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.
Go back and read what lead up to this. I didn't bring up the issue of Charlotte's annexation since 1970. The claim made by ATL forumers was that Charlotte's growth since that time was because of annexation. So I proved this not to be the case.
Now that I've done this, you guys seek to change your excuses for ATL's population loss vs CLT's gain again. I'm not playing this game. You guys made this challange, I accepted it, and you lost. There isn't anything else to it.
If you wish to make a different case, the do so. The rest of your post, I have not addressed. I agree with you that ATL MSA sprawls over 1000s of sq/miles. It's the who problem the place has in the first place and one, that Charlotte is doing a better job at avoiding.
If you read what I wrote.... that is not the case.
I mentioned city limit size vs. the growth of neighborhoods within the city... not just annexations. I did this on purpose, even though annexations are a large part of the issue.
Charlotte has always kept some undeveloped land, ready to be developed on hand. Atlanta hasn't.
When people fled Charlotte's intown neighborhoods, they had more room to stay in the city. In Atlanta that is not the case.
In the mean time if you consider where Atlanta was when it was the current size of charlotte (MSA/region), Charlotte is very similar to where Atlanta was.
If you look at Dekalb Co and small parts of Cobb Co. in particular... it is very easy to see side by side if you dropped Charlotte's/Mecklenburg's borders on top of Atlanta (downtown on downtown) that large parts of these counties in the core, denser areas would be included.
Georgia has a very unique history from its early days why this happened. At this point it is very dated, but it has left us with these borders nonetheless.
No matter, it proved that Charlotte is not growing like ATL, thankfully.
Yet, those of us that lived here in Atlanta when it was the current size of Charlotte no better, regardless of how our exurban neighborhoods are built now.
If you read what I wrote.... that is not the case.
I did read it. It's irrelevant to the point I made.
Atlanta lost 77,000 people within it's 1970 city limits by 2010. Charlotte gained 155,000 residents within it's 1970 city limits during the same period. This "vacant land" claim, now being brought up as the latest excuse for ATL's loss, is nonsense. Vacant land doesn't cause people to leave a city. (Though I does create it I guess. Detroit is the best example of that.)
I don't believe it anyway. I don't know of much vacant land inside the 1970 CLT borders. At the time the state of NC would not allow CLT or any city in the state to annex "vacant land".
I did read it. It's irrelevant to the point I made.
Atlanta lost 77,000 people within it's 1970 city limits by 2010. Charlotte gained 155,000 residents within it's 1970 city limits during the same period. This "vacant land" claim, now being brought up as the latest excuse for ATL's loss, is nonsense. Vacant land doesn't cause people to leave a city. (Though I does create it I guess. Detroit is the best example of that.)
I don't believe it anyway. I don't know of much vacant land inside the 1970 CLT borders. At the time the state of NC would not allow CLT or any city in the state to annex "vacant land".
it is -EXTREMELY- relevant.
It is land new neighborhoods are built on that caused people to leave the pre-1940s streetcar suburbs and other urban areas across the US.
Atlanta (proper) didn't have much vacant land in the city for that purpose, Charlotte did. But the core neighborhoods of Charlotte experienced the very same thing.
The problem you have isn't the numerical facts, but it is and isn't included in those facts on the ground are horribly mismatched. It is the way you are using them as evidence to support other conclusions that is incorrect. (aka... Wow that is really damning for Atlanta, etc... Actually, no, people were just fleeing certain types of neighborhoods for newer ones trendier in the time. The same thing happened in Charlotte)
Dear Heart, My post used current population inside Charlotte's 1970's boundaries. I'm not sure why this completely went over your head. It renders the "annexation" argument completely irrelevant. This was the original argument and why I did the research in the first place. You don't yet again get to change it when the numbers yield a result that you don't like.
i.e. Using the borders of 1970, 40 years development, Atlanta lost 77,000 people, Charlotte gained more than 155,000. Huge difference. Atlanta city was dying, Charlotte city was growing. I honestly don't care about the other places you mention, because I didn't address them.
You can try to spin it however you like but these are facts and not open to opinion.
Lets be clear .I'm not endeared to you.: Charlotte is a great city but you are right its not Atlanta on SO many levels. But misleading people by stating what you said is obviously due to your feeling inadequate about living in Charlotte vs Atlanta.Enjoy Charlotte for what it is and leave Atlanta out of it.I may criticize aspects of certain things about Charlotte but I can see it is a city with a bright future and I do wish it well.
With you it's clear you need Atlanta not to be what all it has become to make it the real center of The Southeast for commerce and culture that you have to act like its some waste land when OBVIOUSLY its not.
So keep with your delusions.We are all good here in Atlanta.From Peachtree City to Midtown to Woodstock to Decatur.We got it all.
Thank you. It's nice to see someone draw conclusions based on real data and to have the results independently verified. (and knows what they are talking about) I didn't focus specifically on the last decade when I made my posts, I did however see the same information for that period that you did.
Using the block data absolutely guarantees that data is normalized between decades. This was how I was able to calculate 2010 population within Charlotte's 1970 borders. ATL's forumers cried foul until I drew up these numbers. Now they won't acknowledge it and have changed the subject. No matter, it proved that Charlotte is not growing like ATL, thankfully.
The CLT/Meck city and county have remained at the lead of population growth vs the surrounding counties. It's been this way for a long time. Sure it could be better, but it's not turning into the disaster that we see in Georgia.
This has been your point all along. Charlotte's pattern of develoment is different from Atlanta, GA. Why they threatened by this is a mystery.
In regards to Charlotte, I think he was more talking about since 2010, although I haven't seen any town/city specific data. We have the data from 2000 - 2010, which shows that many of the surrounding suburbs grew faster than Charlotte.
The UNC map doesn't prove your point either, by the way. He is talking about patterns of development and that The Charlotte region embarked on a very different path from Georgia starting in the 1990's. the overall growth of a community is tempered by this exactly. Overall growth. Pittsburgh's population has shrunk dramatically but it is arguably a much better, more vibrant and urban city today then it was in the 1970's. significantly, the change in patterns of growth to more transit, walkable, compact development is not isolated in Charlotte. It's the law in many Charlotte suburbs. Charlotte's growth in the future will be more compact. There's no sign that this changing in Atlanta as your metro now sprawls from NC to south GA...a massive land area with few parallels for the population.
This has been your point all along. Charlotte's pattern of develoment is different from Atlanta, GA. Why they threatened by this is a mystery.
Actually, I'm here because I'm a dork and spent a good bit of time in school and grad school studying Geography, boundaries, and demography, through studies in economics and marketing. I have taken an interest in Charlotte, because of how similar it is. I really do see in Charlotte what Atlanta had when it was smaller. I fully admit that and I find it exciting, not threatening.
But if the overarching point is the growth is very different, which has been reiterated time and time again.
Why is it when we do away with political borders, and let Census researchers choose an urban boundary based on physical growth on the ground, aka the urban area.
We get very similar numbers.
Charlotte's UA population: 1,249,442
Land area (sq mi): 741.5
density: 1,685.0
Atlanta's UA population: 4,515,419
Land area (sq mi): 2,645.4
density: 1,706.9
Now I fully admit there was a great deal of controversy over the subjective choices of what was included in the Charlotte UA, and whether or not places like Gastonia and concord should or should not be included being UA's apart of the Charlotte MSA and region.
But if I add them to the total, it will only decrease Charlotte's density, as they are less dense than Charlotte's UA.
A majority of Atlanta's population rests in 5 core counties (Fulton, Dekalb, Gwinnett, Cobb, and Clayton) just as a majority of Charlotte's population rests in one (Mecklenburg).
Atlanta as a whole city, suburbs and all, (ignoring political borders) is far bigger than Charlotte, but much in the way it has grown is remarkably similar.
Now the really dense cores throughout Atlanta (Downtown, Midtown, parts of Ponce Ave, Perimeter Center, Vinings, Atlantic Station, Lindbergh etc...) which together are far smaller than the county or city limit sizes have seen phenomoinal residential urbanization via new urbanism philosophies on a really large scale that quite frankly trumps Charlotte's, but most of that is simply because places like Uptown and Southend are seeing the same growth... just scaled to the size of Charlotte's region.
Both cities urban residential cores, emerging and existing, are surrounded by single family home neighborhoods...many of which are protected by historical boundaries and political/neighborhood resistance to anything that changes the character of how they are.
Just look for your self. Most of the develop-able land inside Charlotte's beltway will soon be developed. The next 2-3 million people moving to Charlotte won't want to be in a small condo. Some will, particularly singles and young couples, but most of them will want a home just like most Charlotteans have today. To fit 2-3 million more people in the area with most in single family homes Charlotte's UA will have to grow far beyond the perimeter freeway in several directions. If the city grows 3 times bigger to match Atlanta, so will its urban footprint unless you make a big change from what Charlotte has already been doing.
Last edited by cwkimbro; 02-22-2013 at 06:59 PM..
Reason: typo/clairty
Sure, but there has been substantial organic growth. Again, the only advantage Charlotte has is its era of growth with the possibility for more successfully plan as the metro transitions from a population of 2 million to 4 million (20-30 years) based on current metro growth projections.
The last thing Charlotte needs worry about is a skyline, or any kind of Atlantic Station development (although nice), etc....infill baby, infill. Encourage and incentivize growth near the core.
Every city in America that is growing and developing in the new urbanism model.Charlotte nor Atlanta is new or the first in this.So all this nonsense that Charlotte can grow better than Atlanta is really not the issue.Charlotte can and SHOULD not only look to Atlanta for smart growth examples like Atlantic Station,Glenwood Park,and the Beltline but also develop using those examples to grow.I mean even NYC and Chicago has looked at Atlanta for some of these projects when they were being developed. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/re...QN+5RsLCagioIg
Im not even comparing the growth patterns.I was more correcting statements made by some of your more zealous Charlotte boosters.One thing to be a booster,another to falsify and exaggerate to make your city by putting down other places.We all have our favorites to be proud of.I can see why people are proud of Charlotte.However I refuse to allow incorrect statements about where I live as fact when its so blatant that the truth is overshadowed.I made an incorrect statement(although it was not intentional)I got called on it and was corrected. Im not mad.I consider myself further educated.
Im not talking about a skyline either.Most of Atlantic Station is low rise development.Its apartments,condos etc..Atlanta has several cores so it's infill is necessary everywhere.Midtown is more vibrant than ever.
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.
But misleading people by stating what you said is obviously due to your feeling inadequate about living in Charlotte vs Atlanta.Enjoy Charlotte for what it is and leave Atlanta out of it.I may criticize aspects of certain things about Charlotte but I can see it is a city with a bright future and I do wish it well.
