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: Which CSA feels larger?
Chicagoland 136 81.44%
DC/Baltimore 24 14.37%
They feel equal 7 4.19%
Voters: 167. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-21-2015, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Katy,Texas
2,993 posts, read 1,409,138 times
Reputation: 1776

Advertisements

Yeah but that means a huge amount of people must be leaving Chicago for you guys to only gain 10,000. Why would so many people need to leave as to make your growth look so negligible. I mean no one really cares but if suburbis keeps growing but the population can't fill at the rate of new houses this might leave several of the new neighborhoods half finish and few parts of the city were people have fled fire prone. This could also be seen as a good way to make use of empty land in the city. Don't know Chicago that well but if a city stops growing that is a bad thing as it leads to future problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-21-2015, 11:02 PM
 
Location: where the good looking people are
3,438 posts, read 2,246,763 times
Reputation: 2805
Chicago is rustbelt. Done. DC Baltimore feels larger and more important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 06:07 AM
 
2,601 posts, read 3,900,176 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by WizardOfRadical View Post
Chicago is rustbelt. Done. DC Baltimore feels larger and more important.

For sure, and look at the numbers of the poll. Evidently, most don't agree with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Closer than you think!
2,103 posts, read 3,165,816 times
Reputation: 1529
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
For sure, and look at the numbers of the poll. Evidently, most don't agree with you.
Love it! LOL

DC/Baltimore doesn't feel bigger than Chicagoland at all...Not even close...Important? I guess that depends on how you look at...On one end you have the nation's capital and on the other end you have the third largest city in the country, which is a tier above DC and several tiers above Baltimore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
3,451 posts, read 3,162,130 times
Reputation: 2854
Baltimore feels way more "rust belt" than Chicago anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,479 posts, read 7,714,517 times
Reputation: 7295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
There are plenty of cities I'm not a huge fan of, but I certainly don't blame the people for living there. I wouldn't bash and spit disgust at their choices and their city or how fast it's growing, how big it is, how it ranks. Every city exists for a reason, and people love or hate those cities for their own reasons - but it's their reasons. Don't judge.
You're overreacting but whatever.

I actually love Chicago the actual city. I always have and I always will. I like most things about the city itself, save for the city politics, sports, and climate, and when you get rid of the Internet and actually experience a place in real life, there is no need for population statistics, economy statistics, or any statistics at all. I like that Chicago I see often from street level when I visit it and most certainly love the Chicago I lived in.

However with that being said that does not make up for the fact that Chicago is an albatross in population growth, economical growth, and competitiveness. Yes, I do find the city to be rather sad in those regards.

If you didn't tell me the name of the city and told me that a city grew by 88 people from July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 and its metropolitan statistical area and combined statistical area only grew 8,000 - 10,000 people in that same time frame, I would think you were talking about some Podunk, United States. That type of growth is literally the type of stuff we see from really small podunk towns, hell, some of those small towns with like half-a-million people are growing more numerically than Chicago both city, as well as MSA and CSA.

Actually, let me paint that picture for you (see below).

July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 City Population Growth:
- McKinney: 7,599
- Miramar: 4,303
- Clarksville: 4,033
- Midland: 3,910
- Pleasanton: 3,434
- Conroe: 3,280
- Fishers Town: 2,537
- Folsom: 2,244
- Brentwood: 1,959
- Palm Coast: 1,946
- Broomfield: 1,832
- Chicago: 88

American FactFinder - Results


July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 PCSA Population Growth:
- Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metro Area: 18,177
- North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metro Area: 16,049
- Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metro Area: 15,608
- Richmond, VA Metro Area: 13,162
- McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metro Area: 12,131
- Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metro Area: 12,057
- Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metro Area: 11,479
- Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metro Area: 11,463
- Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metro Area: 10,456
- Fresno, CA Metro Area: 9,872
- Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO: 9,278
- Provo-Orem, UT Metro Area: 9,207
- Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metro Area: 8,788
- Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL Metro Area: 8,671
- Colorado Springs, CO Metro Area: 8,197
- Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI Combined Statistical Area: 8,119
- Columbia, SC Metro Area: 8,073
- Fort Collins, CO Metro Area: 7,628
- Greeley, CO Metro Area: 7,110

Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas Totals: Vintage 2014 - U.S Census Bureau

^ I mean, dude, wtf? Even Fayetteville, Arkansas, a place a fraction of Chicagoland's size is growing more than Chicagoland annually. I actually had to stop putting in small towns because it was getting to be a bit too much. Its one thing to not expect Chicago to actually compete with its large city peers, everywhere has a slowdown period and that is understandable, and another thing entirely to see it lose out to literally small towns with a fraction of the population. Seriously. Chicago has over 9.9 million people and just over 8,000 is all it can do in a year? Seriously? Ugh, I guess it beats declining at least, not that stagnation is anything to actually be proud of or rejoice over. Not like things actually are getting better either, each year Chicago actually finds itself decelerating from the year prior. It is not even like Chicago is an aged place with low fertility that gets no immigrants and this is STILL happening to Chicago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Given the nature of the words used, "embarrassing", "horrendous", "pathetic" and "doesnt' deserve" obviously says a lot more about the person writing the paragraph than it does about the city in question.
No, these would be accurate terms of describe Chicago's population growth and economic growth. As I mentioned in my prior post before editing it out (because it was admittedly too harsh), in these regards both the Washington DC-Baltimore and San Francisco Bay Area regions are better places than Chicago frankly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 02:35 PM
 
2,601 posts, read 3,900,176 times
Reputation: 2275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John View Post
You're overreacting but whatever.

I actually love Chicago the actual city. I always have and I always will. I like most things about the city itself, save for the city politics, sports, and climate, and when you get rid of the Internet and actually experience a place in real life, there is no need for population statistics, economy statistics, or any statistics at all. I like that Chicago I see often from street level when I visit it and most certainly love the Chicago I lived in.

However with that being said that does not make up for the fact that Chicago is an albatross in population growth, economical growth, and competitiveness. Yes, I do find the city to be rather sad in those regards.

If you didn't tell me the name of the city and told me that a city grew by 88 people from July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 and its metropolitan statistical area and combined statistical area only grew 8,000 - 10,000 people in that same time frame, I would think you were talking about some Podunk, United States. That type of growth is literally the type of stuff we see from really small podunk towns, hell, some of those small towns with like half-a-million people are growing more numerically than Chicago both city, as well as MSA and CSA.

Actually, let me paint that picture for you (see below).

July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 City Population Growth:
- McKinney: 7,599
- Miramar: 4,303
- Clarksville: 4,033
- Midland: 3,910
- Pleasanton: 3,434
- Conroe: 3,280
- Fishers Town: 2,537
- Folsom: 2,244
- Brentwood: 1,959
- Palm Coast: 1,946
- Broomfield: 1,832
- Chicago: 88

American FactFinder - Results


July 1, 2013 - July 1, 2014 PCSA Population Growth:
- Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metro Area: 18,177
- North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metro Area: 16,049
- Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metro Area: 15,608
- Richmond, VA Metro Area: 13,162
- McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metro Area: 12,131
- Greenville-Anderson-Mauldin, SC Metro Area: 12,057
- Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metro Area: 11,479
- Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metro Area: 11,463
- Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Metro Area: 10,456
- Fresno, CA Metro Area: 9,872
- Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO: 9,278
- Provo-Orem, UT Metro Area: 9,207
- Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metro Area: 8,788
- Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL Metro Area: 8,671
- Colorado Springs, CO Metro Area: 8,197
- Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI Combined Statistical Area: 8,119
- Columbia, SC Metro Area: 8,073
- Fort Collins, CO Metro Area: 7,628
- Greeley, CO Metro Area: 7,110

Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas Totals: Vintage 2014 - U.S Census Bureau

^ I mean, dude, wtf? Even Fayetteville, Arkansas, a place a fraction of Chicagoland's size is growing more than Chicagoland annually. I actually had to stop putting in small towns because it was getting to be a bit too much. Its one thing to not expect Chicago to actually compete with its large city peers, everywhere has a slowdown period and that is understandable, and another thing entirely to see it lose out to literally small towns with a fraction of the population. Seriously. Chicago has over 9.9 million people and just over 8,000 is all it can do in a year? Seriously? Ugh, I guess it beats declining at least, not that stagnation is anything to actually be proud of or rejoice over. Not like things actually are getting better either, each year Chicago actually finds itself decelerating from the year prior. It is not even like Chicago is an aged place with low fertility that gets no immigrants and this is STILL happening to Chicago.

No, these would be accurate terms of describe Chicago's population growth and economic growth. As I mentioned in my prior post before editing it out (because it was admittedly too harsh), in these regards both the Washington DC-Baltimore and San Francisco Bay Area regions are better places than Chicago frankly.
So, are you saying that DC/Bmore feels larger? Can't tell from all this information that isn't relevant to the thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Tokyo, Japan
6,479 posts, read 7,714,517 times
Reputation: 7295
Quote:
Originally Posted by NowInWI View Post
So, are you saying that DC/Bmore feels larger? Can't tell from all this information that isn't relevant to the thread.
I already said in my first post in this thread a few days back that Chicagoland feels much larger, for now, at least. Population growth is correlated with the feel of an area, as it will impact and change perception over time, not overnight. Since the last census (5 years ago), the Washington DC-Baltimore CSA region probably feels larger than it did just 5 years ago, off real human growth too. This will translate one day, maybe in the near term, or maybe in the long term, lots of things being constructed in the area, not just in the city cores either but all around.

All of this is relevant, you see, while Chicagoland's population goes no where the same cannot be said of Washington DC-Baltimore. More infill, more development, more cohesion (possibly) should do the trick and then I could see it feel larger than Chicagoland CSA as a region, as a place, as an entity one day in the (somewhat distant) future.

That day is not today though.

Last edited by Facts Kill Rhetoric; 07-22-2015 at 03:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 03:07 PM
 
Location: Washington State desert
4,688 posts, read 2,926,062 times
Reputation: 3257
Having lived in the Chicago area, and visited DC and Baltimore, Chicago definitely feels bigger. From the airport, to the suburbs, to the downtown skyline, it feels much larger.

Someone mentioned how different Washington and Baltimore are. This is very true. They look and feel very different though they are only 37 miles apart. DC purposely does not have a skyline except for the monuments, and Baltimore's skyline is less than impressive, IMO. Also good point of DC and Baltimore being different media markets. I don't know if this still exists today, but I remember in the 80's you could watch the network stations from each market on cable if you lived in between.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2015, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
2,380 posts, read 1,217,986 times
Reputation: 2512
As someone originally from the Baltimore/DC area who now lives in Chicago, Chicago "feels" larger in every possible way. Not only are the size and feel of the skyscrapers in downtown Chicago larger than Baltimore and DC's put together, but the fact that "Chicagoland" is a connected stretch makes the area a more continuous, large area.

People from Baltimore/DC region know that DC and Baltimore are 2 distinct regions. I-95 or the B-W parkway serve as a connector between the 2 separate regions, but there is no real "fill-in" between the regions.

As far as the difference in population growth between the regions, the numbers don't lie and the growth rate has been much higher for the Baltimore/DC region compared to Chicago. That still doesn't change the fact that Chicago "feels" larger even considering that Baltimore and DC are combining 2 distinct cities to make the comparison.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top