Top 200 Most Influential USA Urban Areas (NOT City Proper) (rates, Atlanta, Los Angeles)
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.
Seattle fits nicely at #11. It has incredible growth momentum and corporate portfolio. Notice how I split Tacoma off from Seattle (32.0 miles walking distance, almost 11 hours). Including Tacoma might give Seattle a bump to #10 over Dallas, though I am not fully convinced.
My list is not set in stone. I struggled with separating Durham with Raleigh. Chapel Hill presents a big issue since that is 29.1 miles walking distance to Raleigh (almost 10 hours).
Couple arguments - yes they have a shared airport (Raleigh-Durham Int'l). Raleigh would be #33 or #34 combined with Durham I will say. You can follow my comments below on this issue.
So there is alot of synergy between the two, but they also do stand alone somewhat too. I mean Durham has Duke University, and countless other universities, and the Research Triangle is closer to Durham. Raleigh is the state capital and has NC State. You do get a bit of 2+2=5 with them situated near each other.
Maybe it was an honest mistake separating Raleigh and Durham.
Please see my above comments on this issue - they are for you too. I will only add that it is now whataboutism time - what the heck do I do with Connecticut then? You make these arguments for Raleigh, well then why shouldn't Bridgeport get New Haven (18.5 miles) and possibly even Stamford (22.5 miles)?
The furthest stretch from core to core I gave to any individual pairing was to combine Stamford with NYC which is 36.5 miles. Keep in mind, it is #1 NYC we are talking about, also you would reach hyper urban Bronx in less distance, and nearby Greenwich is like the wealthy NYC suburbs. NYC is considered a tri-state area, so I felt Stamford could get pulled into the gravity well of NYC.
Even so, combining Raleigh and Durham could seem inconsistent if I do not also combine Bridgeport and New Haven? In that case Bridgeport would be substantially higher, maybe even #27 above Pittsburgh, which for some reason I do not think it is.
More or less, why do so many publications separate R&D from each other? US Census, IRS tax tables, others I have seen. What is their line of reasoning?
I used Demographia for some of it. Actually I used a concoction of data. IRS SOI Individual Tax Liability by MSA for 2016, US Wiki Urban Areas 2010, Google Search trends worldwide search status comparing each City topic (important to choose city topic from the drop down), let's see, I used CityLab's Top 500 world cities, GAWC, Statista's GDP by MSA, I searched airport volume by XX state on Wiki and compared that, I looked at historical city populations in 1800, 1860, 1910 (pivotal moments in early US history), anything else, yes I looked at how many followers each city board had on Reddit or likes on Facebook. Alot of times the data conflicts and there is no perfect method to ranking.
I'm not strictly opposed to combining R and D. Perhaps it was an honest mistake separating them. You can see my above comments. Honestly though, I think combining Raleigh and Durham could contradict my assumptions about other cities though - particularly in Connecticut. I know that sounds weird but it is an issue.
Yeah definitely R + D combined would probably be #34 above New Orleans or even #33 above Nashville, not entirely certain.
Not gonna lie, the further down the list you get, the harder it gets to rank them. I could see Tri-Cities (Kennewick) being higher, I did not spend as much time with the list later on fine-tuning it, and I am just unfamiliar. It can get very nitty-gritty at the bottom of the list. Think of this as an XY axis where it is an exponential function at X=0 and then tails off the higher X goes. NYC is obviously #1 and the lines are very definitive at the beginning, but as the field of candidates grow it becomes harder to delineate between them. The Tri-Cities could definitely be in the 180s, maybe #188 below Laredo. Idk. I feel like the 170's on my list needs some TLC.
The area is called the Research TRIANGLE for a reason. 3 points. Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill; with NC State, Duke, UNC respectively. This isn't 1776 people aren't walking or riding a horse between communities. Saying it would take over a day to walk from downtown Raleigh to downtown Chapel Hill and arguing that's why it isn't one urban area is probably one of the silliest things I've read on C-D. I'd bet you can walk, run, drive, or penny-farth between Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill quicker than you would from lower Manhattan to Stamford, CT.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 979,465 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylord_Focker
Early view looks good. Could Seattle and Vegas be higher?
Las Vegas at #25 seems good for now. LV is an oddity because its brand name recognition (even internationally) is through the roof and most likely placing it in the top 10 in the entire country. However, Vegas lacks the size or scale to be in the top 10. So, I suppose Vegas could be higher, but above Austin (most momentum of probably any large city) seems a stretch at this time?
Seattle I think could be higher on the list in the future (in the next 10 years), but for now the #11 seat does it well, it seems.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 979,465 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by TarHeelNick
The area is called the Research TRIANGLE for a reason. 3 points. Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill; with NC State, Duke, UNC respectively. This isn't 1776 people aren't walking or riding a horse between communities. Saying it would take over a day to walk from downtown Raleigh to downtown Chapel Hill and arguing that's why it isn't one urban area is probably one of the silliest things I've read on C-D. I'd bet you can walk, run, drive, or penny-farth between Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill quicker than you would from lower Manhattan to Stamford, CT.
Simmer down. I used walking because not everyone has a car or access to public transport, and it also walking could be seen as more authentic connection than driving.
Also my list isn't about Triangles or regional pseudonyms. There is no "Research Triangle" on my list because that is not a city name, nor is it on any maps anywhere.
We are getting into the limitations of this exercise because essentially there is no one size fits all. IMO, Chapel Hill is too far from Raleigh to be in its urban area. It certainly is right on the cusp though. I think regionally Chapel Hill fits with Raleigh.
Even so, just by including Durham, which I now feel should probably be included with Raleigh, would boost Raleigh substantially in the order of ranking probably to #34.
So my question is if a revisited list placed Raleigh (combined w/ Durham) in the # 30-35 category: would New Orleans (a cultural/historical heavyweight) get bested by Raleigh (more economically important on its own, and FAR more economically important with Durham in tow)??? I need to know this information so I can share it with my wife who will probably disagree anyway lol.
I suppose that it all depends on how one weighs cultural and brand identity, something that the Triangle has very little of compared to legacy cities with lots of history. It's also unlike some of the rapidly growing metros in the Sunbelt in that it isn't growing because of retirees (like the southwest coast of Florida), or manufacturing. It's growing in the so called STEM economy, as fueled by the educated workforce, and the presence of major research universities. It's arguably more akin to San Jose in that it's largely an unbranded place beyond the tech scene when compared to other cities in its sphere. Fun fact, my family moved to Raleigh from San Jose when I was kid. It was sort of a lift and shift with my dad's job.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 979,465 times
Reputation: 1406
Just to bring everyone up-to-date. Seems like there is a strong consensus/support for combining Raleigh and Durham and putting Raleigh at #35 above New Orleans. That would change all the ordering below 77 by removing Durham. #200 would open up and I guess we could nominate Duluth, MN.
I would also add Ocala, FL to the runner-ups.
Also I would definitely support the push for Albuquerque up to #70 (at least), and reduce Sarasota to #71.
Perhaps 21-25 need some re-arrangement (currently St. Louis, Portland, Tampa, Austin, Las Vegas). I am wondering if it should go Las Vegas, Austin, Portland, Tampa, St. Louis? Idk, maybe not.
The thread below by the same OP showed up in the similar threads list at the bottom of the page earlier for me. Albuquerque was listed behind El Paso originally, with El Paso being a Top 50 area! Then in an updated list Albuquerque was number 60. This is quite ridiculous and proves that people pull these lists out of nowhere with no firm or consistent criteria in deciding the rankings.
Status:
"See My Blog Entries for my Top 500 Most Important USA Cities"
(set 10 days ago)
Location: Harrisburg, PA
1,051 posts, read 979,465 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albuquerque 101
The thread below by the same OP showed up in the similar threads list at the bottom of the page earlier for me. Albuquerque was listed behind El Paso originally, with El Paso being a Top 50 area! Then in an updated list Albuquerque was number 60. This is quite ridiculous and proves that people pull these lists out of nowhere with no firm or consistent criteria in deciding the rankings.
First off all, I firmly agree that these lists are subjective. I change my opinion all the time. This list is my current opinion. I actually wish there was a way to create live list that people could vote on so we could create a list together. Also you need to realize that many of these rankings are almost interchangeable with each other.
This most recent list is largely based on more research I have done regarding individual income tax, airport/freight volume, historical population data, and google search trends on city topics.
I don't see how it is ridiculous to change your mind/opinion on this subjective topic.
Edit: I am going to start a Blog on my page, not going to post a link because unsure if that's really acceptable per TOS. I might just have a live Top 200 list that I work on from now on. Changes come too often.
Just to bring everyone up-to-date. Seems like there is a strong consensus/support for combining Raleigh and Durham and putting Raleigh at #35 above New Orleans. That would change all the ordering below 77 by removing Durham. #200 would open up and I guess we could nominate Duluth, MN.
I would also add Ocala, FL to the runner-ups.
Also I would definitely support the push for Albuquerque up to #70 (at least), and reduce Sarasota to #71.
Perhaps 21-25 need some re-arrangement (currently St. Louis, Portland, Tampa, Austin, Las Vegas). I am wondering if it should go Las Vegas, Austin, Portland, Tampa, St. Louis? Idk, maybe not.
While Raleigh should be moved up I'm thinking #38 is more appropriate. It should not be above Indianapolis or New Orleans. Those are established metros with sizable cores, MULTIPLE major league sports teams, significant events and amenities, and a more established base...
Ranking by UA is really tricky because some of them are essentially just wealthy extensions of huge cities—Bridgeport, West Palm, The Woodlands. What would they be without NYC, Miami, and Houston? For that reason, I wouldn’t give these UAs much weight.
I would give more weight to cities that are clearly the biggest in their respective states and dominate a wide geographic area. Because they have a bigger gravity and larger orbit, they seem to have an outsized impact even if, on paper, they look similar to other cities. That is, places like OKC, Omaha, Salt Lake, Birmingham, Des Moines, ABQ, etc. For example, being the homer that I am, I’d rank B’ham over cities like Grand Rapids and Rochester.
Also, does VA Beach include Norfolk? I didn’t notice it on there. If it does include Norfolk, it’s position is arguably about right. But if not, I think it should drop a ways.
Edit: thanks for posting this. Makes for interesting discussion and it looks like you put a lot of thought into it!
Last edited by Alabama211; 04-10-2021 at 05:21 PM..
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.
