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.
This is a "land game" guess only: Denver. If the other cities had the land area of Denver and the same densities that they have now, they'd all be over a million already.
I actually think Charlotte, NC, out of all cities in the US that are in this size range, is the most likely to break 1,000,000. It's growing at leaps and bounds, has land, and is not completely surrounded by suburbs. Austin is another likely candidate, but is already a little ahead of the cities in the poll.
Austin would be the real one to watch.
Charlotte - probably, though it would take the better part of 20 years. Probably because, Charlotte's in the same boat as Denver, though to not to the same extent: running out of land to annex. Charlotte's 'ultimate extent' (which has been precisely determined, through annexation agreements with the suburban towns surrounding it) would easily accomodate 1 million, not much more unless (a) already developed parts of the city were redeveloped in a more dense fashion, and (b) the undeveloped future annexation areas are likewise developed in higher densities.
Maybe Denver or Seattle could reach one million in the future but not anytime soon.
The cities to closely watch for the million mark are the fast-growing ones with large populations already, San Jose, Jacksonville, Austin, Indianapolis, Charlotte, and Las Vegas.
San Jose is already over one million. Jacksonville could make it.
I don't think Denver is likely to ever hit one million. Most of the current population increase is because of development around Stapleton and Lowry. Once those areas are fully developed, there wont be any more land to develop. That should stop Denver's population growth well below one million. And I don't see Denver's population density increasing that much.
I don't see how either of these cities will cross the 1million mark anytime soon, but I think Denver has the most potential to. More space to grow in city limits, unlike the other cities where everything is tightly packed.
Denver city limits also include that huge area around the airport, so if they build around there, that could increse density. Anyone saying Denver is suburban doesn't know what a suburb looks like though.
i really think dener is going to start declining soon because of the imminent water crisis in that region that will happen when AZ,CO,NV,UT,WY, and CA finally use all of the colorado rivers water. my guess would be seattle then DC because seattle has a larger land area and dc was almost at 1 million at one point which shows that they could get up that high again. boston can't because its already completely developed and baltimores still declining and is likely to become a satellite city of DC in the next 20-30 years.
Boston only has 48 sq mi of land area. The densest areas are on the north side of the city where an additional 48 sq mi consisting of neighboring very small geographical cities like Cambridge, Sommerville Brookline, Malden... for example would make a city well over a million now. The city of Boston itself will probably never make 1M people because it is so small geographically and existing residents in the lower population density areas don't want increased density in their neighborhoods.
Denver will see a HUGE growth from college students, but not in the downtown proper area, so none of these cities are on the rise really. But, with the economy , seattle has alot of jobs, and denver is affordable, so, those are definetely the two
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.