AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Where will be the newest major city?  (Read 5302 times)

DTComposer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 807
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 09:45:01 AM
Re: Where will be the newest major city?
« Reply #125 on: February 19, 2019, 11:03:21 AM »

I think in this discussion we've been talking about two different tiers of cities:

The Globalization and World Cities Research Network publishes an annual city classification based on economic status, cultural influence, and political dominance. It's been pretty well regarded as having a consistent method for classifying cities.

The highest tier is Alpha (with subdivisions). NYC is the only Alpha++ city in North America; Chicago, Los Angeles, and Miami appear at Alpha (regular) alongside Toronto; San Francisco, Houston, and Washington D.C. are at Alpha - (minus).

I've always thought they rated Seattle a bit too low down the rankings, with only Beta - compared to Vancouver at Beta +.

Here is something interesting though San Jose is listed as a gamma city in the rankings even though they have more people than San Francisco.

Not interesting if you actually read the web site. The listings have little to do with population - notice Miami is an Alpha city, even though it is smaller than San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, etc.

From the website:
Quote
The world according to GaWC is a city-centred world of flows in contrast to the more familiar state-centred world of boundaries.

Cities are assessed in terms of their advanced producer services using the interlocking network model (see GaWC Research Bulletin 23). Indirect measures of flows are derived to compute a city's network connectivity – this measures a city's integration into the world city network.

The connectivity measures are used to classify cities into levels of world city network integration.

San Francisco has been a national and/or international center for business, finance, culture, and tourism for well over 100 years. San Jose was little more than a regional center until perhaps the last 30 years, and only has national and/or international significance now because of Silicon Valley.
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 6646
  • UMass Lowell student

  • Age: 20
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 10:21:49 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: Where will be the newest major city?
« Reply #126 on: February 19, 2019, 11:08:15 AM »

It seems like it correlates more strongly to how well-known the city is to outsiders than its actual population.
Logged
Clinched

Traveled, plus:
US ⒉⒔50
MA ⒐22.40.99.10⒎10⒐1⒒1⒚127.141.159
NH 27,111A; NY 366; GA 42,140; FL A1A; CT 32

Flickr

Max Rockatansky

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 8423
  • Location: Route 9, Sector 26
  • Last Login: Today at 10:25:58 PM
    • Sure, Why Not? (Highway Blog Spot)
Re: Where will be the newest major city?
« Reply #127 on: February 19, 2019, 11:48:48 AM »

The Fresno Metro Area was around 973,000 the last time I looked.   Certainly wouldn’t have thought that moving here, certainly doesn’t feel that way now.  Apparently the population in the City of Fresno has jumped from 217,000 in 1980 to about 500,000 today.


Wow what's amazing here is that Fresno city proper is the largest city in the Central Valley and its technically bigger than Sacramento though.
I would have guessed Sacramento City proper though as the central valleys largest city though until I looked at population list though for Sacramento city and Sacramento county though.

Its pretty interesting, you definitely wouldn't know Fresno was that large from CA 99 as most of the growth has been northward and eastward.  Sacramento as a metro area has way more sprawl, especially along I-80.  There will probably come a time when the Fresno Area connects to Sanger but I don't see that being particularly quick given how little the farm community tends to sell their land to developers.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5354
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: April 21, 2019, 11:19:49 PM
Re: Where will be the newest major city?
« Reply #128 on: February 19, 2019, 05:10:10 PM »

The Fresno Metro Area was around 973,000 the last time I looked.   Certainly wouldn’t have thought that moving here, certainly doesn’t feel that way now.  Apparently the population in the City of Fresno has jumped from 217,000 in 1980 to about 500,000 today.


Wow what's amazing here is that Fresno city proper is the largest city in the Central Valley and its technically bigger than Sacramento though.
I would have guessed Sacramento City proper though as the central valleys largest city though until I looked at population list though for Sacramento city and Sacramento county though.

Its pretty interesting, you definitely wouldn't know Fresno was that large from CA 99 as most of the growth has been northward and eastward.  Sacramento as a metro area has way more sprawl, especially along I-80.  There will probably come a time when the Fresno Area connects to Sanger but I don't see that being particularly quick given how little the farm community tends to sell their land to developers.

Although incorporated Sacramento is somewhat smaller in population than incorporated Fresno, it seems considerably larger because it segues seamlessly into the multitude of other cities immediately surrounding it: Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, etc.  Fresno's got Clovis and maybe Sanger (which is actually more of an exurb than a suburb) and some unincorporated communities surrounding it -- but it transitions into agricultural lands -- particularly to the west -- more quickly than does Sacramento.  The reticence of large agricultural businesses to give up their land for added housing, as Max cites above, is part and parcel of that; most of the development in and around Fresno has occurred northeast and east (the ag lands to the west and the San Joaquin River to the north comprise "natural" barriers to mass development there.  Also -- the fact that the Sacramento area transitions to rolling hills to the east rather than 25-30 miles of valley flatlands as seen further south has inhibited agricultural development in that area -- for better or worse, it's more suitable for housing.  The center of agriculture is well south of the urban areas or across the Sacramento River in Yolo County; the southeast side of Sacramento is dominated by industry, a large portion of which is food processing.  Contrast this to Fresno; where just outside the urbanized area are vast tracts of grapes and citrus -- the reason the area developed over a century ago in the first place.   
Logged

bing101

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2514
  • Last Login: Today at 10:18:33 PM
Re: Where will be the newest major city?
« Reply #129 on: February 19, 2019, 05:46:23 PM »

The Fresno Metro Area was around 973,000 the last time I looked.   Certainly wouldn’t have thought that moving here, certainly doesn’t feel that way now.  Apparently the population in the City of Fresno has jumped from 217,000 in 1980 to about 500,000 today.


Wow what's amazing here is that Fresno city proper is the largest city in the Central Valley and its technically bigger than Sacramento though.
I would have guessed Sacramento City proper though as the central valleys largest city though until I looked at population list though for Sacramento city and Sacramento county though.

Its pretty interesting, you definitely wouldn't know Fresno was that large from CA 99 as most of the growth has been northward and eastward.  Sacramento as a metro area has way more sprawl, especially along I-80.  There will probably come a time when the Fresno Area connects to Sanger but I don't see that being particularly quick given how little the farm community tends to sell their land to developers.

Although incorporated Sacramento is somewhat smaller in population than incorporated Fresno, it seems considerably larger because it segues seamlessly into the multitude of other cities immediately surrounding it: Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, etc.  Fresno's got Clovis and maybe Sanger (which is actually more of an exurb than a suburb) and some unincorporated communities surrounding it -- but it transitions into agricultural lands -- particularly to the west -- more quickly than does Sacramento.  The reticence of large agricultural businesses to give up their land for added housing, as Max cites above, is part and parcel of that; most of the development in and around Fresno has occurred northeast and east (the ag lands to the west and the San Joaquin River to the north comprise "natural" barriers to mass development there.  Also -- the fact that the Sacramento area transitions to rolling hills to the east rather than 25-30 miles of valley flatlands as seen further south has inhibited agricultural development in that area -- for better or worse, it's more suitable for housing.  The center of agriculture is well south of the urban areas or across the Sacramento River in Yolo County; the southeast side of Sacramento is dominated by industry, a large portion of which is food processing.  Contrast this to Fresno; where just outside the urbanized area are vast tracts of grapes and citrus -- the reason the area developed over a century ago in the first place.   

Also with Sacramento area you also have to include some areas like Solano County, CA where you see sprawl from Vacaville, Dixon and Fairfield where these areas are dealing with the suburban/exurban sprawl on the southwest side of the Sacramento Valley and this area has to deal with Bay Area and Sacramento commuters at the same time over affordable housing this may be a factor why Sacramento looks larger than Fresno though.

As far as I know Fresno tends to be known for truck traffic for agricultural goods on CA-99 though.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.