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.
It's difficult to compare different cities or even county density or population numbers due to their boundaries.
In addition to this, many folks ignore the fact that density goes up as city boundaries go down. This is why extremely small Union City, NJ is more dense than NYC. People also ignore visitors and commuters. Manhattan for example (if it were its own city) would be one of the densest cities on Earth at nearly 67,000 ppl/sq mile. When daily visitors and commuters are added to its residential population, people density is well above 100,000 ppl/sq mile.
This same logic can be applied to smaller cities/downtowns too. Uptown Charlotte's residential density is around 8,000 ppl/sq mile. However, uptown's average M-F population during business hours is around 150,000 (residents, commuters, and visitors combined). That's a people density of 75,000 ppl/sq mile.
It's been said numerous times that Charlotte's downtown area is the #1 reason why this city can support mass transit, and I agree. It takes serious people density to make transit work. What is often not mentioned is the fact that concentrated business districts are a major part of the density formula. Residential density alone is not enough. This is why Atlanta and Raleigh (two cities with similar city populations and densities) look and function very differently. Atlanta is built to handle far more visitors and commuters, which makes the city population/density argument almost pointless.
In central Charlotte, apartments, offices, and hotels are going up like crazy. These things contribute to increasing people density in the city's urban core. Think about it. How can a visitor experience "living" in your city's downtown if they can't find a hotel room? How can they enjoy life downtown if they can't walk to a concert, a sporting event, or a simple downtown grocery store?
In my opinion, higher density in NC will not come in the form of 10,000 ppl/sq mi residential density like many cities around the globe. People in the south simply do not wish to live THAT close to their neighbors. This little thing called "quality of life" (which is a bragging point in this state) will stand in the way of density and urbanization efforts in NC everytime.
On the other hand, I can see NC adding density like Atlanta has done. Live/work/play districts scattered around town with an element of walkabilty seems to be the easier sell in NC. People absolutely love the North Hills and Cameron Village areas of Raleigh. Areas of Charlotte such as Metropolitan/Midtown and South Park are popular as well.
In addition to this, many folks ignore the fact that density goes up as city boundaries go down. This is why extremely small Union City, NJ is more dense than NYC. People also ignore visitors and commuters. Manhattan for example (if it were its own city) would be one of the densest cities on Earth at nearly 67,000 ppl/sq mile. When daily visitors and commuters are added to its residential population, people density is well above 100,000 ppl/sq mile.
This same logic can be applied to smaller cities/downtowns too. Uptown Charlotte's residential density is around 8,000 ppl/sq mile. However, uptown's average M-F population during business hours is around 150,000 (residents, commuters, and visitors combined). That's a people density of 75,000 ppl/sq mile.
It's been said numerous times that Charlotte's downtown area is the #1 reason why this city can support mass transit, and I agree. It takes serious people density to make transit work. What is often not mentioned is the fact that concentrated business districts are a major part of the density formula. Residential density alone is not enough. This is why Atlanta and Raleigh (two cities with similar city populations and densities) look and function very differently. Atlanta is built to handle far more visitors and commuters, which makes the city population/density argument almost pointless.
In central Charlotte, apartments, offices, and hotels are going up like crazy. These things contribute to increasing people density in the city's urban core. Think about it. How can a visitor experience "living" in your city's downtown if they can't find a hotel room? How can they enjoy life downtown if they can't walk to a concert, a sporting event, or a simple downtown grocery store?
In my opinion, higher density in NC will not come in the form of 10,000 ppl/sq mi residential density like many cities around the globe. People in the south simply do not wish to live THAT close to their neighbors. This little thing called "quality of life" (which is a bragging point in this state) will stand in the way of density and urbanization efforts in NC everytime.
On the other hand, I can see NC adding density like Atlanta has done. Live/work/play districts scattered around town with an element of walkabilty seems to be the easier sell in NC. People absolutely love the North Hills and Cameron Village areas of Raleigh. Areas of Charlotte such as Metropolitan/Midtown and South Park are popular as well.
Agreed. NC cities will never significantly climb up the density ladder nationally. They simply have too much built up area in a low density suburban model. If I had the time, it would be interesting to graph the density metric over time for each of the top 10 cities as they grew both their populations and land areas. We'd probably see a downward density trend for each starting around 1960 and continuing through 2000 with a generally slow upward trend especially since the new anti-annexation law went in effect. I'd suspect that the faster growing of the state's cities to encourage opportunities to increase their densities and get their share of the rapidly growing metros' new population: Charlotte, Raleigh and Durham in particular.
Expect to see more dense nodes in the faster growing cities as each looks for revenue streams to support their aging suburban infrastructure. As mentioned, some of these areas have already been established and will continue to grow more dense as yet others are established. In Raleigh, I can see the Crabtree Valley area going through its own metamorphosis like North Hills did. In fact, just before the big recession, Crabtree was about to embark on an area transformation on a massive scale. Alas, it didn't happen but there is rekindling of effort recently on a less grand scale. While Cameron Village will become more and more associated with DT Raleigh over time (its closest edge is really only a few blocks from downtown's NW corner), I can imagine a few other satellite urban clusters emerging both north of DT up Capital Blvd and to the south of DT between it and Garner. There's actually quite a bit of opportunity in both areas. I'm sure that Charlotte has a similar story and opportunity and I know that Durham does as well.
What will be interesting to watch are each city's census tracts. Some of those will undoubtedly zoom up in density as other tracts ebb and flow with births and deaths in the already established suburban parts of the cities. Charlotte probably saw huge growth in some of these tracts between 2000-2010 in/near uptown and Raleigh will see some huge increases in particular tracts downtown when the next Census is conducted.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,684,299 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl
Agreed. NC cities will never significantly climb up the density ladder nationally. They simply have too much built up area in a low density suburban model. If I had the time, it would be interesting to graph the density metric over time for each of the top 10 cities as they grew both their populations and land areas. We'd probably see a downward density trend for each starting around 1960 and continuing through 2000 with a generally slow upward trend especially since the new anti-annexation law went in effect. I'd suspect that the faster growing of the state's cities to encourage opportunities to increase their densities and get their share of the rapidly growing metros' new population: Charlotte, Raleigh and Durham in particular.
Expect to see more dense nodes in the faster growing cities as each looks for revenue streams to support their aging suburban infrastructure. As mentioned, some of these areas have already been established and will continue to grow more dense as yet others are established. In Raleigh, I can see the Crabtree Valley area going through its own metamorphosis like North Hills did. In fact, just before the big recession, Crabtree was about to embark on an area transformation on a massive scale. Alas, it didn't happen but there is rekindling of effort recently on a less grand scale. While Cameron Village will become more and more associated with DT Raleigh over time (its closest edge is really only a few blocks from downtown's NW corner), I can imagine a few other satellite urban clusters emerging both north of DT up Capital Blvd and to the south of DT between it and Garner. There's actually quite a bit of opportunity in both areas. I'm sure that Charlotte has a similar story and opportunity and I know that Durham does as well.
What will be interesting to watch are each city's census tracts. Some of those will undoubtedly zoom up in density as other tracts ebb and flow with births and deaths in the already established suburban parts of the cities. Charlotte probably saw huge growth in some of these tracts between 2000-2010 in/near uptown and Raleigh will see some huge increases in particular tracts downtown when the next Census is conducted.
Density will increase in the cities over time. As some areas gentrify, more apartments will be interspersed. Some of the cheaper suburban construction will decline & be replaced by more urbanized construction. That's a given because of increases in land values.
In Raleigh, I can see the Crabtree Valley area going through its own metamorphosis like North Hills did. In fact, just before the big recession, Crabtree was about to embark on an area transformation on a massive scale. Alas, it didn't happen but there is rekindling of effort recently on a less grand scale.
The Soleil Center was way too much for the surrounding real estate. That project would have prematurely jacked up land values to the point that smaller projects would've been less cost effective. The Crabtree area is better off (for now) without that tower.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnc2mbfl
What will be interesting to watch are each city's census tracts. Some of those will undoubtedly zoom up in density as other tracts ebb and flow with births and deaths in the already established suburban parts of the cities. Charlotte probably saw huge growth in some of these tracts between 2000-2010 in/near uptown and Raleigh will see some huge increases in particular tracts downtown when the next Census is conducted.
Believe it or not, Uptown/South End was the Nation's fastest growing apartment submarket last year.
Big cities in NC are looking for ways to bring business to their city.
I just flew in from Denver Co. today. You should have heard the conversation about the plane taxing across railroad tracks and trains going to the terminal.
Charlotte Regional Intermodal Facility at CLT is a way Charlotte is trying to bring business to the city.
Map to show NC absolute population growth by county from 2010 to 2015.
Proves what we already knew. Charlotte and the Triangle metros driving most of the growth, moderate growth in the Triad and lots of decline in rural NC. Interesting that Gaston County seems to grow a lot slower than the rest of the Charlotte area.
Map to show NC absolute population growth by county from 2010 to 2015.
Pay attention to the Coastal counties...there are 7 of them with growth...and in reality Hyde shows growth on Ocracoke, but its offset by Mainland decline. Road infrastructure is VERY inadequate in these 7 coastal counties to handle their growth.
This graph is actual numbers, so not percentage of growth...and obviously the numbers are going to be higher in the two main urban areas.
As well THIS MAP is the divide in NC right now...that is a ton of counties with population loss and the State has been very ineffective in curbing that loss. Vacancy rates are rising quickly in these counties (which corresponds to loss of property values) and virtually no money has been set aside to help them downsize and keep their values up.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,684,299 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeusAV
Proves what we already knew. Charlotte and the Triangle metros driving most of the growth, moderate growth in the Triad and lots of decline in rural NC. Interesting that Gaston County seems to grow a lot slower than the rest of the Charlotte area.
This is showing county-wide statistics. Certain areas of Gaston are losing population. while eastern & southwestern Cleveland have slow growth. The areas with losses drag down the growth in Gaston, While losses in the hinterlands of Cleveland outpace the growth in Kings Mountain & Boiling Springs.
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.
