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.
So this is a poll of large satelite cities connected by public transit lines.
I considered throwing in Fortworth, but the train coverage seemed too limited.
Obviously Oakland and even more so St Paul are very close to the primary city while Baltimore and Providence are more of their own cities with suburban and commuting patterns shifting into Boston and DC. Same for Tacoma and Seattle. Long Beach likely has more diffuse commuter patterns.
I've only lived in or visited Oakland out of these places. I currently live in the Chicago region which has no true satelite city. I've lived in San Diego which is in a different tier of nearby cities (Milwaukee, Sacramento, etc) And I've lived in Johannesburg with Pretoria having a similar relationship to Joburg as these cities do.
Love Tacoma. The city has a gritty rust belt vibe but it’s charming in its own way. It’s significantly cheaper than Seattle and the views are better.
If you WFH and don’t care about the Seattle experience, then it’s a great bargain.
Baltimore is an independent city in every way except it (or its southern suburbs) are in commting range of DC. It wins the list due to having everything a real city has, including some great urban neighborhoods.
Oakland and St. Paul win for proximity to their core cities. SF is a top city and Oakland is far more urban than St. Paul, so it wins that category.
I love Tacoma but it's the least urban of this group. But yes on the scenery...its Mt. Rainier view is 20 miles closer than Seattle's! And it's on a real urbanization tear.
I know I've said this before but St.Paul is not a secondary city. It just so happens that it's smaller than Minneapolis.
Outside of Minnesota, there is probably little awareness that St. Paul and not Minneapolis is the state capital. Maybe Indianapolis being Indiana's capital (given the name alignment) subconsciously causes such an assumption for Minnesota.
Outside of Minnesota, there is probably little awareness that St. Paul and not Minneapolis is the state capital. Maybe Indianapolis being Indiana's capital (given the name alignment) subconsciously causes such an assumption for Minnesota.
St. Paul still isn't a secondary city, it's a core city that happens to be a little smaller than Minneapolis hence the nickname the "Twin Cities". St. Paul is actually older than Minneapolis with a more historic less modern feel.
Providence probably not. Tacoma and Oakland are definitely satellite cities...secondary cores that share the same workforces as the primary cities.
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.
