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)
 
 
Old 11-04-2009, 12:03 PM
 
218 posts, read 1,156,823 times
Reputation: 114

Advertisements

Some metro areas' status in the USA is heavily debated. For instance, some call Washington-Baltimore one metro, others call it two. How would you classify the following? (my classifications are in brackets)

Dallas-Ft. Worth (1)
Minneapolis-St. Paul (1)
San Fransisco-San Jose-Oakland bay area (1)
Washington DC-Baltimore (2)
Los Angeles-San Diego (2)

Feel free to list any other places in which the number of metro areas is in question
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-04-2009, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Long Island/NYC
11,334 posts, read 17,087,987 times
Reputation: 6071
The first three are one metro. #4 can really go either way. #5 is definitely separate.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Durham, NC
2,536 posts, read 8,122,145 times
Reputation: 1624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrum237 View Post
Some metro areas' status in the USA is heavily debated. For instance, some call Washington-Baltimore one metro, others call it two. How would you classify the following? (my classifications are in brackets)

Dallas-Ft. Worth (1)
Minneapolis-St. Paul (1)
San Fransisco-San Jose-Oakland bay area (1)
Washington DC-Baltimore (2)
Los Angeles-San Diego (2)

Feel free to list any other places in which the number of metro areas is in question
Agree with all above. Here's a reversal. I think the following metro areas, currently recognized as seperate MSAs, should be recognized as one.

Raleigh-Cary, NC
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 04:02 PM
 
925 posts, read 2,290,772 times
Reputation: 529
Dallas-Fort Worth (1 metro area) - completely connected, and not thinly linked, development-wise.
Minneapolis-St. Paul (1 metro area) -completely connected, and not thinly linked, development-wise.
San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose (1 metro area) completely connected, and not thinly linked, development-wise.
Washington D.C.-Baltimore (IFFY). They function as two metro areas, but they are basically connected in this day and time, development-wise, though only moderately.
Los Angeles-San Diego (2 metro areas). Most are separate because of Camp Pendleton, and only a small string of patchy development along southern Riverside/East Orange, Northern San Diego Counties are somewhat linked.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 04:11 PM
 
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
3,994 posts, read 3,450,579 times
Reputation: 2438
If Dallas Fort Worth is one metro, than How is DC-Baltimore not? Thats what i've never understood. Yes DC and Baltimore are their own dominant cities with their own Television and Radio markets. Each city has it's own professional sports teams, and it's own Beltway 495 & 695 circling the immediate metro suburbs, but they share the same suburbs (i.e. Columbia) and city limits are only 35 miles apart. In no traffic at 4am i can make it from city line to city line in 40-45 mins. The two beltways are only 20 mins apart barring traffic. We also share 1 of the 3 regional airports. Yes there may be two differences in culture and feel between the locals but thats because "back in the day" there was more seperation amongst the two cities which now and in the future has tightened up, i see it as one large metro area that stretches from NOVA almost to Aberdeen.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 04:40 PM
 
737 posts, read 1,040,082 times
Reputation: 192
Austin and San Antonio are separate metro areas, but anyone who has lived around that area can talk about the development along I-35 between the metros and how it has exploded.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 05:12 PM
 
Location: Germantown, MD
1,359 posts, read 3,275,927 times
Reputation: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redrum237 View Post
Some metro areas' status in the USA is heavily debated. For instance, some call Washington-Baltimore one metro, others call it two. How would you classify the following? (my classifications are in brackets)

Dallas-Ft. Worth (1)
Minneapolis-St. Paul (1)
San Fransisco-San Jose-Oakland bay area (1)
Washington DC-Baltimore (2)
Los Angeles-San Diego (2)

Feel free to list any other places in which the number of metro areas is in question
The Bay Area is definitely one metro area. Same with MSP. DFW and Baltimore-Washington, are single Metro areas made up of two distinct smaller metro areas. LA and San Diego are two different metro areas.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 06:52 PM
 
1,712 posts, read 2,756,567 times
Reputation: 810
Only Dallas/Ft Worth and Minneapolis/St Paul

The others have multiple self sufficient cities and you could argue in the Bay Area case that San Jose is more important than SF these days...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 07:36 PM
 
11,172 posts, read 22,363,867 times
Reputation: 10919
Quote:
Originally Posted by the resident09 View Post
If Dallas Fort Worth is one metro, than How is DC-Baltimore not? Thats what i've never understood. Yes DC and Baltimore are their own dominant cities with their own Television and Radio markets. Each city has it's own professional sports teams, and it's own Beltway 495 & 695 circling the immediate metro suburbs, but they share the same suburbs (i.e. Columbia) and city limits are only 35 miles apart. In no traffic at 4am i can make it from city line to city line in 40-45 mins. The two beltways are only 20 mins apart barring traffic. We also share 1 of the 3 regional airports. Yes there may be two differences in culture and feel between the locals but thats because "back in the day" there was more seperation amongst the two cities which now and in the future has tightened up, i see it as one large metro area that stretches from NOVA almost to Aberdeen.
It's more how they function as fairly split areas - they grew up individual and then grew together and became more connected.

Minneapolis and St. Paul's central cores are 10 minutes apart - and the two city limits are smashed together on their east/west sides. The cities have been connected as far as development since the cities were fairly young. It's for all intents and purposes one area with two commercial centers.

Dallas and Ft. Worth are 40 or so miles apart, but from what I've read historically the growth of those two cities has been racing towards each other. Look at the urban areas of Fort Worth to the west compared to the east, and Dallas to the east compared to the west. The suburban areas grew in between - the cities "wanted" to function as one area as far as development, sports, etc.

Washington and Baltimore are very close together, and obviously the urban areas are pretty connected - but historically and even now, the cities tend to function more on their own level than as just ONE area. The urban areas grew around their own developed cores as opposed to focusing on the combined area as the main unit.

Same with LA and San Diego. Back when the areas were developing and suburban sprawl was flowing out from both cities - I don't think San Diego had a lot of influence on LA's growth or visa versa. I mean the valley grew up in LA in the opposite direction of San Diego, and San Diego grew wildly to the south as well as west and north.

Same with people who say Chicago and Milwaukee will be one area in the future. As far as urban development - yes, it's basically one built up area along the lake (and closing in fast west of the lake by I-94), but historically, the growth patterns of each metro area grew because of their core cities - not because of this unified Chicago-Milwaukee pull. They're VERY different functioning cities.


Right? That's just what I've always thought. I'd see San Fran and San Jose as a combination of the two. I think San Jose was fairly split from San Fran historically - but in the past few decades they've become much much more inter-twined. There's still the distance between them, and only a few easy ways to get from one to the other - but in the end they pretty much function as one area.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2009, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
18,637 posts, read 27,042,193 times
Reputation: 9577
Downtown Dallas to Downtown Fort Worth are 30 minutes apart. But the Dallas westernmost city limits to Fort Worth's easternmost city limits are as much as 10 miles apart. They both grew into each other and share basically the same things such as media markets and airport. DFW is much more of a single metro than Washington/Baltimore. There is still open land between Washington and Baltimore.
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.


 
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