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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2018, 09:44 AM
 
Location: 78745
3,207 posts, read 2,361,193 times
Reputation: 5565

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
So Grand Rapids is the smallest city you consider major? Or is Grand Rapids the biggest city you don't consider major?

You often cite your surprise of Grand Rapids metro population. I can't tell if you've actually ever been to Grand Rapids, and if you had was it after say 2011. Or if perhaps you just don't always have a good gage of the feel of a city? If you think South Bend(a city who's metro area contains less than half the residents of GR's urban area) would be relatively the same size.
I never been to Grand Rapids. I never really heard too much about it or never gave it a whole lot of thought. In my mind, I thought it was just another Midwestern town, not much different than Fort Wayne, just a bigger version of Muncie, and it was never on my radar or never had enough curiosity about Grand Rapids to investigate it, as I had no intentions to move to another mid-size Midwest city when I left Muncie.

The only thing I knew for sure about Grand Rapids is it's where President Ford was from.

Since about 1965 when I was about 11 years old, I always liked to look at Rand McNally Road Atlas's. On the Michigan map, Grand Rapids didnt look any bigger than Lansing, Kalamazoo or Ann Arbor. The map didn't and it still doesn't show GR as being a large spread out urban area. Rand McNally does the same thing to Austin. Austin doesn't look like a 2 million plus metro on the map. Indianapolis looks bigger than Austin, but Austin is a little bigger.

In the index of cities population of the RMRA, seems like the population of Grand Rapids was around 150,000 to 180,000.

I had never seen evidence that made GR stand out from South Bend or Ft Wayne or Lansing. It was on City-Data forum I realized that GR Metro was a 1.3 million metro area. What really surprised me though, is GR metro is larger than Dayton and Toledo Metros.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2018, 10:03 AM
 
Location: Heart of Dixie
755 posts, read 438,204 times
Reputation: 1275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
I never been to Grand Rapids. I never really heard too much about it or never gave it a whole lot of thought. In my mind, I thought it was just another Midwestern town, not much different than Fort Wayne, just a bigger version of Muncie, and it was never on my radar or never had enough curiosity about Grand Rapids to investigate it, as I had no intentions to move to another mid-size Midwest city when I left Muncie.

The only thing I knew for sure about Grand Rapids is it's where President Ford was from.

Since about 1965 when I was about 11 years old, I always liked to look at Rand McNally Road Atlas's. On the Michigan map, Grand Rapids didnt look any bigger than Lansing, Kalamazoo or Ann Arbor. The map didn't and it still doesn't show GR as being a large spread out urban area. Rand McNally does the same thing to Austin. Austin doesn't look like a 2 million plus metro on the map. Indianapolis looks bigger than Austin, but Austin is a little bigger.

In the index of cities population of the RMRA, seems like the population of Grand Rapids was around 150,000 to 180,000.

I had never seen evidence that made GR stand out from South Bend or Ft Wayne or Lansing. It was on City-Data forum I realized that GR Metro was a 1.3 million metro area. What really surprised me though, is GR metro is larger than Dayton and Toledo Metros.
What is even more suprising is the GR CSA is larger than the Buffalo, NY CSA, which is why I think CSAs are bogus. Urban area population I think is most important here, as Buffalo's urban area is around 940,000 while Grand Rapids' is around 600,000. By this metric, Dayton is much larger than GR too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 10:06 AM
 
4,121 posts, read 3,735,121 times
Reputation: 6678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
I never been to Grand Rapids. I never really heard too much about it or never gave it a whole lot of thought. In my mind, I thought it was just another Midwestern town, not much different than Fort Wayne, just a bigger version of Muncie, and it was never on my radar or never had enough curiosity about Grand Rapids to investigate it, as I had no intentions to move to another mid-size Midwest city when I left Muncie.

The only thing I knew for sure about Grand Rapids is it's where President Ford was from.

Since about 1965 when I was about 11 years old, I always liked to look at Rand McNally Road Atlas's. On the Michigan map, Grand Rapids didnt look any bigger than Lansing, Kalamazoo or Ann Arbor. The map didn't and it still doesn't show GR as being a large spread out urban area. Rand McNally does the same thing to Austin. Austin doesn't look like a 2 million plus metro on the map. Indianapolis looks bigger than Austin, but Austin is a little bigger.

In the index of cities population of the RMRA, seems like the population of Grand Rapids was around 150,000 to 180,000.

I had never seen evidence that made GR stand out from South Bend or Ft Wayne or Lansing. It was on City-Data forum I realized that GR Metro was a 1.3 million metro area. What really surprised me though, is GR metro is larger than Dayton and Toledo Metros.
Yeah I understand your sentiments, I think there are a lot of people who don’t have a concept of what GR is or what it’s like. Grand Rapids is somewhat off the grid in that people don’t typically pass throug it, which is how most cities are known. I think it’s metro numbers and economic growth have started putting on more people’s radars. I’ve definitely met more than a few people who were shocked at the size and vibrancy. They didn’t realize there was a city this big just chillin quietly over here on this side of Michigan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Seattle
5,656 posts, read 3,429,418 times
Reputation: 4050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treasurevalley92 View Post
I can agree on the inland empire, but I don't see how anyone doesn't see Portland OR and San Antonio as a tier below Baltimore. San Antoinio has historically been the largest city in TX until somewhat recently. It does have somewhat lower GDP, but is still a massive city. Portland, OR is one ranking below Baltimore on the GDP rankings. I think they all fall into the same catigory.
Largest in size? I think Houston has SA beat in any metric.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Illinois
352 posts, read 155,413 times
Reputation: 364
I think context matters here.

I consider Des Moines, Omaha, NOLA, OKC to be fairly major because because they are surrounded by vast rural areas.

Providence, Norfolk, Springfield, Hartford I don’t consider to be major cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Northwest Virginia Beach
4,517 posts, read 3,138,994 times
Reputation: 4886
At minimum, I think you need to have both a minimum MSA of 2 million, and a minimum gdp of $100 billion, to be considered a "major city". That's current, as those numbers will shift as the country grows...

Even within that, there are levels of "major-ness". We're approaching 40 cities above the 2 million/$100 billion threshold---they aren't all the same degree of major. But those are minimum requirements in my opinion...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2018, 09:24 AM
 
4,121 posts, read 3,735,121 times
Reputation: 6678
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjoseph View Post
What is even more suprising is the GR CSA is larger than the Buffalo, NY CSA, which is why I think CSAs are bogus. Urban area population I think is most important here, as Buffalo's urban area is around 940,000 while Grand Rapids' is around 600,000. By this metric, Dayton is much larger than GR too.
In this case I think UA is a bit missleading. The two core counties that make up GR's main urban population (Kent and Ottawa) have 130k more people than Dayton's entire MSA. What's not seen there is that there is an 8 mile gap between Grand Rapids UA, and 150k people in Hollands UA

I agree that urban GR doesn't fully match up with all of it's 1million plus metro peers. Though I don't think it's CSA is as fraudulent as others. There are 3 separate urban areas in the Grand Rapids MSA/CSA and they all kind of blend into each others counties. They create this triangle of development with a rural hole in the middle. Grand Rapids original MSA alignment of the 1990's had these 3 cities as one metro area, as they definitely function as one region. If you only take the 4 core counties of the GR CSA (the ones that share urban areas not separated by more than 10 miles, they have less land area and more people than Buffalo's CSA. The amount of people in GR's sphere I do think is legitimate for it's ranking, it is more nodal than MSA's with one central core. Though with all the growth continuing in the area I believe that cohesion will be more evident by the 2023 UA release.


Last edited by mjlo; 09-22-2018 at 09:45 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2018, 01:59 PM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
8,315 posts, read 12,730,845 times
Reputation: 5226
SMALLEST major cities
Baton Rouge
Knoxville
Mobile
Jackson, MS

BIGGEST non-major cities
Reno, Nevada - it doesn't even consider itself a big city in its nickname!
Sacramento, California
San Bernardino, California
Laredo, Texas
Orlando, Florida (i see it as just a tourist trap)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2018, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Heart of Dixie
755 posts, read 438,204 times
Reputation: 1275
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjlo View Post
In this case I think UA is a bit missleading. The two core counties that make up GR's main urban population (Kent and Ottawa) have 130k more people than Dayton's entire MSA. What's not seen there is that there is an 8 mile gap between Grand Rapids UA, and 150k people in Hollands UA

I agree that urban GR doesn't fully match up with all of it's 1million plus metro peers. Though I don't think it's CSA is as fraudulent as others. There are 3 separate urban areas in the Grand Rapids MSA/CSA and they all kind of blend into each others counties. They create this triangle of development with a rural hole in the middle. Grand Rapids original MSA alignment of the 1990's had these 3 cities as one metro area, as they definitely function as one region. If you only take the 4 core counties of the GR CSA (the ones that share urban areas not separated by more than 10 miles, they have less land area and more people than Buffalo's CSA. The amount of people in GR's sphere I do think is legitimate for it's ranking, it is more nodal than MSA's with one central core. Though with all the growth continuing in the area I believe that cohesion will be more evident by the 2023 UA release.

Good point...I always forget about Holland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2019, 02:18 AM
 
1,375 posts, read 463,692 times
Reputation: 977
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDak15 View Post
I never considered Las Vegas to really be a major city. Sure, it's a big city, but when you think about it, other than gambling, what really is the major industry there? It just doesn't seem like it has much of the features you would expect in a big city.
How about the

Shows
Theaters
Conventions
Music venues
Fashion industry
Hotels
Clubs
Hoover Dam
Restaurants
Warm, dry weather

Sure, it's still missing some of the world class amenities, like truly great museums and a big zoo, but these things are definitely in the near future.

Also, the tech industry and film industry will increase its presence in Vegas (and Reno) as California becomes increasingly expensive.

Las Vegas is building up it's professional sports presence faster than any city I can think of. NHL in 2017, NFL in 2020, and now there is talk about MLB in the near future.

I don't get why some people still only think of Las Vegas as casinos when I'm guessing around 80% of tourists don't even go there to gamble. I sort of understand the stereotype, afterall, that's pretty much what Vegas was found on, but thats history now. Las Vegas is (gasp) actually becoming more like a real city now.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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.

© 2005-2020, 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