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.
And again. The HUGE flaw in that is you are cherry picking areas.
In that case, let’s chop off 1/3 of Charlotte and replace it with Huntersville, Cornelius, Matthews, Concord, etc.
Fuquay to Wake Forest is as far as Concord Mills to downtown Gastonia....
Cherry picking would be cutting out chunks of Charlotte's actual city land area to replace with it's metro towns. You could do the same land shaving with Raleigh too... But that's not the comparison. And it's not a perfect circle radius comparison obviously. Cities aren't built like that as your map examples show. But the stat is the stat. If you had pizza dough representing the land area and population of both examples, they would make similiar sized pizzas.
I think it goes back to the original issue in this thread. It would be nice to cut off the excess fat of what Charlotte annexed so it's large population doesn't have to be defended by the haters that will say "Charlotte is only big because its 300 miles blah blah." But that's kind of what we're trying to get people to understand for Wake counties defense. It's not only largely populated because of it's large land area.
Cherry picking would be cutting out chunks of Charlotte's actual city land area to replace with it's metro towns. You could do the same land shaving with Raleigh too... But that's not the comparison. And it's not a perfect circle radius comparison obviously. Cities aren't built like that as your map examples show. But the stat is the stat. If you had pizza dough representing the land area and population of both examples, they would make similiar sized pizzas.
I think it goes back to the original issue in this thread. It would be nice to cut off the excess fat of what Charlotte annexed so it's large population doesn't have to be defended by the haters that will say "Charlotte is only big because its 300 miles blah blah." But that's kind of what we're trying to get people to understand for Wake counties defense. It's not only largely populated because of it's large land area.
Cary isn’t a metro town?
Decisions aren’t made on what people think.
I get what y’all are trying to say but it does it doesn’t make sense.
A significantly smaller (significant for the size of areas we are talking about) between a combined Durham/Raleigh MSA vs. Charlotte MSA and all this talk of multi-nodal and Charlotte focuses too much on downtown yet somehow it’s one big misunderstanding that Wake is larger than Meck due to geography?
Uptown is much more populated than downtown even out to 1 mile from downtown. A 5 mile ring around both areas, CLT would be much more populated. Yet somehow, Wake is just a big ole misunderstanding.
It just doesn’t add up to me.
Combined MSA Triangle is closer in size to a combined Triad MSA than Charlotte MSA. That alone makes it hard, mathematically, for me to think that Wake is in reality the size of Meck and has nothing to do with having much larger borders. Ok....
And if you want to say “that’s my point” about Charlotte’s population vs. Raleigh, I refer you to compare downtown to uptown, compare 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 mile radius from each Charlotte and Raleigh and tell us how much larger Charlotte is.
If RDU MSA was 3-4M and not less than 2M like it is, then I could maybe reevaluate my thoughts on this issues
Cherry picking would be cutting out chunks of Charlotte's actual city land area to replace with it's metro towns. You could do the same land shaving with Raleigh too... But that's not the comparison. And it's not a perfect circle radius comparison obviously. Cities aren't built like that as your map examples show. But the stat is the stat. If you had pizza dough representing the land area and population of both examples, they would make similiar sized pizzas.
I think it goes back to the original issue in this thread. It would be nice to cut off the excess fat of what Charlotte annexed so it's large population doesn't have to be defended by the haters that will say "Charlotte is only big because its 300 miles blah blah." But that's kind of what we're trying to get people to understand for Wake counties defense. It's not only largely populated because of it's large land area.
Trent, take my word for it (as Charlotte485 has beautifully explained) you can't simply piece and puzzle together a bunch of far flung towns of Wake and say "See, Charlotte and Raleigh are the same size". The distance between Raleigh and Fuquay-Varina for example is like driving from Charlotte to Rock Hill.
Also, look at the density of Meck vs Charlotte. Meck (524 sq miles) is around 2,100 people per sq/mile. Charlotte (305 sq miles) is close to 2,900 people per sq mile. Notice how the density is going up as the land area gets smaller? At 145 sq miles (roughly the same land area as Raleigh) neighborhoods in Charlotte average around 4,200 people per sq mile. This is due to the fact that super dense areas (uptown, midtown, and south end exceeding 10,000 people per sq mile) and moderately dense areas (Wesley Heights, Dilworth, Elizabeth, Plaza Midwood, Noda around 5,000 people per sq mile) are averaged together with a ton of neighborhoods around 3,500 people per sq mile. At Raleigh's 145 sq miles, Charlotte would be a city of nearly 610,000 provided that Charlotte's boundary remained bottom heavy and light up top and out west. The remaining 160 sq miles of Charlotte is about 260,000 worth of low density low income "fat".
If you don't believe me, I challenge you to research some images of Kansas City and then compare KC's citywide density to that of Charlotte's and Raleigh's. On paper, Charlotte and Raleigh are more dense, but KC'S built environment tells a MUCH different story (and so does KC'S urbanized area). Take me up on that KC challenge then get back to me on what I posted above.
I get what y’all are trying to say but it does it doesn’t make sense.
A significantly smaller (significant for the size of areas we are talking about) between a combined Durham/Raleigh MSA vs. Charlotte MSA and all this talk of multi-nodal and Charlotte focuses too much on downtown yet somehow it’s one big misunderstanding that Wake is larger than Meck due to geography?
Uptown is much more populated than downtown even out to 1 mile from downtown. A 5 mile ring around both areas, CLT would be much more populated. Yet somehow, Wake is just a big ole misunderstanding.
It just doesn’t add up to me.
Combined MSA Triangle is closer in size to a combined Triad MSA than Charlotte MSA. That alone makes it hard, mathematically, for me to think that Wake is in reality the size of Meck and has nothing to do with having much larger borders. Ok....
And if you want to say “that’s my point” about Charlotte’s population vs. Raleigh, I refer you to compare downtown to uptown, compare 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 mile radius from each Charlotte and Raleigh and tell us how much larger Charlotte is.
Yes it is lol but I'm not taking a section of nothingness in Raleigh's 145sq miles and replacing it with Cary like you were implying Charlotte should be able to do with Huntersville. Im taking the land area of all those towns I mentioned, adding it up, and comparing it to 300 sqmiles of Charlotte. You can do the math yourself. I didn't even count Rolesville, Wendell, Angier, Morrisville, or Zebulon. Why are the populations so similiar? Well you basically explained it yourself. Starting at Uptown and moving out, there is a lot more population starting at Charlotte's core. But then you get into a lot of nothingness that is still counted as Charlotte. So what is the problem with that? It doesn't mean anything. It doesn't challenge Uptown lol. It doesn't make an argument for Raleigh being as large as Charlotte.
If hypothetically we could compare with two perfect circles of land, here's how I imagine it going. Uptown and the real core of Charlotte city would blow Raleigh away in population for a large radius. But then that gap slows and possibly evens or swings back to "Raleigh and friends" favor until the 300 sqmiles cuts off and it gets into even more of the metro where Charlotte continues to gap.
Another hypothetical. Someone from Raleigh had a job that requires them to work in Cary, Apex, Fuquay, Garner, Knightdale, and Wake Forest throughout the week. They would daily move throughout a chunk of land with roughly the same population as someone that had the same job but was asked to only work throughout the different sections of Charlotte. That's how much larger Charlotte is then Raleigh only. The core would be a lot more dense carrying that population versus the population being spread out more for Raleigh and company.
Trent, take my word for it (as Charlotte485 has beautifully explained) you can't simply piece and puzzle together a bunch of far flung towns of Wake and say "See, Charlotte and Raleigh are the same size". The distance between Raleigh and Fuquay-Varina for example is like driving from Charlotte to Rock Hill.
Also, look at the density of Meck vs Charlotte. Meck (524 sq miles) is around 2,100 people per sq/mile. Charlotte (305 sq miles) is close to 2,900 people per sq mile. Notice how the density is going up as the land area gets smaller? At 145 sq miles (roughly the same land area as Raleigh) neighborhoods in Charlotte average around 4,200 people per sq mile. This is due to the fact that super dense areas (uptown, midtown, and south end exceeding 10,000 people per sq mile) and moderately dense areas (Wesley Heights, Dilworth, Elizabeth, Plaza Midwood, Noda around 5,000 people per sq mile) are averaged together with a ton of neighborhoods around 3,500 people per sq mile. At Raleigh's 145 sq miles, Charlotte would be a city of nearly 610,000 provided that Charlotte's boundary remained bottom heavy and light up top and out west. The remaining 160 sq miles of Charlotte is about 260,000 worth of low density low income "fat".
If you don't believe me, I challenge you to research some images of Kansas City and then compare KC's citywide density to that of Charlotte's and Raleigh's. On paper, Charlotte and Raleigh are more dense, but KC'S built environment tells a MUCH different story (and so does KC'S urbanized area). Take me up on that KC challenge then get back to me on what I posted above.
The hilarious thing to me is that none of you seem to understand, this is exactly what I'm trying to say. I agree with pretty much everything you just said. Maybe it's my fault for not explaining it or my position clear enough. I, in no way, am trying to skew numbers to make Raleigh look as large as Charlotte. They're just not. Plain and simple. And I have no problem with that lol. Believe me.
But I will say, the downtown convention center in Raleigh is less then 4 miles to Garner. There's not a situation in Charlotte in which that is the case. Take a close look at Raleigh limits radius on Google maps. Not look at 540 and how that will be completed. Compare it to the 485 loop. That is basically what we are talking about. And that land area and the population within it will be approximately be the same as the city of Charlotte.
Winston Salem - Charlotte = 79 Miles
High Point - Charlotte =77 Miles
Winston Salem - Duham-80 Miles
High Point - Durham-68 Miles
These appear to be cities carefully chosen to disprove Raleigh?MiamiBeach guy's point about single metropolises sitting by themselves get to count a broader area for their MSA numbers, which I agree with and also tried to say in one of my posts.
Along those 79, 80 miles to each city is not the same, one has much more development & people than the other, one will include multiple MSAs while the other will feature one major one.
It's like Richmond, where it's population is usually counted using a big swath of central Virginia, whereas D.C. and Baltimore's numbers can't be calculated the same way.
In regards to this thread's discussion about population of the two leading NC metros, nobody cares about commuting patterns, highways, etc.
The goal is to arrive at a fair comparison....to drill down to the difference in population using equivalent parameters.
Charlotte is bigger than the Triangle by no more than 500,000 people.
It looks bigger from the air (the burbs also, not just downtown).
Charlotte pursuit to look like a big city will ultimately succeed, and it may outpace the Triangle in growth in the future. The "build it and they will come" mantra will triumph, as the people all over the world don't really remember cities without a big skyline.
My former Romanian boss in NYC (Trump as well) always think of Charlotte when North Carolina is mentioned which he pronounces "Sharl-ut, keeping the L in the first syllable.
They only remember the skyline.
But when comparing populations, let's use the same control set.
Trent, take my word for it (as Charlotte485 has beautifully explained) you can't simply piece and puzzle together a bunch of far flung towns of Wake and say "See, Charlotte and Raleigh are the same size". The distance between Raleigh and Fuquay-Varina for example is like driving from Charlotte to Rock Hill.
Also, look at the density of Meck vs Charlotte. Meck (524 sq miles) is around 2,100 people per sq/mile. Charlotte (305 sq miles) is close to 2,900 people per sq mile. Notice how the density is going up as the land area gets smaller? At 145 sq miles (roughly the same land area as Raleigh) neighborhoods in Charlotte average around 4,200 people per sq mile. This is due to the fact that super dense areas (uptown, midtown, and south end exceeding 10,000 people per sq mile) and moderately dense areas (Wesley Heights, Dilworth, Elizabeth, Plaza Midwood, Noda around 5,000 people per sq mile) are averaged together with a ton of neighborhoods around 3,500 people per sq mile. At Raleigh's 145 sq miles, Charlotte would be a city of nearly 610,000 provided that Charlotte's boundary remained bottom heavy and light up top and out west. The remaining 160 sq miles of Charlotte is about 260,000 worth of low density low income "fat".
If you don't believe me, I challenge you to research some images of Kansas City and then compare KC's citywide density to that of Charlotte's and Raleigh's. On paper, Charlotte and Raleigh are more dense, but KC'S built environment tells a MUCH different story (and so does KC'S urbanized area). Take me up on that KC challenge then get back to me on what I posted above.
Calling Fuquay "far-flung" is rich considering Charlotte loves to dive deep in SC to get its millions of people.
Why are the parameters always shifting to prove how much bigger Charlotte is? One minute it's the huge CSA compared to just Raleigh's portion of the Triangle...
Then the next minute it's the dense in-town neighborhoods that are counted...
Always favoring Charlotte to get the biggest appearance of Charlotte "twice the size" of Raleigh.
Never mentioned is if it's the city limits, which would be true and just like the San Antonio or San Diego's claims of being in the top 5 of the biggest cities...
By not clarifying the implication is twice as big of a metro, which is not true.
Notice the two core counties are never given any importance for comparing, nor is Cary ever added with Raleigh's city limits which are indistinguishable without a demarking sign....
And considering the Triangle as one metro, like it had always been throughout history until 10 years ago, is always regards as a favor or a stretch of the rules, never by default which is common sense.
All I have to say is, "It's like trying to be cool...The harder one tries, the less successful they are."
Charlotte needs to stop proving that it's a big city. Don't think the need for validation goes unnoticed by the entire country. It hurts the main cause of the attaining the respect that you seek.
TELEVSION MARKET RANKINGS seem to be the fairest because of the limit that the signal can reach.
The number of household included with the same number of people per house, seems like it can't be contested or Gerrymander-ed.
Calling Fuquay "far-flung" is rich considering Charlotte loves to dive deep in SC to get its millions of people.
Why are the parameters always shifting to prove how much bigger Charlotte is? One minute it's the huge CSA compared to just Raleigh's portion of the Triangle...
Then the next minute it's the dense in-town neighborhoods that are counted...
Always favoring Charlotte to get the biggest appearance of Charlotte "twice the size" of Raleigh.
Never mentioned is if it's the city limits, which would be true and just like the San Antonio or San Diego's claims of being in the top 5 of the biggest cities...
By not clarifying the implication is twice as big of a metro, which is not true.
Notice the counties are never given any importance, nor is Cary ever added with Raleigh's city limits....
And considering the Triangle as one metro, like it had always been throughout history until 10 years ago, is always regards as a favor or a stretch of the rules, never by default which is common sense.
All I have to say is, "It's like trying to be cool...The harder one tries, the less successful they are."
Charlotte needs to stop proving that it's a big city. Don't think the need for validation goes unnoticed by the entire country. It hurts the main cause of the attaining the respect that you seek.
TELEVSION MARKET RANKINGS seem to be the fairest because of the limit that the signal can reach.
The number of household included with the same number of people per house, seems like it can't be contested or Gerrymander-ed.
Charlotte is not a "big city", it's midsized. Charlotte is not "twice as large" as the Triangle (and neither is Denver). Metro Charlotte is however 620k more populated than metro Raleigh/Durham. Charlotte also added 44,000 people in one year (Raleigh/Durham added 36,000 in one year).
To be honest, you, Trent, and myself are usually in agreement with each other. It's the other guy (born in 1982 I suspect) that seems to think that Wake has "caught up" to Meck for the first time in history. If we take a look at the 210 year census history of these two counties, we can easily see that Wake and Meck have been growing together and switching positions for quite some time. Mecklenburg
These appear to be cities carefully chosen to disprove Raleigh?MiamiBeach guy's point about single metropolises sitting by themselves get to count a broader area for their MSA numbers, which I agree with and also tried to say in one of my posts.
Along those 79, 80 miles to each city is not the same, one has much more development & people than the other, one will include multiple MSAs while the other will feature one major one.
It's like Richmond, where it's population is usually counted using a big swath of central Virginia, whereas D.C. and Baltimore's numbers can't be calculated the same way.
In regards to this thread's discussion about population of the two leading NC metros, nobody cares about commuting patterns, highways, etc.
The goal is to arrive at a fair comparison....to drill down to the difference in population using equivalent parameters.
Charlotte is bigger than the Triangle by no more than 500,000 people.
It looks bigger from the air (the burbs also, not just downtown).
Charlotte pursuit to look like a big city will ultimately succeed, and it may outpace the Triangle in growth in the future. The "build it and they will come" mantra will triumph, as the people all over the world don't really remember cities without a big skyline.
My former Romanian boss in NYC (Trump as well) always think of Charlotte when North Carolina is mentioned which he pronounces "Sharl-ut, keeping the L in the first syllable.
They only remember the skyline.
But when comparing populations, let's use the same control set.
Im so confused why you are mentioning DC. Or really what your point is
Calling Fuquay "far-flung" is rich considering Charlotte loves to dive deep in SC to get its millions of people.
Why are the parameters always shifting to prove how much bigger Charlotte is? One minute it's the huge CSA compared to just Raleigh's portion of the Triangle...
Then the next minute it's the dense in-town neighborhoods that are counted...
Always favoring Charlotte to get the biggest appearance of Charlotte "twice the size" of Raleigh.
Never mentioned is if it's the city limits, which would be true and just like the San Antonio or San Diego's claims of being in the top 5 of the biggest cities...
By not clarifying the implication is twice as big of a metro, which is not true.
Notice the two core counties are never given any importance for comparing, nor is Cary ever added with Raleigh's city limits which are indistinguishable without a demarking sign....
And considering the Triangle as one metro, like it had always been throughout history until 10 years ago, is always regards as a favor or a stretch of the rules, never by default which is common sense.
All I have to say is, "It's like trying to be cool...The harder one tries, the less successful they are."
Charlotte needs to stop proving that it's a big city. Don't think the need for validation goes unnoticed by the entire country. It hurts the main cause of the attaining the respect that you seek.
TELEVSION MARKET RANKINGS seem to be the fairest because of the limit that the signal can reach.
The number of household included with the same number of people per house, seems like it can't be contested or Gerrymander-ed.
Atlanta is the poster child of that. I always feel bad how everyone rags on ATL for not being a real city. Luckily, you’re there to defend the constant barrage of posts like that.
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.
