How many incorporated places are registered in the U.S.?

There were 19,502 incorporated places registered in the United States as of July 31, 2019. 16,410 had a population under 10,000 while, in contrast, only 10 cities had a population of one million or more.

Small-town America

Suffice it to say, almost nothing is more idealized in the American imagination than small-town America. When asked where they would prefer to live, 30 percent of Americans reported that they would prefer to live in a small town. Americans tend to prefer small-town living due to a perceived slower pace of life, close-knit communities, and a more affordable cost of living when compared to large cities.

An increasing population

Despite a preference for small-town life, metropolitan areas in the U.S. still see high population figures, with the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago metro areas being the most populous in the country. Metro and state populations are projected to increase by 2040, so while some may move to small towns to escape city living, those small towns may become more crowded in the upcoming decades.

This dataset contains information about the demographics of all US cities and census-designated places with a population greater or equal to 65,000. This data comes from the US Census Bureau's 2015 American Community Survey. This product uses the Census Bureau Data API but is not endorsed or certified by the Census Bureau.

This statistic shows the top 25 cities in the United States with the highest resident population as of July 1, 2022. There were about 8.34 million people living in New York City as of July 2022.

This layer is a component of Transborder.

This dataset contains geographic information concerning cities and towns in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. A city or town is a place with a recorded population, usually with at least one central area that provides commercial activities. Cities are generally larger than towns; no distinction is made between cities and towns in this map layer.

All cities with a population > 1000 or seats of adm div (ca 80.000)Sources and ContributionsSources : GeoNames is aggregating over hundred different data sources. Ambassadors : GeoNames Ambassadors help in many countries. Wiki : A wiki allows to view the data and quickly fix error and add missing places. Donations and Sponsoring : Costs for running GeoNames are covered by donations and sponsoring.Enrichment:add country name

This layer presents the locations of major cities within the United States with populations of approximately 10,000 or greater, state capitals, and the national capital. Major Cities are locations containing population totals from the 2020 Census.The points represent U.S. Census Places polygons sourced from U.S. Census Bureau 2020 TIGER FGDB (National Sub-State). Attribute fields include 2020 total population from the U.S. Census Public Law 94 data that symbolize the city points using these six classifications: Class Population Range 5 2,500 – 9,999 6 10,000 – 49,999 7 50,000 – 99,999 8 100,000 – 249,999 9 250,000 – 499,999 10 500,000 and overThis ready-to-use layer can be used in ArcGIS Pro and in ArcGIS Online and its configurable apps, dashboards, StoryMaps, custom apps, and mobile apps. The data can also be exported for offline workflows. Cite the 'U.S. Census Bureau' when using this data.

This data set includes cities in the United States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. These cities were collected from the 1970 National Atlas of the United States. Where applicable, U.S. Census Bureau codes for named populated places were associated with each name to allow additional information to be attached. The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) was also used as a source for additional information. This is a revised version of the December, 2003, data set.

This layer is sourced from maps.bts.dot.gov.

The purpose of this data package is to offer demographic data for U.S. cities. The data sources are multiple, the most important one being the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. In this case, the data was organized by the Big Cities Health Coalition (BCHC). Others are the New York City Department of City Planning and Department of Parks and Recreation, data being available through the NYC Open Data.

Geospatial data about US Major Cities (State). Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

As of July 2024, 130 cities in the United States were served by e-scooter sharing schemes. The number of cities served had been rising from one city in 2017 to its peak at 179 cities in 2022. Since then, operators have been reducing the number of cities in which they operate.

This dataset is about cities in the United States. It has 4,171 rows. It features 7 columns including country, population, latitude, and longitude.

In Miami Beach, Florida, around 40,000 residents live in homes at risk to being flooded by 2060 due to rising sea levels. Florida has many cities that may be lost to coastal erosion as a result of sea level rise, as well as storm surges. The significance of sea level rise is particularly great for the many cities with high values of assets that are under threat.

Sustainable cities depend on urban forests. City trees -- a pillar of urban forests -- improve our health, clean the air, store CO2, and cool local temperatures. Comparatively less is known about urban forests as ecosystems, particularly their spatial composition, nativity statuses, biodiversity, and tree health. Here, we assembled and standardized a new dataset of N=5,660,237 trees from 63 of the largest US cities. The data comes from tree inventories conducted at the level of cities and/or neighborhoods. Each data sheet includes detailed information on tree location, species, nativity status (whether a tree species is naturally occurring or introduced), health, size, whether it is in a park or urban area, and more (comprising 28 standardized columns per datasheet). This dataset could be analyzed in combination with citizen-science datasets on bird, insect, or plant biodiversity; social and demographic data; or data on the physical environment. Urban forests offer a rare opportunity to intentionally design biodiverse, heterogenous, rich ecosystems. Methods See eLife manuscript for full details. Below, we provide a summary of how the dataset was collected and processed.

Data Acquisition We limited our search to the 150 largest cities in the USA (by census population). To acquire raw data on street tree communities, we used a search protocol on both Google and Google Datasets Search (https://datasetsearch.research.google.com/). We first searched the city name plus each of the following: street trees, city trees, tree inventory, urban forest, and urban canopy (all combinations totaled 20 searches per city, 10 each in Google and Google Datasets Search). We then read the first page of google results and the top 20 results from Google Datasets Search. If the same named city in the wrong state appeared in the results, we redid the 20 searches adding the state name. If no data were found, we contacted a relevant state official via email or phone with an inquiry about their street tree inventory. Datasheets were received and transformed to .csv format (if they were not already in that format). We received data on street trees from 64 cities. One city, El Paso, had data only in summary format and was therefore excluded from analyses.

Data Cleaning All code used is in the zipped folder Data S5 in the eLife publication. Before cleaning the data, we ensured that all reported trees for each city were located within the greater metropolitan area of the city (for certain inventories, many suburbs were reported - some within the greater metropolitan area, others not). First, we renamed all columns in the received .csv sheets, referring to the metadata and according to our standardized definitions (Table S4). To harmonize tree health and condition data across different cities, we inspected metadata from the tree inventories and converted all numeric scores to a descriptive scale including “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”, and “dead/dying”. Some cities included only three points on this scale (e.g., “good”, “poor”, “dead/dying”) while others included five (e.g., “excellent,” “good”, “fair”, “poor”, “dead”). Second, we used pandas in Python (W. McKinney & Others, 2011) to correct typos, non-ASCII characters, variable spellings, date format, units used (we converted all units to metric), address issues, and common name format. In some cases, units were not specified for tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and tree height; we determined the units based on typical sizes for trees of a particular species. Wherever diameter was reported, we assumed it was DBH. We standardized health and condition data across cities, preserving the highest granularity available for each city. For our analysis, we converted this variable to a binary (see section Condition and Health). We created a column called “location_type” to label whether a given tree was growing in the built environment or in green space. All of the changes we made, and decision points, are preserved in Data S9. Third, we checked the scientific names reported using gnr_resolve in the R library taxize (Chamberlain & Szöcs, 2013), with the option Best_match_only set to TRUE (Data S9). Through an iterative process, we manually checked the results and corrected typos in the scientific names until all names were either a perfect match (n=1771 species) or partial match with threshold greater than 0.75 (n=453 species). BGS manually reviewed all partial matches to ensure that they were the correct species name, and then we programmatically corrected these partial matches (for example, Magnolia grandifolia-- which is not a species name of a known tree-- was corrected to Magnolia grandiflora, and Pheonix canariensus was corrected to its proper spelling of Phoenix canariensis). Because many of these tree inventories were crowd-sourced or generated in part through citizen science, such typos and misspellings are to be expected. Some tree inventories reported species by common names only. Therefore, our fourth step in data cleaning was to convert common names to scientific names. We generated a lookup table by summarizing all pairings of common and scientific names in the inventories for which both were reported. We manually reviewed the common to scientific name pairings, confirming that all were correct. Then we programmatically assigned scientific names to all common names (Data S9). Fifth, we assigned native status to each tree through reference to the Biota of North America Project (Kartesz, 2018), which has collected data on all native and non-native species occurrences throughout the US states. Specifically, we determined whether each tree species in a given city was native to that state, not native to that state, or that we did not have enough information to determine nativity (for cases where only the genus was known). Sixth, some cities reported only the street address but not latitude and longitude. For these cities, we used the OpenCageGeocoder (https://opencagedata.com/) to convert addresses to latitude and longitude coordinates (Data S9). OpenCageGeocoder leverages open data and is used by many academic institutions (see https://opencagedata.com/solutions/academia). Seventh, we trimmed each city dataset to include only the standardized columns we identified in Table S4. After each stage of data cleaning, we performed manual spot checking to identify any issues.

Dataset

This dataset was created by smokedCedar

Contents

This layer is a component of 2007_NAIP_COVERAGE_3.mxd.

In 2021, New York city had the highest number of people living below the poverty line, with 1.4 million people living in poverty. This is significantly higher than any of the other most populated cities.

The datasets are split by census block, cities, counties, districts, provinces, and states. The typical dataset includes the below fields.

Column numbers, Data attribute, Description 1, device_id, hashed anonymized unique id per moving device 2, origin_geoid, geohash id of the origin grid cell 3, destination_geoid, geohash id of the destination grid cell 4, origin_lat, origin latitude with 4-to-5 decimal precision 5, origin_long, origin longitude with 4-to-5 decimal precision 6, destination_lat, destination latitude with 5-to-6 decimal precision 7, destination_lon, destination longitude with 5-to-6 decimal precision 8, start_timestamp, start timestamp / local time 9, end_timestamp, end timestamp / local time 10, origin_shape_zone, customer provided origin shape id, zone or census block id 11, destination_shape_zone, customer provided destination shape id, zone or census block id 12, trip_distance, inferred distance traveled in meters, as the crow flies 13, trip_duration, inferred duration of the trip in seconds 14, trip_speed, inferred speed of the trip in meters per second 15, hour_of_day, hour of day of trip start (0-23) 16, time_period, time period of trip start (morning, afternoon, evening, night) 17, day_of_week, day of week of trip start(mon, tue, wed, thu, fri, sat, sun) 18, year, year of trip start 19, iso_week, iso week of the trip 20, iso_week_start_date, start date of the iso week 21, iso_week_end_date, end date of the iso week 22, travel_mode, mode of travel (walking, driving, bicycling, etc) 23, trip_event, trip or segment events (start, route, end, start-end) 24, trip_id, trip identifier (unique for each batch of results) 25, origin_city_block_id, census block id for the trip origin point 26, destination_city_block_id, census block id for the trip destination point 27, origin_city_block_name, census block name for the trip origin point 28, destination_city_block_name, census block name for the trip destination point 29, trip_scaled_ratio, ratio used to scale up each trip, for example, a trip_scaled_ratio value of 10 means that 1 original trip was scaled up to 10 trips 30, route_geojson, geojson line representing trip route trajectory or geometry

The datasets can be processed and enhanced to also include places, POI visitation patterns, hour-of-day patterns, weekday patterns, weekend patterns, dwell time inferences, and macro movement trends.

The dataset is delivered as gzipped CSV archive files that are uploaded to your AWS s3 bucket upon request.

TABLE III. Deaths in 122 U.S. cities - 2015122 Cities Mortality Reporting System ��� Each week, the vital statistics offices of 122 cities across the United States report the total number of death certificates processed and the number of those for which pneumonia or influenza was listed as the underlying or contributing cause of death by age group (Under 28 days, 28 days ���1 year, 1-14 years, 15-24 years, 25-44 years, 45-64 years, 65-74 years, 75-84 years, and ��� 85 years).FOOTNOTE:U: Unavailable -: No reported cases * Mortality data in this table are voluntarily reported from 122 cities in the United States, most of which have populations of 100,000 or more. A death is reported by the place of its occurrence and by the week that the death certificate was filed. Fetal deaths are not included. ** Totals include unknown ages. *** Partial counts for this city.

Many of the U.S.’s most populated areas are within miles of the coast. As the sea level rises in many areas, these cities are being exposed to more and more nuisance floods - not just from extreme events like Hurricane Sandy, but also when routine rain storms occur. This map plots data from NOAA showing the results of an analysis of tide gauge and satellite data from around the country. City locations colored in blue-green are experiencing positive sea level rise, whereas areas colored in light brown are experiencing negative sea level rise. This feature service includes pop-ups that indicate the city, the rate of sea level rise (feet per century) and the statistical 95% confidence level. The latter gives an indication of how much more or less rise can be expected from the average. Original data from NOAA: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/