The Surface Temperature Record and the Urban Heat Island
 william @ 6:33 pm

There are quite a few reasons to believe that the surface temperature record - which shows a warming of approximately 0.6°-0.8°C over the last century (depending on precisely how the warming trend is defined) - is essentially uncontaminated by the effects of urban growth and the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect. These include that the land, borehole and marine records substantially agree; and the fact that there is little difference between the long-term (1880 to 1998) rural (0.70°C/century) and full set of station temperature trends (actually less at 0.65°C/century). This and other information lead the IPCC to conclude that the UHI effect makes at most a contribution of 0.05°C to the warming observed over the past century.  continues...
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/the-surface-temperature-record-and-the-urban-h eat-island/

Seems that using average data is part of the problem here. The temp on Aug 1 may be hotter than the temp on Aug 1 during the dust bowl. If we have an extremely cold winter, or another season is colder than normal, it may wash out the extremes we see.

How about a series of highest recorded temperatures for cities?

Like SC (comment further below), I too have trouble with using annual average temperatures to talk about heat waves, though I've used them myself for other purposes. It's the extremes of heat (and cold) that kill people. Most of the deaths are among the ill and the elderly, just as it would be in nature.

For species less adaptible than ours, the extremes in temperature (and precipitation) are much more important than the annual averages in affecting the health and reproduction of natural populations. Plants and animals are affected, like us, by drought, blizzards, heat waves, etc. The effects tend to be most pronounced towards the edges of their geographic distributions.

I haven't run across a summary measure for heat waves, which is not to say there isn't one. However, I have looked at the annual highest temperature for 36 representative climate monitoring stations in British Columbia, where I live, for the period 1950-2001. Only about a third of the locations show evidence for any increase in the maximum temperature. The increase at those locations is about a degree Celsius in 50 years.

Reasonably complete data sets are pretty rare in my experience, especially when looking at locations with records back into the 19th century. The outcome of even simple analyses can be affected by how the missing data are treated. Temperature records have been kept in BC for about 150 years, but the analysis back to 1950 is probably the best that can be done with confidence.  

Sorry, that should be NC, not SC.