Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: How big/small do the following metros feel?
ATL feels about its size 6 4.65%
ATL feels bigger 20 15.50%
ATL feels smaller 18 13.95%
DFW feels about its size 1 0.78%
DFW feels bigger 32 24.81%
DFW feels smaller 9 6.98%
Houston feels about its size 6 4.65%
Houston feels bigger 31 24.03%
Houston feels smaller 6 4.65%
Voters: 129. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
5,003 posts, read 5,973,386 times
Reputation: 4323

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
I said to that post "I dare you to post a US metro in the 3 million range that's under 2,000 sq mi. seriously" so LA is in 3 million range now )?
Yeah I know. I just wanted to note that for comparison's sake. Obviously the portion of the Atlanta metro with 3 million people would have much more to offer than Orange County, if that helps.

 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:06 PM
 
4,843 posts, read 6,097,568 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
how does that make any of these 5M metros not feel like 3M metros?
I am not saying that they do, I have just not gotten your reasoning?
Every 5M metro is alot denser than every 3M metro. All 3M metros are 3,000 to 7,000 sq mi to get 3M, While Atlanta, Houston, DFW and etc does it less than 1,800 sq mi. Alot posters like talk about ATL, DFW and HOU sprawl and low density, when in 1,800 sq mi there amongst the most dense in country. If all metros were 1,800 sq mi Atlanta would only drop to 10th or 11th.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:16 PM
 
4,843 posts, read 6,097,568 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlGreen View Post
I'm not trying to be an ass, but you can get pretty defensive with people. You're never nice to meeeee
Your cool we just diagree alot. But I know your not a troll your opinions makes sense. Trust me we haven't argue to the point that were discussing Biscuit.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,929,248 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Every 5M metro is alot denser than every 3M metro. All 3M metros are 3,000 to 7,000 sq mi to get 3M, While Atlanta, Houston, DFW and etc does it less than 1,800 sq mi. Alot posters like talk about ATL, DFW and HOU sprawl and low density, when in 1,800 sq mi there amongst the most dense in country. If all metros were 1,800 sq mi Atlanta would only drop to 10th or 11th.
ah okay.

I can only think of Tampa and Orland that are close to 3M in less than 3000 sq miles.

yeah, the sunbelt Metros are always being crapped on but they have the same number of people in the same area.

Boston metro division + Middlesex County is about 3M people in 2000sq miles
Philly has about 3.2M in 1800 sq miles (Philly + Mont+Chester +Bucks)
 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:33 PM
 
4,843 posts, read 6,097,568 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlGreen View Post
You know, San Francisco didn't use the "hills" excuse when they built their city. Atlanta doesn't sprawl that way because it has to, it sprawls that way because it can.

You're one of the first to brag about how dense Atlanta is in the core, so why wasn't that trend continued? Focusing on the "key areas and corridors" is cool, but stray to far and you're back to sporadic suburban sprawl. Atlanta will never be too far ahead of the others, as long as that is true.

The point being made is that Houston is already set up in a way that will help it become more urban and walkable in the long run.
That’s the problem because besides New Orleans, Atlanta was develop more like a small Northeast city, a dense core with satellite towns. Most sunbelt cities are build in the fashion of LA, when the 50s came around sunbelt metros really began to sprawl. So Atlanta comes out like a sprawl and less dense version of Greater Boston. And Houston and Dallas comes out like a less dense version of Greater LA.

So if Atlanta leaders are going to infill there not going to cry that there’s no grid and etc when most dense cities in the world don’t have grids it’s mainly a North American thing. My point is Atlanta is too, already set up in a way that will help it become more urban and walkable in the long run. Revitalize the areas that historically were dense that decrease by sprawl, make them denser then they had ever been. Other wise Houston and Dallas are fusing on large areas to become denser and Atlanta is focusing on key areas to have a even high density. If the areas were sporadic they wouldn’t be key, MikeandIke post some good videos on it a few pages back.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 10:37 PM
 
Location: America
5,092 posts, read 8,842,323 times
Reputation: 1971
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Your cool we just diagree alot. But I know your not a troll your opinions makes sense. Trust me we haven't argue to the point that were discussing Biscuit.
I'm just messing with you lol.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 11:01 PM
 
4,843 posts, read 6,097,568 times
Reputation: 4670
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
ah okay.

I can only think of Tampa and Orland that are close to 3M in less than 3000 sq miles.

yeah, the sunbelt Metros are always being crapped on but they have the same number of people in the same area.

Boston metro division + Middlesex County is about 3M people in 2000sq miles
Philly has about 3.2M in 1800 sq miles (Philly + Mont+Chester +Bucks)
See I didn't even know that. I asume that by the way posters talked about density they would be much highier. So really these cities core and some inter suburbs are the only things denser. While the big sunbelt cities have smaller cities core there inter suburbs are generally denser to make up. I going use that now every time a northeast poster say something about ATL, DFW, and HOU being over 8,000 sq mi to get 5 to 6 million, and they say what if my metro was that size. I going to bring up in 1,800 sq mi every US metro from 4th to 12th ranked by whole population is 3.2m to 4.2m range.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,929,248 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Most sunbelt cities are build in the fashion of LA, when the 50s came around sunbelt metros really began to sprawl.
actually Houston was built neither on the NE model or the LA model. The original city was tiny and very dense for the first 100 years of its existence, but it never had the narrow streets of the NE.

LA was no model for anywhere at the time. LA was a very tiny town up until the 1900's.
I think ATL was bigger than LA for all of the 1800's.

1890:
ATL- 65K
LA - 50K

It wasn't after Texas passed the lax annexation laws in the 1900's that Houston absorbed a sea of cities and unincorporated areas.

Houston's original land area was only 147 acres. Even as late as the 30's it was only 60 sq miles. as a matter of Fact Houston was much denser in 1930 than LA.

dallas was only 40 sq miles at the time and more Dense than Seattle, LA

ATL was about 35 sq miles at the time and as dense as DC,
 
Old 05-21-2011, 11:16 PM
 
Location: America
5,092 posts, read 8,842,323 times
Reputation: 1971
Parts of Houston and Dallas seem more reminiscent of the Chicago grid than Los Angeles, so it isn't just about the Sunbelt.
 
Old 05-21-2011, 11:26 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,929,248 times
Reputation: 7752
Yeah, after the slack annexation laws were passed and the Texas Cities started to cover large areas, the development became along the lines of LA, but to say that the cities were formed along the lines of LA is totally wrong. Houston had twice as many people as LA when Texas joined the US.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:34 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top