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.
I would like to conduct a study of what percent of people in a metro area live in its principal city, and what percent live outside...and see if that has anything to do with the characteristics of that city (overall health specifically)
Anyone have any thoughts/insight?
I think that the area of a city will definitely be a major factor in this. for example: consolidated city-counties like Louisville and Jacksonville will skew the numbers so that they are a much larger % of their metro areas than say DC or Boston where their city limits are very restricted, and a vast majority live in the suburbs.
What do you guys think this has effects on with regards to that city's overall health: crime, density, public transit, street life, culture, identity, etc etc.
Another idea is to look at metro areas that straddle state lines, and how that affects its sense of identity.
I can't answer the question, but I know that before Jacksonville was consolidated, 250,000 people lived in the city (which was 30.2 sq miles (that's smaller than Miami's land area)). Now it's around 110,000. I don't know if that helped but it could have possibly helped.
420,003 people live in Atlanta's city limits and 5,268,860 people in Atlanta's metro area so that's just a ridiculous stat that I hate every time I read it. The city just about, in relation to the metro, has almost no residential population in the city limits, but it has been improving, even if they did miss the majority of the growth in the census or not.
420,003 people live in Atlanta's city limits and 5,268,860 people in Atlanta's metro area so that's just a ridiculous stat that I hate every time I read it. The city just about, in relation to the metro, has almost no residential population in the city limits, but it has been improving, even if they did miss the majority of the growth in the census or not.
City governments should start consolidating to save money. Too many little cities in ATL. Fulton, Dekalb, Gwinnett and Cobb should be one City divided into 4 boroughs like NY is. And Fulton should be known as the Borough of Atlanta, like how New York County is known as the Borough of Manhattan. The other Boroughs would be Marietta, Lawrenceville and Decatur
The other counties would be suburban counties in the metro
The metro would stay the same
The City would have 3.1M people and the
Borough of Atlanta would have 1M
would you be happy then??
City governments should start consolidating to save money. Too many little cities in ATL. Fulton, Dekalb, Gwinnett and Cobb should be one City divided into 4 boroughs like NY is. And Fulton should be known as the Borough of Atlanta, like how New York County is known as the Borough of Manhattan. The other Boroughs would be Marietta, Lawrenceville and Decatur
The other counties would be suburban counties in the metro
The metro would stay the same
The City would have 3.1M people and the
Borough of Atlanta would have 1M
would you be happy then??
Yep, I'd have to say I would, however that kind of thing would never happen. Too many people are contempt using Atlanta's amenities, but don't want to contribute to it.
Well, in the case of D.C., Maryland and Virginia, it simply means that people are constantly at each other's throats.
Bostons Metro is mainly Massachusetts, but people are still at each other throats, people just hate other people period.
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.