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.
Seeking thoughts on objectively measuring this characteristic across metro areas. I am hoping to find absolute measurable data rather than relying on feel/vibe. If this belongs in a different forum then I apologize, but it seems the posters who come here often are the opinions I am most seeking.
Density?
Walkability and transit access?
Vibrancy (and how is that measured)?
Sports?
Arts and Culture?
Business infrastructure and/or Fortune 1000s?
Skyline?
Just curious what factors matter most and how to measure them. I'll add that in the case of density and walkability, in my opinion this would only be measured in the neighborhoods with the highest of each. How dense or walkable the entire region is doesn't matter at all vs the primary areas where one would be seeking a big city environment.
This is all subjective but skyline has absolutely no bearing on any of this as far as importantance in living somewhere.
Culture is one that gets me because I don't value tangible cultural experiences like museums and galleries as much as I do palpable experiences like food, language, history, and music. Everything else seems pretty self explanatory.
One factor could be the extent of highly-urban neighborhoods. You could draw the line anywhere...20k/sm, 30k, whatever. Or graduate it...10k for sorta urban and 30k for highly urban for example.
That's problematic of course...30k can be car-dominated too. Any the density could be spread fairly evenly or clustered. But it would be an ok clue.
Using 2018 numbers, compare each city by how many tracts it can string together either in a central group or overall above each measure.
This would be very easy to measure to if you have an intermediate understanding of statistics or some data science skills. You could run a multivariate regression with home prices as the response and the rest of the attributes you listed as parameters. That would tell you exactly how much density or sports contributes to home prices, controlling for all of the other factors you listed.
One factor could be the extent of highly-urban neighborhoods. You could draw the line anywhere...20k/sm, 30k, whatever. Or graduate it...10k for sorta urban and 30k for highly urban for example.
That's problematic of course...30k can be car-dominated too. Any the density could be spread fairly evenly or clustered. But it would be an ok clue.
Using 2018 numbers, compare each city by how many tracts it can string together either in a central group or overall above each measure.
I don't know if I agree that "big city living" requires urban, non-car dominated neighborhoods.
Dallas or Houston for example are clearly big city living, if of the suburban variety. I certainly wouldn't say that Dallas feels "smaller" than say Boston. Less dense, sure, but not smaller.
I don't know if I agree that "big city living" requires urban, non-car dominated neighborhoods.
Dallas or Houston for example are clearly big city living, if of the suburban variety. I certainly wouldn't say that Dallas feels "smaller" than say Boston. Less dense, sure, but not smaller.
I agree.
For me, what defines big city living is a metro area that includes the following:
*Airline Hub
*Minimum of 5 Fortune 500 companies
*At least 4 Professional Sports teams
*At least 1 upscale shopping mall
*A large art museum, science center, history museum and zoo
OP leaves off the obvious measure of “big cityness” — population. I’d set a lower range of perhaps 400,000 for the city proper, but you should choose something.
Agree also that the number of high-density areas (by zip code or census tract maybe) or the share of city population these areas contain would be a good metric.
There are metrics out there about what share of people commute to work via mass transit, but I’d be wary of these. The number is much higher in New York than LA or Phoenix, I’m sure. But obviously they’re all still major cities.
The number of bars and restaurants per capita (excluding fast food) could be a measure of vibrancy, as could the number of live music venues, pop or classical.
But most important, you’d just have to decide which variables are most important to your definition of urbanity and weight them accordingly.
OP leaves off the obvious measure of “big cityness” — population. I’d set a lower range of perhaps 400,000 for the city proper, but you should choose something.
.
Population doesn't say much about a city. population DENSITY is much more relevant
Seeking thoughts on objectively measuring this characteristic across metro areas. I am hoping to find absolute measurable data rather than relying on feel/vibe. If this belongs in a different forum then I apologize, but it seems the posters who come here often are the opinions I am most seeking.
Density?
Walkability and transit access?
Vibrancy (and how is that measured)?
Sports?
Arts and Culture?
Business infrastructure and/or Fortune 1000s?
Skyline?
Just curious what factors matter most and how to measure them. I'll add that in the case of density and walkability, in my opinion this would only be measured in the neighborhoods with the highest of each. How dense or walkable the entire region is doesn't matter at all vs the primary areas where one would be seeking a big city environment.
Very difficult to quantify, so I'll try to answer it based on my current city, Raleigh. Multi-part answer incoming...
•Density and Walkability
Raleigh does not feel like a big city when density and walkability are the criteria. Raleigh's densest census tract tops out at ~9500 ppsm, and here it is, this is what it looks like:
Its South Campus housing around NCSU. To further illustrate this, something around the next 4-5 most dense tracts are all in the State area, roughly between 7000-8600 ppsm, with the only semblance of urbanity being short stretches like this:
Raleigh's most dense region doesn't reach 10k density in any tract, and only briefly and barely displays any urban type of built form. It lends to the belief that it's an artificial urbanity because all of the most dense tracts are within 1.5-2 miles of the university. Which, the area is passably walkable at pretty much the lowest level of walkability you'd allow for...
Other areas where there is high density for Raleigh, meaning over 5k, are basically apartment complex density. Most of Raleigh is embarrassing to walk, so by these measures, you have to be both structurally and residentially denser than Raleigh, as well as more walkable, to feel like a big city. I'm not sure exactly what the number is that should be, but I don't think you can put a hard number on it. It's kind if one of those things that you know it when you're in it...
•Transit Access and Vibrancy
These two things kind of lend to each other and a sophisticated transit system provides a big city feel. Raleigh actually has a pretty thorough bus system, the issue is the city has hardly any vibrancy. There are some brief pockets downtown that can be pretty vibrant, but we're talking 2-4 block stretches and then separations of emptiness until the next one...
Vibrancy I think also comes from the pedestrian activity within the neighborhoods. Raleigh doesn't do well here. Almost every major thoroughfare outside of the immediate Downtown and State areas are more than 4 lanes, and even the ones that aren't are sleepy. This ties back into walkability, if you have two legs you can walk almost anywhere but this is not a pedestrian friendly city, so there is a clear lack of vibrancy...
The airport is way outside of town and there is no rail transit. So more transit access and more vibrancy are needed to feel like a big city, but how exactly do you quantify that? Again, you know it when you see it...
•Sports, Arts, Culture
Large and frequent event representation lend to a big city feel. How frequent dies it have to be, and what is the size of the large events a city has to attract, to feel big?
Raleigh has a small park downtown that hosts events and concerts, and certain festivals bring big draws downtown. Most major concerts and sporting events are relegated to the main city venue which, like the airport, is way out the ****ing way. Regarding sports, you don't need major league teams to feel like a big city, however, the more sporting events you have contribute to the big or major city feel...
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.
