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.
I personally think that York PA is up near the top. It has the bones of a much larger city. It’s downtown looks like it was poised to grow to the size of Philadelphia.
It may not function like a large city today but it looks like Brooklyn or Harlem in the teens and 20’s.
Charleston WV and Chattanooga TN I would agree with. Other small big cities are those smaller cities that are the major play in their area because there is nothing nearby to compete with them. These are largely found in the Western and the Plains states. These are little bit differen than the overgrown college towns like Lexington, Madison, Columbia SC, and Knoxville.
I would include here:
Cheyenne, WY
Fargo, ND
Wichita, KS
Spokane, WA
Des Monies, IA
Shreveport, LA
Amarillo, TX
Lubbock, TX
Laredo, TX
Reno, NV
Salt Lake City, UT (although that is borderline because its metro population is pretty standard mid-metro)
It isn't because they are very large but they appear to be even more significant when you factor in that they are the main play in their area.
I would definitely put those as smaller cities that are major in some way.
Also, Billings MT, Boise ID, Casper WY, Sioux Falls SD, Rapid City SD, Anchorage AK
There is another thread for "tiny cities that are a hub"
What would you say is the smallest "big city" in the US by metro area. I would say Madison and Des Moines are two possible contenders, as they are listed on this "global cities" list as "sufficiency" global cities.
When I first read the title of the OP's thread (without having ever even starting reading the thread itself yet), with the title asking what we think is "The Smallest 'Big City' In the US", my very first thought was Madison, Wisconsin (which I have been to). Though originally from the East Coast of the U.S.A., I have traveled and lived all over the U.S. (or much of the U.S.) over the multiple decades of life and have seen and stayed in many cities and other locations. So I have alot of first-hand experience with many places and the very first city that came to my mind (the same as the OP's first choice for an answer) was Madison, Wisconsin. How do you like that?
By the way, OP, I've also been to Des Moines, Iowa (your second stated city) and yes, it could be said to well fit the category of "the smallest 'big city' in the U.S. by metro area". It is quite an impressive place (not some small dismissible town but a rather impactful and impressive city).
P.S. (added in here later, after I'd already typed what appears above)-- Actually, Kansas City, Missouri (or the Kansas CIty, Missouri-Kansas consolidated metro, being that they are twin cities right next to one another) is a very significant, impressive and impactful city that DOES have all the makings of a major big city yet is not in the category of New York CIty or Chicago or Los Angeles or Houston yet is still quite quite impressive with many big city attributes.
This is done by metro population. City proper population is irrelevant, as that would be saying that Colorado Springs is a bigger city than Miami. Metro population (where all the influence is coming) is the criteria in this thread.
I can't believe people on here are actually using city limits population. that is just absurd. for metro sized cities, city population is arbitrary and meaningless. they vary in size and density so much as to be laughable to try to compare.
it's the metro population that is the best indicator. unless you really think Indianapolis or Jacksonville are bigger than Boston and Miami. lol.
I'm surprised Portland, Maine hasn't been talked about more here (I believe it was mentioned once). It has a lot going on for such a small metro size (500k in the metro and 250k in the urban area). I believe it has something like the highest number of breweries per person of any city and a pretty happening urban core that makes it feel bigger than it is.
Hard question, but these are ones I consider cities which have populations under 700,000:
Boston
New Orleans
Atlanta
Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Of these, Pittsburgh is the smallest in population.
All those cities range from 2.3 to 6 million in metro population.. there’s nothing inherently “small” about them lol
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.
