Top 200 Most Influential USA Urban Areas (NOT City Proper) (better, largest, quality)

[2000_Watts]

Originally Posted by g500

Allowing WPB to be combined with Miami would open a giant can of worms. Basically Riverside/San Bernardino, Bridgeport, Trenton NJ, Tacoma, Denton, The Woodlands, Temecula, McKinney, Mission Viejo, Antioch, Victorville, Lancaster CA, Santa Clarita, and a whole host of others would be eliminated from the list.

I'm with that. Tacoma and Maybe Bridgeport stand best on their own. Most of the rest aren't known in real life outside this forum for other than being bedroom communities associated with their larger neighbors

[whereiend]

Originally Posted by 2000_Watts

I'm with that. Tacoma and Maybe Bridgeport stand best on their own. Most of the rest aren't known in real life outside this forum for other than being bedroom communities associated with their larger neighbors

Yea that was a strange list. I mean is there someone that doesn't consider The Woodlands to be part of greater Houston?.. I live in Texas and even here people would call that "Houston". "The Woodlands" would be the answer to "what part of Houston?". Denton is perhaps a bit more separated from Dallas, but still pretty unequivocally part of the DFW population mass.

[Gaylord_Focker]

Originally Posted by SweethomeSanAntonio

I wouldn't put Austin as the 4th largest economy in Texas based on industries. San Antonio has larger economic sectors and more economic clusters with far larger annual GDP.

Austin is the most expensive and highest COL city in the state but that doesn't equate to having more industry or a bigger economy.

Can anybody confirm? Are you saying Austin isn't even 4th?

[g500]

Originally Posted by g500

Gonna have to disagree quite substantially here. Pittsburgh still has a larger urban area/MSA population, a larger economy, a much larger CBD/core and urban footprint, more impactful history (subjective area, I know), and far more legacy institutions (universities, NGO's, cultural institutions). Pittsburgh has more of a financial/banking profile than Nashville does. I will say, Nashville does have more tourism, serves as its state capital, and is the undisputed #1 within its state. They probably have similar brand name recognition overall.

I don't think they are worlds apart, but I feel quite strongly that Pittsburgh is above Nashville. As it stands, I currently have Pittsburgh #27 and Nashville #32. I say this without any biases. I struggled ranking (but ultimately do rank) much more suburban and "newer" cities like Austin and Las Vegas above Pittsburgh, but that is just how it goes. Pittsburgh was easily in the Top 10 most influential American cities/urban areas for a long period of time.

I just bumped Nashville to #31 above Sacramento, despite Nashville having a smaller economy. I did some research and discovered Nashville has the third most recording studios (behind LA and NY), a federal reserve chapter (NOT a district) under the Atlanta district, and is also the headquarters/central administrative offices for many of the largest Christian denominations in the nation (Southern Baptist, United Methodist).

This, along with its brand name recognition, undisputed #1 status in its state, state capital, and other factors, I am starting to think there is a case for Nashville being ranked even higher than #31.

I now definitely think Nashville is in Pittsburgh's class along with Kansas City, Cleveland, and Cincinnati.

[kingtutaaa]

It will be interesting to see if Mercer county in Jersey will become part of the Philly CSA because of SARS II pandemic .

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by kingtutaaa

It will be interesting to see if Mercer county in Jersey will become part of the Philly CSA because of SARS II pandemic .

YM "return to the Philly CSA."

it was part of the CSA until the early 1990s, when the OMB moved it from the Philadelphia to the New York CSA in part to reflect shifting commuting patterns, in particular Middlesex County residents commuting to jobs in Princeton and nearby, and in part to give Federal employees who lived in the county a pay raise thanks to the higher COLA for New York.

Mercer County remains in the Philadelphia DMA ("designated market area" — the media market. Philadelphia media outlets all have Trenton bureaus while only The New York Times has a Trenton bureau to cover state government. Trenton stories can be "local" to Greater Philadelphia.

[g500]

Nobody is wrong to place STL ahead of Charlotte -- they are definitely neck and neck. I personally would put Charlotte #21 and St. Louis #22, but they are so close and could be interchangeable. Difficult to compare them because they are so different. And perhaps that is a limitation of this list/ranking. It would be much easier to rank categorically/regionally/functionally similar cities. I'm trying to be unbiased in my list though. Like, I don't want to rank Austin above Pittsburgh either (being a PA native myself), but that is just how it goes. The new age cities (Charlotte included) have caught up to the old age cities (STL, PGH, KC, CLE, CIN) in some cases. Though it is odd comparing them because they really are built and function so differently.

St. Louis has more urban structure/history/institutions/overall identity, while Charlotte has the better economy/momentum/public perception. They both have logistical advantages, though St. Louis is far more important from a freight rail perspective and Charlotte from an air travel perspective. It really is a toss up. Definitely no wrong answers here. It's very subjective.

[g500]

Originally Posted by Caesarstl

I agree that they are totally different, which is why you need a set methodolgy to compare them regardless to make this exercise meaningful, otherwise this is just totally for fun and just kind of gets lost in all of the other citydata lists. My previously mentioned/agreed LV problem (which I get is an oddball looking from the outside, but if you had a set weighted criteria it wouldn't be a big issue) and inconcistencies of legacy cities compared to newer cities hurt the credibility of your list. Looking at your own criteria and how it has mostly been applied, St. Louis should be ahead of Charlotte and Portland... (o boy... ) Also, yes, I def think KC is ahead of LV.

It's also strange that you link the US Urban Areas in your post to explain what a UA is, because you make some major variations that aren't consistent. For the current discussion, St. Louis actually ranks 20th (you ranked it 22nd), ahead of 24th Portland (you ranked it 20th) and 38th Charlotte (you ranked it 21st). Granted we only have 2010 to work with so this is very dated, but it's your chosen criteria and you need to back up the rankings a bit better with an applied methodolgy that isn't just open to attack by every homer opinion on this forum.

The 2010 numbers are old and the borders were different then. Charlotte did not include Gastonia, Concord, or Rock Hill SC then which would have added 500,000+ population to its urban area. The region has also experienced a lot of growth and in-fill. I'm just trying to make an unbiased list.

The 2020 Demographia list (different source) puts them side by side in population.

This thread is subjective. St. Louis might be more worldly than Charlotte. I wouldn't be surprised given its history. I still think Charlotte has that New South aura, like a smaller Atlanta. It is shiny and new (for now) which is what many people care about (not me). Definitely boosts it.

I already said I don't have any problem swapping St. Louis over Charlotte. I personally would still choose Charlotte. If you emphasize history OTOH, St. Louis would win easily. Also, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Buffalo, Rochester, Toledo, etc. would also gain. As would many others. USA has many old legacy cities have definitely struggled. Many have abandoned blocks/tracts, empty overgrown fields, brownfields, even urban prairieland. Some argue that adds to urban character/grit.

You are correct my methodology does veer off-course because urban area isn't the perfect definition either. Multi-nodal UA's, gaps in development, varying population density, degree of cohesiveness, urban structure, notoriety are all issues that make comparing urban areas difficult. UA is the best measure but not perfect. Also, population size does not always equal influence. It is strongly correlated though.

Interesting to note that suburban areas, single family homes on decent plots, are included in USA urban area definitions. Because that's how a lot of US city areas were developed after WW2. Are these "urban"? Not necessarily in the classical sense. But, they are still included because most new development in this country has been suburban for a long time (post WW2-today).

Honestly, I am using urban area because it's the closest measure to what I'm actually seeking. "Urban influence area" (does not exist) would be a better term, maybe?

This exercise is just for fun.

[Logicist027]

Nice list. The only thing I don't agree with is Detroit. I know its still quite large for a metro area, but I think quality has to mean something. I would knock it down a couple spots. I definitely don't think it's better than Denver or San Diego. Personally I would put that and Baltimore below Charlotte. I know that sounds harsh but I think Charlotte is just better than Detroit now. (Despite the fact that Detroit is a much larger city

Second, I must admit, I generally prefer to use MSA for this type of thing. I know there is no perfect way to do it, but I think generally MSA captures what we mean when we say "city" the best. There are a few outlier cases though:

1. The Bay being separated, San Fran & San Jose
2. The Triangle (Raleigh/Durham)
3. Riverside doesn't have a strong enough identity outside of LA to be separate. There is no way that you can look at Riverside and conclude 4 million people live there from the size of downtown Riverside (Ventura has the same issue as well)
4. The Triad being separated (Greensboro/Winston Salem)

I hope they put those together next time they make the MSA statistics.

[North 42]

Originally Posted by Logicist027

Nice list. The only thing I don't agree with is Detroit. I know its still quite large for a metro area, but I think quality has to mean something. I would knock it down a couple spots. I definitely don't think it's better than Denver or San Diego. Personally I would put that and Baltimore below Charlotte. I know that sounds harsh but I think Charlotte is just better than Detroit now. (Despite the fact that Detroit is a much larger city

Second, I must admit, I generally prefer to use MSA for this type of thing. I know there is no perfect way to do it, but I think generally MSA captures what we mean when we say "city" the best. There are a few outlier cases though:

1. The Bay being separated, San Fran & San Jose
2. The Triangle (Raleigh/Durham)
3. Riverside doesn't have a strong enough identity outside of LA to be separate. There is no way that you can look at Riverside and conclude 4 million people live there from the size of downtown Riverside (Ventura has the same issue as well)
4. The Triad being separated (Greensboro/Winston Salem)

I hope they put those together next time they make the MSA statistics.

Wishful thinking, but Detroit still packs a hefty punch as a metro, and is still a global powerhouse in the automotive world. San Diego, Charlotte and Denver have nowhere near the importance of Detroit.