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: Sterile Cities
Charlotte 24 24.74%
Tampa-St.Petesburgh 14 14.43%
Las Vegas 10 10.31%
San Diego 8 8.25%
Houston 13 13.40%
Atlanta 8 8.25%
Portland, Oregon 3 3.09%
Seattle-Tacoma 1 1.03%
Minneapolis-St.Paul 1 1.03%
other 15 15.46%
Voters: 97. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Crown Town
2,742 posts, read 6,717,834 times
Reputation: 1680

Advertisements

Wow. A thread comparing Charlotte to places two, three and even four times its size. We've truly arrived. I love it!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,711,473 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
Atlanta metro NEEDED to densify - no surprise there.




Listen. I love big cities. Not every city can be the most successful in its region or country. Most in this situation usually means one. Just because a city doesn't have density levels like NYC, San Francisco, or LA (yes LA is dense), doesn't mean these places do not have any influence. There have been cities that have gone through good influence as well as bad and reinvented themselves again - look at NYC and Atlanta for example. In addition, what is wrong with cities that are MAKING history? I always felt there was something exciting about being a part of a city as it goes through growing pains and creates its own history. Isn't that what Atlanta is doing (along with many other older and newer Sunbelt cities)? Atlanta certainly isn't spewing out a ton of history, but it has created its own type of history in the past 20 years that has had just as much of an influence on the city as other time periods and there's always tomorrow (for any city).

Thanks
Actually other than New Orleans,Most Southern MAJOR Cities are not "new".Some have more lengthier histories than others.Atlanta does not market its history,but its history is very pivotal in its region and the country.Atlanta history :

Quote:
During the American Civil War, Atlanta served as an important railroad and military supply hub... the city became the target of a major Union invasion (the subject of the 1939 film Gone with the Wind)....
Sherman's March to the Sea. The fall of Atlanta was a critical point in the Civil War..... the fall of Atlanta led to the re-election of Abraham Lincoln and the eventual surrender of the Confederacy.


On December 15, 1939 Atlanta hosted the premiere of Gone With the Wind, the movie based on Atlanta resident Margaret Mitchell's best-selling novel. Stars Clark Gable, Vivien Leigh, and Olivia de Haviland were in attendance. Time magazine included the novel in its TIME 100 Best English-language Novels from 1923 to 2005.

In the 1960s, Atlanta was a major organizing center of the US Civil Rights Movement, with Dr. Martin Luther King and students from Atlanta's historically black colleges and universities playing major roles in the movement's leadership. On October 19, 1960, a sit-in at the lunch counters of several Atlanta department stores led to the arrest of Dr. King and several students. This drew attention from the national media and from presidential candidate John F. Kennedy.


It is WAY more than 20 YEARS.So yes Atlanta is "spewing" with History and influence.At the regional and national level.The only difference today is that the economic powers have surpassed its history.Now it's influence in the entire region and some level on the national scene too,is greater than it's size would ordinarily suggest.I do agree that there is always tomorrow.Thanks "ANNIE".LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Atlanta ,GA
9,067 posts, read 15,711,473 times
Reputation: 2980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue View Post
Wow. A thread comparing Charlotte to places two, three and even four times its size. We've truly arrived. I love it!!
Well it has nothing to do with size so much.Like I said before,a lot has to do with history and culture.Many people find it lacking in Charlotte.Does not make it a bad place,just something different or unique. Richmond is smaller than Charlotte but has more of all what was mentioned.Savannah is another one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:48 PM
 
Location: Surprise, AZ
8,513 posts, read 10,029,424 times
Reputation: 7839
Quote:
Originally Posted by afonega1 View Post
Actually other than New Orleans,Most Southern MAJOR Cities are not "new".Some have more lengthier histories than others.Atlanta does not market its history,but its history is very pivotal in its region and the country.Atlanta history :



It is WAY more than 20 YEARS.So yes Atlanta is "spewing" with History and influence.At the regional and national level.The only difference today is that the economic powers have surpassed its history.Now it's influence in the entire region and some level on the national scene too,is greater than it's size would ordinarily suggest.I do agree that there is always tomorrow.Thanks "ANNIE".LOL
Umm, did you even read the post I made? I said Atlanta isn't spewing out a ton of history. Atlanta has more influence now in the world than it did then. Much of that has happened over the last 20 years, so it can be perceived as not only old but new and sterile as well. Get it?? Yet it still is not as influential as LA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,365 posts, read 2,819,160 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by afonega1 View Post
I concur.However Atlanta has changed the most drastically out of them all.Atlanta density is growing everyday,more so than any major city in the U.S.
Atlanta Metro News | ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/services/content/opinion/stories/2008/11/05/leinbergered.html - broken link)
Anyone who has been to Atlanta over a period from even just year to year can see the changes clearly.
Don't quote me on this, but I've actually heard from several posters around these forums that Houston is actually denser than Atlanta. "Inner Loop" Houston is what you'll mostly here references to. It's about 96 sq miles with a pop. of about 600,000. West U Place was named one of the best urban enclave neighborhoods by Forbes, I believe. There are also multiple other walkable neighborhoods within the loop.

Atlanta may in fact have more urban developments, but Houston, and even Dallas with Victory Park and other projects are bound to catch up in the near future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 10:01 PM
 
Location: Hernando County, FL
8,488 posts, read 20,538,220 times
Reputation: 5397
I just checked out who voted for Tampa and wasn't surprised to find 2 of the 3 are declared Florida haters who I am sure only voted for it because it is in Florida.

That is one reason I don't give these polls much value.

I voted other since of the 5 on the list I have been to (actually 7 but didn't spend enough time in 2 to form an opinion) none seemed sterile at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 10:03 PM
 
229 posts, read 518,135 times
Reputation: 179
Charlotte is "winning" in this poll. But, can a city be "sterile" and vibrant at the same time? Charlotte's core is seemed pretty vibrant to me after a recent visit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,365 posts, read 2,819,160 times
Reputation: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt345 View Post
Because Los Angeles isn't really one city, it's many smaller cities put together. That's what I was trying to say.
Well so is Atlanta. You have Decatur, College Park, Sandy Springs, Riverdale, and countless other cities and unincorporated areas that are commonly referred to as "Atlanta". How else would you explain a town of about 500,000 people with a metro pop. of about 5.4 million?

Houston would be the same way if it hadn't annexed.



Quote:
Los Angeles invented the suburban city? Last time I checked, Levittown was in Long Island and the Los Angeles freeway system was actually influenced by the New York parkway system. Besides, the term poster child refers to something that is, "the perfect representative of, a cause, a movement, or an idea."
Poster child - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Los Angeles is by no means the perfect example of suburban sprawl. Visit LA and then visit Phoenix and then tell me which of the two cities better epitomizes suburban sprawl.
I get what you're saying, but you're missing my point. I never said that Los Angeles was one of the sprawliest cities because it's actually way more dense than the average Sunbelt city. But of all the major American metropolises, LA popularized suburban sprawl. That's probably what the other poster meant by calling it the poster child.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 10:20 PM
 
13,336 posts, read 39,695,150 times
Reputation: 10760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingsley View Post
Charlotte is "winning" in this poll. But, can a city be "sterile" and vibrant at the same time? Charlotte's core is seemed pretty vibrant to me after a recent visit.
Absolutely a city can be vibrant and sterile. A suburban shopping mall can be vibrant and sterile, too. And when I think of Charlotte, the images of sterile shopping malls and nondescript high-rises come to mind.

Of the cities in this list, Charlotte to me seems to be the most sterile city. Sure it's growing fast, but it's like the city sold its soul a long time ago to grow at any cost, to be "the next Atlanta" even if it meant destroying its own identity in the process.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 10:34 PM
 
229 posts, read 518,135 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT View Post
Absolutely a city can be vibrant and sterile. A suburban shopping mall can be vibrant and sterile, too. And when I think of Charlotte, the images of sterile shopping malls and nondescript high-rises come to mind.

Of the cities in this list, Charlotte to me seems to be the most sterile city. Sure it's growing fast, but it's like the city sold its soul a long time ago to grow at any cost, to be "the next Atlanta" even if it meant destroying its own identity in the process.
I get that same impression from just 99% of American cities outside of their downtowns (including Knoxville. Very much so Knoxville, outside of downtown). I did not at all find their skyscrapers to nondescript but rather impressive. Btw, I was speaking in terms of the downtown area. Not the overall city.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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