Honorable mention: San Francisco is at 13th
Honorable mention: San Francisco is at 13th
Using their methodology the order is: LA, NYC, Chicago, SF, Houston, DC, Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, and Phoenix.[2]
[1] https://www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/Definition-of-Funct...
[2] https://www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/functional-urban-ar...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_primary_statistical_ar...
0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Metropolitan_Statistic...
SF is artificially small due to how the line was drawn. Even the Census Region is not really correct since it considers SF and SJ as different zones, which artificially pumps up SJ's significance.
In reality "SF"-the-region includes Silicon Valley and the East Bay, and includes the non-agricultural (basically northern part) of San Jose as a suburb.
I kind of expect people will say it is San Francisco and speculate that the other is closer to the truth.
NYC's Metropolitan Division includes Ocean County (Jersey shore) but not Essex County (which includes Newark and all of the PATH trains).
The Metropolitan Statistical Area includes Pike County (not accessible by commuter rail from NYC) but not New Haven or Fairfield (which are).
These rankings are based on political borders of the cities and not the commonly perceived notions of what is a city. Honestly for me entire SF to San Jose belt must be considered as one single city to compare it with something like L.A. That is just me saying though. I might be compeltely off on this because I have never been to NY, Chi, Phili, etc.
(I generally look at urban regions that are larger entities than official borders by transit. If there are large daily people flows from area A to B, A and B are part of that region, no matter what the tax borders say.)