How many major cities in the US are right next to even bigger cities and as a consequence they become secondary cities. (fit in, apartment)

[jjv007]

Philly next to New York for sure. It would be at least at Chicago's status if it commanded its own region. Freaking Trenton, NJ, a ten minute drive outside the city (with billboards for Philly news stations) is part of the NYC metro area lol.

[rnc2mbfl]

Originally Posted by kyle19125

It used to be a single MSA but in the weirdest move ever by the OMB they split Raleigh and Durham into two separate MSAs back in 2015, despite the fact they city limits adjoin one another in some areas and they share commerce and workforce populations. Raleigh has always had top billing as state capital and larger of the two in terms of population, however Durham is arguably the more dominant in terms of commerce with Research Triangle Park, Duke University and the University of North Carolina (in neighboring Chapel Hill) present there.

It was split in 2003 but I agree that it was a very weird move. Rumor is that Durham wanted the split for their own visibility. If that was the case, I'd argue that it didn't work.
Regarding the idea that Durham is dominant in commerce isn't necessarily proven in data. Even RTP itself is split between the 2 MSAs with IBM arguably anchoring the Durham Side and Cisco arguably anchoring the Raleigh side. Periphery office parks around RTP proper have presence on both sides of the MSA split as well. In addition to its RTP presence, Raleigh's MSA also hosts Lenovo (HQ), Citrix, RedHat (HQ), SAS (HQ) and others. Raleigh's MSA continues to grow by a faster rate and by larger absolute numbers than Durham's. Many Durham RTP workers also live in the Raleigh MSA because it has more of the higher-end development near RTP.
As for the universities, that too isn't concentrated in just the Durham MSA. NC State in Raleigh is the largest university in the state and provides the lion's share of the Triangle universities' new engineering grads to the local tech industry. UNC doesn't have an engineering college and Duke's program is tiny in comparison.
Today, the Raleigh MSA is more than double the population of Durham's MSA and, over time, the delta between the two has only grown.
That said, the two MSAs could probably stand alone if they were further apart but that would basically mean eliminating the synergy created by the three universities and the state government being in one place. They would be less successful apart and each weaker economically. I guess what I am trying to say is that they really should be one MSA of over 1.8 million people.

[That_One_Guy]

Originally Posted by jjv007

Philly next to New York for sure. It would be at least at Chicago's status if it commanded its own region. Freaking Trenton, NJ, a ten minute drive outside the city (with billboards for Philly news stations) is part of the NYC metro area lol.

This was always a little weird to me, but it makes sense if you think about it. NYC and Philly are very close. Philly is only about 45 miles or so from Staten Island. Due to this there is a bit of overlap between both Metro areas. So one of them has to be cut short a little bit, and it's not gonna be NYC because... it's NYC. So Philly takes a hit.

So on paper Trenton and other parts of central Jersey are part of NYC Metro but in reality it is kind of mixed. There's that train station in Trenton that is very well connected to both cities as also serves as a connecting point between the two. NJT takes people to NYC while SEPTA takes them to Philly, and Amtrak to both.

I heard from someone on some CD thread that Philly and NYC actually meet the criteria for one single CSA, but they are intentionally left separate. But all that being said, I don't think anyone looks at Philly as a secondary city to NYC. Everyone knows that it's really close by, but people know that it is its own city. It does get overlooked a lot, but they're still one of the largest metro areas despite being cut short a little bit, and also have every major league sports team.

[Tom Lennox 70]

Oakland, California
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
St. Petersburg, Florida
Gary, Indiana (borders Chicago)
Riverside and San Bernardino, California (the Inland Empire is one of the largest metro areas in the nation if counted alone)

Newark, NJ
Mesa, Arizona
Akron, Ohio (near Cleveland)
Long Beach, California
San Jose, California (probably the biggest city that nobody talks about)

[66nexus]

Originally Posted by That_One_Guy

I don't know if Jersey City and Newark would be much of anything without NYC being right there though. Their economies kind of depend on NYC and a lot of their growth comes from spillover from NYC.

I'd say more with JC than Newark since much of JC's financial business base originates from NYC. In the case of Newark, it's nearly as old as NYC itself and was well-established as a major city before it fell into NYC's orbit. Newark's industry is nowhere near what it was, but it's still sizable for a city its size (many of the goods find themselves far beyond the tri-state). With that said, NYC's red hot real-estate market definitely sprinkled some magic on the northern NJ market.

Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers

Oakland (and San Jose) would probably qualify, as would Fort Worth. On a smaller scale, Durham, NC and whatever the large cities are in the Hampton Roads (VA) area would work as well. I think that Fort Lauderdale, the Inland Empire in southern California, and cities like Newark, Jersey City, and Yonkers benefit dramatically from suburban sprawl and would probably only be midsize cities if it weren't for being close to other major cities.

Indeed, but keep in mind Newark was already growing and flourishing before the concept of a metro area even existed. Without NYC those two would probably be a little larger due to their location on the water. Unfortunately, NJ policy at the time and the city itself stunted the city's growth.

[mhays25]

Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70

Oakland, California
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
St. Petersburg, Florida
Gary, Indiana (borders Chicago)
Riverside and San Bernardino, California (the Inland Empire is one of the largest metro areas in the nation if counted alone)

Newark, NJ
Mesa, Arizona
Akron, Ohio (near Cleveland)
Long Beach, California
San Jose, California (probably the biggest city that nobody talks about)

Most of those are suburbs or much smaller cities that got enveloped by big cities. I don't believe that's the topic.

[That_One_Guy]

Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70

Oakland, California
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
St. Petersburg, Florida
Gary, Indiana (borders Chicago)
Riverside and San Bernardino, California (the Inland Empire is one of the largest metro areas in the nation if counted alone)

Newark, NJ
Mesa, Arizona
Akron, Ohio (near Cleveland)
Long Beach, California
San Jose, California (probably the biggest city that nobody talks about)

San Jose is a good one except for the fact that it's actually bigger than SF.

Maybe Tacoma, WA too

[kehkou]

Sounds like Fort Worth to me.

[Tom Lennox 70]

Originally Posted by That_One_Guy

San Jose is a good one except for the fact that it's actually bigger than SF.

Maybe Tacoma, WA too

I didn't know San Jose was bigger than San Francisco. Yet San Francisco and even Oakland get far more attention than San Jose. Nobody outside Northern California ever really talks about or thinks about San Jose much.

Gary, Indiana is a sizable city of its own that grew separately from Chicago.

I don't think Baltimore is overshadowed by DC, I think its an appropriate amount of attention for its size.

[Pincho-toot]

Originally Posted by florida-dolphins

I am talking about actual big cities with a local culture that could do well as cities of their own, but because they are so close geographically to an even larger city, they pretty much become a sort of secondary city.

Oakland comes to mind. Oakland could be a normal big city, in may states Oakland would be the state's largest city, however due to its proximity to San Francisco, Oakland is often just mentioned when San Francisco or the Bay area is mentioned, as a result Oakland somehow doesn't really get all the attention it deserves.

Fort Lauderdale is another example in reference to Miami.

Are there any other big cities that follow that pattern? I suppose southern California or the area around New York city has plenty of cities like that.

Fort Lauderdale isn't really a major city. St. Petersburg has far more people and its a better example as its overshadowed by Tampa.