US Cities that are Helped/Hurt by being near Larger US Cities

[the urban politician]

This thread is making me crave a cheesesteak

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Skintreesnail

The move from NYC to Philly due to covid makes sense to me if someone was previously in an apartment building, paying crazy rent and getting no outdoor space and looking for a single family home with a small backyard that is still in a dense and urban environment.

I agree, but again, this isn't "due to Covid". People have been moving from apartments to SFH since they invented SFH. There will always be people looking for cheaper, more spacious housing.

And this requirement could be met by moving to Northern NJ, which has urban enclaves as affordable and dense as Philly, but 20 minutes from Manhattan. So someone moving to Philly likely specifically wants Philly.

[pj3000]

Not commenting on anything pandemic-related here, only based on proximity.

Eastern Pennsylvania cities in the Lehigh Valley greatly benefit from being near NYC and Philly.

There's nothing particularly interesting to me about the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton area on its own, but the metro has grown steadily since the 1970s (and particularly fast relative to the rest of PA in the last decade) due to its much lower cost of living/cost of business than in the NYC or even Philly areas, and still is less than 100 miles away from NYC and 60 miles from Philly.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by JManc

Lies. San Francisco is actually a suburb of Sausalito.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Not commenting on anything pandemic-related here, only based on proximity.

Eastern Pennsylvania cities in the Lehigh Valley greatly benefit from being near NYC and Philly.

There's nothing particularly interesting to me about the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton area on its own, but the metro has grown steadily since the 1970s (and particularly fast relative to the rest of PA in the last decade) due to its much lower cost of living/cost of business than in the NYC or even Philly areas, and still is less than 100 miles away from NYC and 60 miles from Philly.

That area is also considered a retirement haven and scores highly on many retirement lists. Like Delaware, people that don't want extreme heat, and want to be near to big eastern cities where they may have family and friends, and also want lower taxes and housing prices would consider that part of PA for retiring.

[Centropolis]

Ø null
set </midwest>

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Again, this isn't what I'm talking about. Philly obviously has lower housing prices than Brooklyn, and there's always movement from higher cost locales to lower cost locales.

I'm asking about the Covid narrative, with people supposedly fleeing into rural areas, and how it fits with pandemic-related moves to core Philly. Obviously Center City would be affected by Covid the same as other urban cores, and Philly is about as cramped/crowded as it gets in the U.S. outside of NYC.

Because I work in the World Trade Center (lower Manhattan) and post-Covid, I will only have to be in the office 2 days a week. I will not be full time remote, so I can't live in say, Atlanta. But I can live further afield. I wouldn't do a Philly to Manhattan commute every day but I can stomach it two days a week.

The house I'm building is a little outside of the core (Fishtown), so rather than backtrack into Center City to take Amtrak, I'm going to take it from a park and ride just north of Philadelphia. It will be about 10 minutes from my house to that park and ride. The Amtrak train from that station is 38 minutes to Newark Penn. From there, I hop on the PATH and am in the bottom of my building in 25 minutes. Door to door that's about an hour and 20 minutes.

Plenty of people commute from close in NY suburbs in Nassau, West Chester, and Fairfield with much longer commutes than that.

To be clear, there are going to be 3 buckets of workers in big cities go forward. Full time on site, Part time on site, Full time off site.

Obviously the first bucket can't really leave NYC. The second bucket doesn't get really talked about but is probably what most people will fall into. You have flexibility to be further away but you can't disappear to the other side of the country because your presence will be required frequently (enough) in the office. The third bucket you can be anywhere.

Philly will benefit the most from bucket number 2. I read these crazy articles about people moving to the Hamptons and Hudson Valley and they're saying it's doable because they only have to be in the office twice a week. Well guess what, it's a 3.5 hour train ride from the Hamptons to NYC. It's 2.5 from Hudson NY to Grand Central on Metro North. It's 38 minutes on Amtrak for me.

Psychologically there are a lot of places people commute from in the NY area that people think of as "close" to NY. Philly is closer to New York than a lot of them because the transit we use to get there is straight line direct and relatively high speed.

I don't see how this isn't easy to understand or see.

[thoughtcriminal]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

I wouldn't do a Philly to Manhattan commute every day

I used to do it, for years. it's not fun. 2 1/2 hours each way. drove to trenton then took NJT from there. missed a fair amount of my kids' growing up. had to fight to get an occasional work from home day on Fridays. Big part of the reason I left that job. if I had been able to work from home as often as I do now, would be a much different story. 1-2 days in the office would have been tolerable.

[iheartthed]

Is any city really "hurt" by being too close to another? I think most big cities are actually clustered near other large cities, especially in the U.S. and Canada (and maybe also western Europe?).

Almost all U.S. cities of +4M are within 400 miles of another city of +4 million. The exceptions to this are Atlanta and Miami. And Miami is the only +4 million city that isn't within 200 miles of another metro that is at least +2 million. However, both Orlando and Tampa are within 300 miles of Miami.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Because I work in the World Trade Center (lower Manhattan) and post-Covid, I will only have to be in the office 2 days a week. I will not be full time remote, so I can't live in say, Atlanta. But I can live further afield. I wouldn't do a Philly to Manhattan commute every day but I can stomach it two days a week.

So if your company changes policies (which they obviously can do, at any moment), you'd then move again? Like if they were 100% remote, you'd consider moving anywhere on the planet? Or if they were 100% in-office, you'd feel compelled to move next to the office again?

Basically no company knows their long-term office policies yet. This will be very iterative and take a few years to stabilize. So why would people be making permanent lifestyle choices based on work policies in constant flux?

Also, I suspect you have a Philly connection, and/or were considering living in Philly prior to Covid. I cannot believe you had zero interest in Philly, then Covid came, then you decided Covid was the perfect opportunity to start a crazy long commute a few days a week, bypassing cheaper areas along the way.

[JMKeynes]

One of my favorite cities, Philly, is often ignored because it’s sandwiched between NY and DC.

Providence is also awesome, but it’s overshadowed by Boston.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Is any city really "hurt" by being too close to another? I think most big cities are actually clustered near other large cities, especially in the U.S. and Canada (and maybe also western Europe?).

Right, I don't think any city is hurt by being in relatively close proximity to another city, be it larger or smaller, within the largely economic context in which we're speaking.

Really depends on how we define "hurt". A smaller city in close proximity to a larger one benefits, but also bears costs. Often higher crime, prices, congestion, pollution, etc. than if the larger city was not close.

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Almost all U.S. cities of +4M are within 400 miles of another city of +4 million. The exceptions to this are Atlanta and Miami. And Miami is the only +4 million city that isn't within 200 miles of another metro that is at least +2 million. However, both Orlando and Tampa are within 300 miles of Miami.

Miami is roughly 200 mi to Havana (2M+) though.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Miami is roughly 200 mi to Havana (2M+) though.

Yeah, I was actually thinking about that while writing, but forgot to check the distance when I submitted the response. I figured it was in the 200 mile range, and Miami's growth as a major city is indeed somewhat tied to proximity to Havana.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by Crawford

So if your company changes policies (which they obviously can do, at any moment), you'd then move again? Like if they were 100% remote, you'd consider moving anywhere on the planet? Or if they were 100% in-office, you'd feel compelled to move next to the office again?

Basically no company knows their long-term office policies yet. This will be very iterative and take a few years to stabilize. So why would people be making permanent lifestyle choices based on work policies in constant flux?

Also, I suspect you have a Philly connection, and/or were considering living in Philly prior to Covid. I cannot believe you had zero interest in Philly, then Covid came, then you decided Covid was the perfect opportunity to start a crazy long commute a few days a week, bypassing cheaper areas along the way.

Where are the cheaper urban areas along the way? Newark? New Brunswick? Trenton? I'm not moving just to save money. I still want a compelling urban life day to day. If my best option was Trenton I would just stay in Brooklyn.

If my office changes its policy I will move back. It's not rocket science.

I'm not like most people who shovel money into real estate and then need that capital to otherwise live. I live far below my means. I've never sold a property I've owned. I always hold onto them and turn them into rentals when I move on. I make handsome profits on all of them.

I suspect you wouldn't be criticizing a person who commutes from Port Jefferson NY to Manhattan every day on the Long Island Railroad even though that commute is two hours in each direction. Just because psychologically that's "close"?

Keep in mind, my income taxes will fall drastically. I don't own property in NY or NJ, but if I "opted" for something more convenient in your mind, property taxes in NY or NJ on a $500K house (which doesn't even really exist in nice towns) would be at least $15K a year. Not to mention that property I'm buying would be $2MM minimum in Brooklyn and at least a million in any close in NYC town. Which means the taxes would really be $20-$25K a year.

My property taxes will be $2K a year here.

This is not an arbitrary or haphazard decision in any way.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Is any city really "hurt" by being too close to another? I think most big cities are actually clustered near other large cities, especially in the U.S. and Canada (and maybe also western Europe?).

Almost all U.S. cities of +4M are within 400 miles of another city of +4 million. The exceptions to this are Atlanta and Miami. And Miami is the only +4 million city that isn't within 200 miles of another metro that is at least +2 million. However, both Orlando and Tampa are within 300 miles of Miami.

Denver metro is not there yet (currently 2.9M) but someday will be a pretty big outlier considering the nearest major cities are over a thousand miles away. Denver has some of the best air connections in the country though so getting to the west coast is only a couple hours away and the east coast anywhere from 3-4 hours.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

Ø null
set </midwest>

it's not a completely null set out here in the corn.

if we use the 80 mile philly to NYC distance as an upper limit, there are some city pairs like that in the midwest, they're just between much smaller cities than NYC & philly, obviously.

and they're all east of the mississippi; west of the big river, things start getting pulled too far apart as population density really begins to drop.



1M+ MSA to an even bigger MSA:

milwaukee to chicago - ~80 miles


500K+ MSA to a 1M+ MSA:

dayton to cincinnati - ~49 miles
dayton to columbus - ~65 miles
akron to cleveland - ~30 miles
madison to milwaukee - ~74 miles
toledo to detroit - 53 miles
lansing to detroit - ~80 miles
lansing to grand rapids - ~59 miles
youngstown to pittsburgh - ~58 miles
youngstown to cleveland - ~61 miles



all distances are approximate downtown-to-downtown, as the crow flies.

[MolsonExport]

What about cities that are dinged because they aren't the primary city in their state or province? Doesn't seem to affect California much (or maybe Alberta, since Calgary and Edmonton are more or less the same size and importance, and have been for decades), but New York State? Talk about a huge drop off from NYC to....Buffalo? Rochester metro is now nearly the same size).

In Canada, some provinces have one primary city and the rest are quite a ways down in the population sweepstakes (e.g., Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and to a lesser extent, Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec). Saskatchewan's largest city (Saskatoon) is breaking away from its former contender, Regina (formerly largest). Ditto for New Brunswick, with reference to Moncton vs. Saint John (formerly largest). PEI is really just too small to really consider here. Alberta mentioned above.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

it's not a completely null set out here in the corn.

if we use the 80 mile philly to NYC distance as an upper limit, there are some city pairs like that in the midwest, they're just between much smaller cities than NYC & philly, obviously.

and they're all east of the mississippi; west of the big river, things start getting pulled too far apart as population density really begins to drop.



1M+ MSA to an even bigger MSA:

milwaukee to chicago - ~80 miles


500K+ MSA to a 1M+ MSA:

dayton to cincinnati - ~49 miles
dayton to columbus - ~65 miles
akron to cleveland - ~30 miles
madison to milwaukee - ~74 miles
toledo to detroit - 53 miles
lansing to detroit - ~80 miles
lansing to grand rapids - ~59 miles
youngstown to pittsburgh - ~58 miles
youngstown to cleveland - ~61 miles



all distances are approximate downtown-to-downtown, as the crow flies.

The straight-line distance between Detroit and Cleveland is about the same as between Manhattan and Philadelphia.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Where are the cheaper urban areas along the way? Newark? New Brunswick? Trenton? I'm not moving just to save money. I still want a compelling urban life day to day. If my best option was Trenton I would just stay in Brooklyn.

You could move 10-15 minutes from Manhattan and have greater neighborhood density and neighborhood vibrancy than anywhere in Philly, for the same price and low taxes. NJ has a huge geography of low-cost urban living:

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7797...7i16384!8i8192

But Philly is an awesome city, so I suspect that's the reasoning, not Covid.

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

If my office changes its policy I will move back. It's not rocket science.

This isn't how this typically works. The majority of people have spouses, partners, children, community commitments, etc. Most professionals cannot just permanently move based on a manager's fleeting whim.

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

I suspect you wouldn't be criticizing a person who commutes from Port Jefferson NY to Manhattan every day on the Long Island Railroad even though that commute is two hours in each direction. Just because psychologically that's "close"?

I'm not criticizing anyone, and don't know anyone who commutes two hours one-way. My point is that I don't understand what this move has to do with Covid.

I literally don't know a single person who made a permanent move strictly due to Covid, given the uncertainties around the situation. I know plenty of people who moved, but their moves were either A. Temporary or B. Would have happened anyways regardless of Covid.

But if we were to accept the premise that WFH is permanent, thus meaning some people will endure longer commutes, I still don't get how Center City Philly would specifically benefit. Center City is expensive and a huge job center. It would just mean that everyone, everywhere, would have a larger potential geography for living. So former Center City residents would be in Manhattan, or Lancaster, or anywhere, really, because no longer tied to job address. It would be a wash, pretty much.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The straight-line distance between Detroit and Cleveland is about the same as between Manhattan and Philadelphia.

it's very close.

city hall to city hall, as the crow flies:

NYC to Philly - 80.5 miles

Detroit to Cleveland - 89.8 miles




of course, with lake erie being smack dab in between them, detroit and cleveland are much further away from each other in practical terms.



driving distances per google maps:

NYC to Philly - 95 miles

Detroit to Cleveland - 170 miles