Philly and NYC or seperate and distinct and the space in the middle connects and has grey areas CSA rules with commuters only say where people work not always where they live per se
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.
