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.
True, but you do realize that those "3 counties" are large with nearly 2,118 sq/miles of land. To compare, the five county area of Mecklenburg, Gaston, Lincoln, Cabarrus, and Union has 2,172 sq/miles of land (and 400,000 more people). Ironically, the UA difference between Charlotte and Raleigh is also 400k.
It is a fact that counties in the east are typically larger in land area than western counties. As a result, eastern MSAs and CSAs will have fewer counties. However, the total land area of those eastern MSAs are rather large.
As for the UAs, they seem to be too political for my tastes. Charlotte (for example) is really one big "blob" of nearly 1.8 million (Charlotte, Gastonia, Concord, Rock Hill combined). The Triangle is really one big blob of nearly 1.3 million (Raleigh/Durham combined). Heck, even the Triad seems to be one UA of over 1 million residents (Greensboro, Winston, High Point, and Burlington combined). Not sure if Burlington still qualifies as a UA, but if it does, it most certainly connects to Greensboro's east side.
Due to politics, none of these urbanized areas are named as they should be. In the case of Charlotte, we literally have 4 different UAs within the same MSA region. No other MSA in NC nor SC has that many different census defined urbanized areas. There are CSAs with 4 (Greenville/Spartanburg comes to mind) but 4 within the same MSA just seems a bit weird to me. I guess the argument here is that Charlotte's "ring cities" are somehow stand-alone cities. However, the inbound/outbound commuting patterns between Charlotte and these ring cities would most certainly suggest otherwise.
True, but you do realize that those "3 counties" are large with nearly 2,118 sq/miles of land. To compare, the five county area of Mecklenburg, Gaston, Lincoln, Cabarrus, and Union has 2,172 sq/miles of land (and 400,000 more people). Ironically, the UA difference between Charlotte and Raleigh is also 400k.
It is a fact that counties in the east are typically larger in land area than western counties. As a result, eastern MSAs and CSAs will have fewer counties. However, the total land area of those eastern MSAs are rather large.
As for the UAs, they seem to be too political for my tastes. Charlotte (for example) is really one big "blob" of nearly 1.8 million (Charlotte, Gastonia, Concord, Rock Hill combined). The Triangle is really one big blob of nearly 1.3 million (Raleigh/Durham combined). Heck, even the Triad seems to be one UA of over 1 million residents (Greensboro, Winston, High Point, and Burlington combined). Not sure if Burlington still qualifies as a UA, but if it does, it most certainly connects to Greensboro's east side.
Due to politics, none of these urbanized areas are named as they should be. In the case of Charlotte, we literally have 4 different UAs within the same MSA region. No other MSA in NC nor SC has that many different census defined urbanized areas. There are CSAs with 4 (Greenville/Spartanburg comes to mind) but 4 within the same MSA just seems a bit weird to me. I guess the argument here is that Charlotte's "ring cities" are somehow stand-alone cities. However, the inbound/outbound commuting patterns between Charlotte and these ring cities would most certainly suggest otherwise.
The vast majority of Raleigh's MSA and almost all of its urban area is within Wake County. The Triangle's urban area is essentially from Raleigh towards the west, not Raleigh towards the east. Since Durham's urban area doesn't contribute to either, it's statistically invisible until it's united with the CSA.
True, but you do realize that those "3 counties" are large with nearly 2,118 sq/miles of land. To compare, the five county area of Mecklenburg, Gaston, Lincoln, Cabarrus, and Union has 2,172 sq/miles of land (and 400,000 more people). Ironically, the UA difference between Charlotte and Raleigh is also 400k.
Actually, Anson County is part of the Charlotte MSA, and consists of 537 sq miles. Therefore, Charlotte's MSA is 2,709 square miles.
Urban areas (urbanized areas and urban clusters) and core based statistical areas (metropolitan statistical areas, micropolitan statistical areas, and combined statistical areas) are delineated based on set criteria and thresholds. If areas meet the criteria, they qualify. If they don't meet the criteria, they don't qualify. There are no politics involved.
As areas grow together, deciding on whether to merge them or keep them separate is one of the most difficult things to deal with. When the urban area criteria for 2010 were proposed several years ago, they included merging urbanized areas that grew together and were in the same metropolitan areas, which could have resulted in the merger of Gastonia, Concord, and Rock Hill with Charlotte. As a result of negative feedback, the final criteria said that all separate urbanized areas from 2000 would retain their separate status. Urban clusters (urban areas below 50,000 population) were not protected.
As a result, many area urban clusters were merged into urbanized areas (Mooresville, Statesville, Wingate, and Westport (in Lincoln County) into Charlotte; Salisbury into Concord; Kings Mountain into Gastonia -- but the existing urbanized areas remained separate. That's what the criteria say. For the next census, there may be different criteria, and areas might get merged. Who knows what will happen?
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,813 posts, read 34,657,307 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCDave
Urban areas (urbanized areas and urban clusters) and core based statistical areas (metropolitan statistical areas, micropolitan statistical areas, and combined statistical areas) are delineated based on set criteria and thresholds. If areas meet the criteria, they qualify. If they don't meet the criteria, they don't qualify. There are no politics involved.
As areas grow together, deciding on whether to merge them or keep them separate is one of the most difficult things to deal with. When the urban area criteria for 2010 were proposed several years ago, they included merging urbanized areas that grew together and were in the same metropolitan areas, which could have resulted in the merger of Gastonia, Concord, and Rock Hill with Charlotte. As a result of negative feedback, the final criteria said that all separate urbanized areas from 2000 would retain their separate status. Urban clusters (urban areas below 50,000 population) were not protected.
As a result, many area urban clusters were merged into urbanized areas (Mooresville, Statesville, Wingate, and Westport (in Lincoln County) into Charlotte; Salisbury into Concord; Kings Mountain into Gastonia -- but the existing urbanized areas remained separate. That's what the criteria say. For the next census, there may be different criteria, and areas might get merged. Who knows what will happen?
Dave, I missed it before, but they added the Lincolnton micropolitan to Gastonia & the Shelby micropolitan as well. Over half of the population of Cleveland County is concentrated in the cities of Shelby & Kings Mountain plus Kings Mountain Twp. Add some commuters coming in from the current MSA to people commuting from Cleveland County & you probably have the magic number. Most of Lincoln & Cleveland are rural & in some areas very sparsely populated. Add the sparce population of northern Gaston County, & you probably have the reason for the drop in density to the Charlotte MSA.
As areas grow together, deciding on whether to merge them or keep them separate is one of the most difficult things to deal with. When the urban area criteria for 2010 were proposed several years ago, they included merging urbanized areas that grew together and were in the same metropolitan areas, which could have resulted in the merger of Gastonia, Concord, and Rock Hill with Charlotte. As a result of negative feedback, the final criteria said that all separate urbanized areas from 2000 would retain their separate status.
And the "negative feedback" came from the local leaders of small suburban urbanized areas who did not want to lose their own naming rights. This is what I meant when I stated that UAs are too political. This reminds me of how Concord wanted their name on Concord Mills Mall. The local leaders their absolutely DID NOT want another popular attraction in their city with Charlotte's name on it (think "Charlotte" Motor Speedway).
I understand what you mean about how politics has nothing to do with the formula. However, politics has everything to do with how UAs are named. So if Gastonia (for example) is in its own UA (which it is), what's stopping Gastonia from having its own MSA (think Raleigh/Durham, Greensboro/Winston, and Greenville/Spartanburg)? Metro Charlotte will most likely gain counties, but losing counties (due to UA political naming practices) is most certainly not out of the question.
If we were to lose counties, every statistic for "Metro Charlotte" would be based off of a smaller MSA (metro growth, crime, GDP, infrastructure funding, etc). All because a few Mayberries in our area want to keep their own UA name, the area as a whole could suffer statistically. This is why I would like to see the politics taken out of UAs, MSAs, and CSAs.
Back in 2003, we lost Lincoln and Rowan counties (they went from MSA to CSA status). Had that never happened, our metro area's funding and GDP information would have included the populations of those two. Instead, we lost those two (200,000 plus people) and gained Anson (25,000 strong and shrinking). This happened because Lincoln and Rowan qualified as Micropolitan counties. They qualified because of a relatively new concept called "Urban Clusters". "Urban Clusters" were invented due to political bickering from the Mayberries of America who wanted their own name to be listed rather than the name of the main city in which they owe most of their prosperity to.
Again, too much politics for my tastes. Carry on....
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,813 posts, read 34,657,307 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
And the "negative feedback" came from the local leaders of small suburban urbanized areas who did not want to lose their own naming rights. This is what I meant when I stated that UAs are too political. This reminds me of how Concord wanted their name on Concord Mills Mall. The local leaders their absolutely DID NOT want another popular attraction in their city with Charlotte's name on it (think "Charlotte" Motor Speedway).
I understand what you mean about how politics has nothing to do with the formula. However, politics has everything to do with how UAs are named. So if Gastonia (for example) is in its own UA (which it is), what's stopping Gastonia from having its own MSA (think Raleigh/Durham, Greensboro/Winston, and Greenville/Spartanburg)? Metro Charlotte will most likely gain counties, but losing counties (due to UA political naming practices) is most certainly not out of the question.
If we were to lose counties, every statistic for "Metro Charlotte" would be based off of a smaller MSA (metro growth, crime, GDP, infrastructure funding, etc). All because a few Mayberries in our area want to keep their own UA name, the area as a whole could suffer statistically. This is why I would like to see the politics taken out of UAs, MSAs, and CSAs.
Back in 2003, we lost Lincoln and Rowan counties (they went from MSA to CSA status). Had that never happened, our metro area's funding and GDP information would have included the populations of those two. Instead, we lost those two (200,000 plus people) and gained Anson (25,000 strong and shrinking). This happened because Lincoln and Rowan qualified as Micropolitan counties. They qualified because of a relatively new concept called "Urban Clusters". "Urban Clusters" were invented due to political bickering from the Mayberries of America who wanted their own name to be listed rather than the name of the main city in which they owe most of their prosperity to.
Again, too much politics for my tastes. Carry on....
However, politics has everything to do with how UAs are named.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
So if Gastonia (for example) is in its own UA (which it is), what's stopping Gastonia from having its own MSA (think Raleigh/Durham, Greensboro/Winston, and Greenville/Spartanburg)?
Gaston County qualified as an outlying county and merged into the Charlotte metro area in 1973 based on high commuting. Commuting has remained high and Gaston County will remain in the metro area. The fact that Gastonia has had a separate UA since 1976 has nothing to do with that.
The old Raleigh/Durham, Greensboro/Winston-Salem, and Greenville/Spartanburg areas didn't qualify to be together based on high commuting. They qualified based on medium commuting, which gave them a choice based on the old criteria. They chose to combine. Before the 2000 census, the optional combination of areas based on local opinion was removed from the criteria. These areas did not have sufficient commuting to merge, so they were separated after 2000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
Metro Charlotte will most likely gain counties, but losing counties (due to UA political naming practices) is most certainly not out of the question..
Political naming practices?
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
All because a few Mayberries in our area want to keep their own UA name, the area as a whole could suffer statistically. This is why I would like to see the politics taken out of UAs, MSAs, and CSAs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
Back in 2003, we lost Lincoln and Rowan counties (they went from MSA to CSA status). This happened because Lincoln and Rowan qualified as Micropolitan counties. They qualified because of a relatively new concept called "Urban Clusters". "Urban Clusters" were invented due to political bickering from the Mayberries of America who wanted their own name to be listed rather than the name of the main city in which they owe most of their prosperity to.
Urban clusters had nothing to do with Lincoln and Rowan dropping out of the metro area. They dropped out because the criteria changed. Before 2000, outlying counties could qualify based on a commuting rate of as little as 15% (but they had to meet other criteria, such as population density minimums or growth rates). For the 2000 census this was changed to a flat 25% commuting rate with no other population-based criteria. As a result of this change, many metro areas lost counties, but others gained. It's just the way the data fell.
Before 2000 the Census Bureau classified area as urban in two ways: population within urbanized areas with a population of 50,000 or more, and population within places (incorporated and census designated places) outside urbanized areas with a population of 2,500 or more. Thus some areas were classified as urban based on population density (in urbanized aeas) and some areas were classified as urban because they were inside a place boundary. To make the classification more consistent, the Census Bureau basically applied the urbanized area criteria to areas down to 2,500. Urban areas with populations between 2,500 and 49,999 were called urban clusters.
The whole idea is to come up with urban classifications that are consistent nationwide.
Also after the 2000 census the Office of Management and Budget (not the Census Bureau) decided to recognize counties containing smaller urban areas as micropolitan statistical areas. Thus Lincolnton, Salisbury, Shelby, Albemarle, Chester, and Lancaster qualified as micropolitan statistical areas because they contained urban clusters with populations above 10,000.
In the map below, the darker shaded areas are metropolitan statistical areas recognized after the 2000 census, and the lighter shaded areas are micropolitan statistical areas.
Concord, Gastonia, and Rock Hill could qualify as separate metropolitan statistical areas because of theur separate urbanized areas, but they merged into Charlotte because of their high commuting into Mecklenburg.
Adjacent metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas can combine to form combined statistical areas, if they meet certain commuting thresholds that are lower than those thet qualify areas to merge. The dark green line outlines the Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury combined statistical area.
The metro- and micropolitan statistical area delineation process generally involves two steps: Counties with large populations within urban areas qualify as central counties, and other counties qualify as outlying based on commuting to central counties.
For 2000, Union County was a central county in addition to Mecklenburg because so much of Union County's population was in the urbanized area. that's how Anson County qualified -- becasue of commuting to Union County, in addition to Mecklenburg County. Gaston, Cabarrus, and York Counties qualified as outlying, merged into the Charlotte metro area, and became part of the central core because they also contained urbanized areas. Other counties could qualify based on commuting to this 5-county core, but surprisingly none did except Anson.
When the new areas are delineated next year, Iredell County will be a central county along with Mecklenburg and Union because the Charlotte urbanized area takes in most of its population.
Also, Rowan County will be central because the Concord urbanized area now takes in Salisbury. This means that Cabarrus and Rowan Counties will go into a metropolitan statistical area as a unit. I expect that together they will qualify for the Charlotte metro area, but they could remain separate.
I expect Gaston and York Counties to again qualify as outlying to Mecklenburg/Iredell/Union. Counties could then qualify as outlying to the Mecklenburg/Iredell/Union/Gaston/York (and possibly Cabarrus and Rowan) central core. (The process just keeps going and going...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
Again, too much politics for my tastes. Carry on....
If you're defining politics very broadly, then "politics" may have played a part because urbanized areas that could potentially merge in with others argued against it when given the opportunity to comment on the proposed criteria. But it's really mostly about statistics and how they fall in with the trhresholds and other criteria.
Dave, I missed it before, but they added the Lincolnton micropolitan to Gastonia & the Shelby micropolitan as well. Over half of the population of Cleveland County is concentrated in the cities of Shelby & Kings Mountain plus Kings Mountain Twp. Add some commuters coming in from the current MSA to people commuting from Cleveland County & you probably have the magic number. Most of Lincoln & Cleveland are rural & in some areas very sparsely populated. Add the sparce population of northern Gaston County, & you probably have the reason for the drop in density to the Charlotte MSA.
This is a relationship table that shows relationships between urban areas and core based statisical areas (metropolitan and micropolitan staistical areas. It says that of the total population of 169,495 for the Gastonia urbanized area, 158,241 is within the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC Metro Area (mostly Gaston and a little piece in York County), 83 is in the Lincolnton, NC Micro Area (Lincoln County), and 11,171 is in the Shelby, NC Micro Area (Cleveland County).
Changes to core based statistical areas for this decade won't be announced until 2013.
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.
