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 12-08-2017, 08:55 PM
 
Location: Northeast states
10,674 posts, read 8,182,570 times
Reputation: 2898

Advertisements

Connecticut
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-08-2017, 11:16 PM
 
Location: Jersey City
6,488 posts, read 16,148,250 times
Reputation: 5632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92 View Post
Right, and what I'm saying is that if the standard for UA is low enough that they count Coeur d'Alene as part of the UA for Spokane, there is no possible way the UA for all of Idaho is under 400k for total "Urban Areas" Post Falls, Coeur d'Alane, and Hayden aren't any more urban than Meridian or Nampa in the Treasure Valley, actually they are less so. Boise, Meridian, Nampa, and Caldwell all have higher population density than Post Falls for example.

I would believe that the treasure valley had an urban area around 400k, but not the whole state.
The 394,000 number posted earlier is the UA population for the Boise, ID UA. No other areas are included in that number except for the UA that contains/surrounds Boise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2017, 11:32 PM
 
56,516 posts, read 80,824,285 times
Reputation: 12480
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPt111 View Post
Connecticut
It does have a metro with over 1 million people though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2017, 11:50 PM
 
Location: Washington State
18,451 posts, read 9,554,421 times
Reputation: 15734
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
But it does; it simply shares the metro area with (an)other state(s). Without suburbs, there wouldn't even be any such thing as a metropolitan area.
Just depends how you define it and you and I are defining it differently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 03:16 AM
 
29,875 posts, read 27,333,728 times
Reputation: 18427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
Just depends how you define it and you and I are defining it differently.
There's only one definition for a metropolitan area, whether you're talking about an MSA or CSA. At least half of the major MSAs and CSAs are not contained within any one state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 05:10 AM
 
21,185 posts, read 30,343,833 times
Reputation: 19590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griffland219 View Post
What states just really don't offer access to a major urban/suburban area? Assuming you're from the suburbs in the first place, would smaller cities like Des Moines, Iowa or Portland, Maine cut it?
The Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana are the only real options in terms of lack of access to a "major" urban/suburban area within state boundaries. While cities like Sioux Falls SD and Fargo ND might suffice for some, they're not considered major metros. To answer the second question I would say yes, if that's what you're accustomed to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 10:45 AM
 
7,592 posts, read 9,444,553 times
Reputation: 8949
It doesn't match the criteria, but look at the vast expanse from Minneapolis-St. Paul to Seattle--there's very little in between ( don't tell me that Fargo is a major urban center)..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Big Bayou
721 posts, read 298,570 times
Reputation: 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griffland219 View Post
I'm from the Chicago area, albeit a suburb very far from Downtown. It would probably be considered a "middle ring suburb." Even though you're not far from the city limits, you're fairly far removed from the "action." Some other cities aren't nearly as big as Chicago, but still have several hundred thousand people, a major urban center, and a number of suburbs. The main difference seems to be the scope of the development. Cities like Indianapolis or Cincinnati are still very large and offer a lot, and I don't think someone from Chicago's suburbs would see a huge difference living near one of those cities in terms of amenities and everyday life (save for Lake Michigan). Even Arkansas shares a border with Memphis. What states just really don't offer access to a major urban/suburban area? Assuming you're from the suburbs in the first place, would smaller cities like Des Moines, Iowa or Portland, Maine cut it?
Connecticut has no major metro unless you count NYC (lol at that). Hartford, the state capital, has about 120,000 people. New Haven has about the same. Only people in the southwestern corner of the state have access to NYC, which geographically is probably only about 20% of the state. Cue the CT fan boys hating on my post...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Springfield and brookline MA
1,243 posts, read 2,518,942 times
Reputation: 1217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zambon View Post
Connecticut has no major metro unless you count NYC (lol at that). Hartford, the state capital, has about 120,000 people. New Haven has about the same. Only people in the southwestern corner of the state have access to NYC, which geographically is probably only about 20% of the state. Cue the CT fan boys hating on my post...
The Hartford metro has just under 1 million people. And in every day life Hartford is very intertwined with Springfield Ma. They are sharing a commuter rail starting in January, and the two cities centers are within 20 miles of each other. You combine the two metropolitan areas and you are looking at close to 1.8 million people and growing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2017, 01:16 PM
 
1,593 posts, read 831,682 times
Reputation: 1216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zambon View Post
Connecticut has no major metro unless you count NYC (lol at that). Hartford, the state capital, has about 120,000 people. New Haven has about the same. Only people in the southwestern corner of the state have access to NYC, which geographically is probably only about 20% of the state. Cue the CT fan boys hating on my post...
I wouldn't consider it "hating on," I'd consider it pointing out a flaw in your post.

You start by saying Connecticut doesn't have a major metro and follow it up by giving city limit population numbers.

Hartford has 1.2 million (47th) in the metro and 920,000 (47th) in its urban area. It's city limits population of 120,000 is in 18.1 square miles.

I mean I guess it would depend on your definition of major. If it's 1,000,000+ or top 50 Hartford squeaks in, if you're gonna say 2,000,000+ Connecticut doesn't.
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