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.
The higher elevations, yes. The lower elevations where there is significantly less precipitation? I doubt it.
The Santa Monica Mountains get SIGNIFICANTLY more precipitation than the valleys and basins where most SoCal residents live.
Point being is that without imported water from the Sierras, LA wouldn't look like LA. wouldn't be enough natural groundwater resources to not only support the 18 million people in the LA area, but also the IMMENSE amount of landscaping in the lower elevations.
You are certainly correct w/r/t the current massive population. But the LA basin sits on a considerable aquifer. Some of the earliest European descriptions, eg Alfred Robinson, describe an verdant plane with many springs, esp as compared with Orange County. Of course, we had to pave that over. But the melt from the San Gabriels could sustain a larger population than many think. The majority of water consumed by cities in LA county other than the city of LA is locally welled.
Silly me. I always thought Miami-Dade was consolidated like Duval county. Well since the size of Miami-Dade is close to 2000sq mi yes its believable. Although Miami itself will never surpass Houston, much less Los Angeles.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,037,872 times
Reputation: 11862
[quote=one more thing;21886951]Looking at Miami, one sees the kind of growth L.A. used to enjoy a few decades ago. The city population may be only 1/10th the size of L.A.'s, and the metro 1/3 the size of L.A.'s, but Miami is hot whereas L.A. looks to be cooling off.
Will Miami surpass L.A. as this nations # 2 city? If so, when?[/quote]
Yes, I am totally serious. Just look at history, consider the impact of High-Speed Rail and the retirement of the baby boomers, and then look forward two decades. Miami is the top choice for a city that could leapfrog L.A. in size and importance. L.A. might even shrink over the next decade. No guarantees, but saying it'll never happen? L.A. is like Detroit, except it makes film & entertainment... not cars. Just look at how the entertainment industry (Hollywood) is de-centralizing and shrinking. Miami is one good tax break away from eating Hollywood's lunch.
[quote=Trimac20;21899156]
Quote:
Originally Posted by one more thing
Looking at Miami, one sees the kind of growth L.A. used to enjoy a few decades ago. The city population may be only 1/10th the size of L.A.'s, and the metro 1/3 the size of L.A.'s, but Miami is hot whereas L.A. looks to be cooling off.
Will Miami surpass L.A. as this nations # 2 city? If so, when?[/quote]
Yes, I am totally serious. Just look at history, consider the impact of High-Speed Rail and the retirement of the baby boomers, and then look forward two decades. Miami is the top choice for a city that could leapfrog L.A. in size and importance. L.A. might even shrink over the next decade. No guarantees, but saying it'll never happen? L.A. is like Detroit, except it makes film & entertainment... not cars. Just look at how the entertainment industry (Hollywood) is de-centralizing and shrinking. Miami is one good tax break away from eating Hollywood's lunch.
Do you have any proof to make this an educated argument? Los Angeles has a lot that Detroit never will: allure, beaches, amazing weather, a reputation for beautiful people, a growing public transportation system...
Also, Hollywood might be decentralizing a bit, but the vast majority of the entertainment industry is still situated in the LA area. Most of that decentralizing is studios moving to cities like Burbank (still in the metro).
It's just a ludicrous statement that a currently growing city and metro is going to shrink, and it's not like the last 20-30 years have been extremely kind to the economy of LA.
That's the trend, like it or not. I know better than to offer 'proof' on this forum. I stand by my hypothetical scenario. Anyone who has studied any history whatsoever can see that your statement (in bold) is flat-out wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup
Do you have any proof to make this an educated argument? Los Angeles has a lot that Detroit never will: allure, beaches, amazing weather, a reputation for beautiful people, a growing public transportation system...
Also, Hollywood might be decentralizing a bit, but the vast majority of the entertainment industry is still situated in the LA area. Most of that decentralizing is studios moving to cities like Burbank (still in the metro).
It's just a ludicrous statement that a currently growing city and metro is going to shrink, and it's not like the last 20-30 years have been extremely kind to the economy of LA.
That's the trend, like it or not. I know better than to offer 'proof' on this forum. I stand by my hypothetical scenario. Anyone who has studied any history whatsoever can see that your statement (in bold) is flat-out wrong.
Well in my uninformed, uneducated, baseless opinion, Miami will start shrinking too.
Miami will never match the population of America's largest sprawling CSAs. There simply isn't the available land to do so.
That said, the central core of Miami might grow to rival the central core of cities within CSAs that are much larger. Frankly, that's all I really care about. I couldn't care less how many thousands of square miles of new suburbs might be added to any of the "rival" metros in the future. Miami's future is in its core and its very close-in suburbs. Miami only having 36 square miles of land is actually a good thing because it has to grow more densely in order to increase its revenues through taxes. Miami may have only officially grown by about 36K in the previous decade but that represents 1000 additional residents per square mile in one decade alone. I am not sure any central city in America can claim that sort of metric. And, if one considers that the Census count happened primarily before most of the new towers were occupied, the real densification is probably significantly higher now. I'd look for another 1-2K in density in Miami by the next Census.
Regarding the moniker of "city of the future", keep in mind that Miami's growth is fueled by the emerging economies in South America. Brasil, in particular, is economically strong and Miami is the gateway for international business to the Americas. Added to this is the fact that Miami and its beaches are magnets globally.
Miami will never match the population of America's largest sprawling CSAs. There simply isn't the available land to do so.
That said, the central core of Miami might grow to rival the central core of cities within CSAs that are much larger. Frankly, that's all I really care about. I couldn't care less how many thousands of square miles of new suburbs might be added to any of the "rival" metros in the future. Miami's future is in its core and its very close-in suburbs. Miami only having 36 square miles of land is actually a good thing because it has to grow more densely in order to increase its revenues through taxes. Miami may have only officially grown by about 36K in the previous decade but that represents 1000 additional residents per square mile in one decade alone. I am not sure any central city in America can claim that sort of metric. And, if one considers that the Census count happened primarily before most of the new towers were occupied, the real densification is probably significantly higher now. I'd look for another 1-2K in density in Miami by the next Census.
Regarding the moniker of "city of the future", keep in mind that Miami's growth is fueled by the emerging economies in South America. Brasil, in particular, is economically strong and Miami is the gateway for international business to the Americas. Added to this is the fact that Miami and its beaches are magnets globally.
Miami will never match the population of America's largest sprawling CSAs. There simply isn't the available land to do so.
That said, the central core of Miami might grow to rival the central core of cities within CSAs that are much larger. Frankly, that's all I really care about. I couldn't care less how many thousands of square miles of new suburbs might be added to any of the "rival" metros in the future. Miami's future is in its core and its very close-in suburbs. Miami only having 36 square miles of land is actually a good thing because it has to grow more densely in order to increase its revenues through taxes. Miami may have only officially grown by about 36K in the previous decade but that represents 1000 additional residents per square mile in one decade alone. I am not sure any central city in America can claim that sort of metric. And, if one considers that the Census count happened primarily before most of the new towers were occupied, the real densification is probably significantly higher now. I'd look for another 1-2K in density in Miami by the next Census.
Regarding the moniker of "city of the future", keep in mind that Miami's growth is fueled by the emerging economies in South America. Brasil, in particular, is economically strong and Miami is the gateway for international business to the Americas. Added to this is the fact that Miami and its beaches are magnets globally.
My hope for the future of LA is very similar to yours. Actually both metros are pretty hemmed in now, there really isn't room to grow out in LA anymore. Both cities are just going to get more and more dense as time passes.
Asian markets help the growth of LA. For example mid-Wilshire wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for South Korea.
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.
