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.
2015 CSA Population Counts with growth percentage since 2010
1. New York-Newark NY-NJ-CT-PA: 23,723,626 (2.80%)
2. Los Angeles-Long Beach: 18,679,763 (4.49%)
3. Chicago-Naperville: 9,923,358 (0.84%)
4. Washington DC-Baltimore-Arlington DC-ML-VA-WV: 9,625,360 (6.33%)
5. San Francisco Bay Area: 8,713,914 (6.87%)
Will the DC-Balimore metro overtake Chicagos to become the 3rd biggest?
Which One Is the better CSA in your opinion?
Why is Chicago growing so slowly?
Side Question: Will the Washington DC and Baltimore ever become twin cities such as Dallas-Ft.Worth and Minneapolis-St.Paul?
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,130 posts, read 7,581,348 times
Reputation: 5796
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaBigHomieGucci
2015 CSA Population Counts with growth percentage since 2010
1. New York-Newark NY-NJ-CT-PA: 23,723,626 (2.80%)
2. Los Angeles-Long Beach: 18,679,763 (4.49%)
3. Chicago-Naperville: 9,923,358 (0.84%)
4. Washington DC-Baltimore-Arlington DC-ML-VA-WV: 9,625,360 (6.33%)
5. San Francisco Bay Area: 8,713,914 (6.87%)
Will the DC-Balimore metro overtake Chicagos to become the 3rd biggest?
Which One Is the better CSA in your opinion?
Why is Chicago growing so slowly?
Side Question: Will the Washington DC and Baltimore ever become twin cities such as Dallas-Ft.Worth and Minneapolis-St.Paul?
This has been overly discussed already before but, yes the DC-Balt CSA will pass Chicago in a few years.
No it will not feel larger or more connected as one city than Chicago we all know that.
Both CSA's pack a strong punch with Chicago probably slightly ahead currently, but DC/Balt will be on the same level very soon.
Chicago's growth slowed because the city has probably hit its highest peak in terms of American importance/dominance. It will always be important to the US, but the country has changed drastically since Chicago was King or maybe Prince to NYC. DC's potential has very few limits.
To answer the side question, I'd say though that unlike MSP or DFW, Baltimore/DC are more fraternal twins based on cultural/structural differences. However, Columbia, MD is a lot like Arlington, TX in terms of being an important suburb between the two. Of course, DC/Balt has the advantage of being right down the road from Philly/NYC and closer to the sunbelt. Sure, Chicago has two good airports, but the hassle factor is higher compared to driving, taking a bus, or taking Amtrak up to the NE cities.
Chicago's slow growth is due to an increase in crime, weather, and a regionally weaker economy (Detroit, believe it or not, is actually seeming to do better the past few years or so).
I think that as the suburbs of DC keep expanding (The suburbs of Baltimore are not growing at nearly the same rate) the border between the DMV and Greater Baltimore will be increasingly more blurred and eventually DCs suburbs will be right against and connected to Baltimore's
Wether or not DC/Bmore will overtake Chicagoland is largely dependent on the continued expansion of the federal government, which is due for a major contraction. It may overtake chicagoland temporarily, but in the long run chicago will continue to be a larger more dominant csa.
Which one is better? It's entirely subjective. Chicago is a classic american city in every respect. I'd imagine it's still arguably the best city for blue collar types. DC is bureaucracy central, and is well suited for college educated people. The DMV has more varied urban environments, and far more historical gems. If I had to choose one I'd pick chicago, because its economy is less vulnerable.
Chicago appears to be growing slowly because of how it is structured. A massive an continuously growing urban core surrounded by old shrinking neighborhoods and suburbs. The latter brings the numbers down substantially. It has to do with age of developement. While dc is technically the older city, much of its growth is new, while chicago is structurally the older city, and thus must deal with aging infrastructure and housing stock.
Many people already regard dc/bmore as twin cities. The most comparable dynamic imo, would be sf/oakland.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,130 posts, read 7,581,348 times
Reputation: 5796
Quote:
Originally Posted by killakoolaide
Wether or not DC/Bmore will overtake Chicagoland is largely dependent on the continued expansion of the federal government, which is due for a major contraction. It may overtake chicagoland temporarily, but in the long run chicago will continue to be a larger more dominant csa.
Which one is better? It's entirely subjective. Chicago is a classic american city in every respect. I'd imagine it's still arguably the best city for blue collar types. DC is bureaucracy central, and is well suited for college educated people. The DMV has more varied urban environments, and far more historical gems. If I had to choose one I'd pick chicago, because its economy is less vulnerable.
Chicago appears to be growing slowly because of how it is structured. A massive an continuously growing urban core surrounded by old shrinking neighborhoods and suburbs. The latter brings the numbers down substantially. It has to do with age of developement. While dc is technically the older city, much of its growth is new, while chicago is structurally the older city, and thus must deal with aging infrastructure and housing stock.
Many people already regard dc/bmore as twin cities. The most comparable dynamic imo, would be sf/oakland.
Well besides the fact that DC's entire economy is NOT entirely reliant on gov't spending, even more importantly Baltimore's economy is even less reliant upon it. So as a combined CSA I would say this is an advantage DC-Baltimore has over Chicago in the long term. Baltimore has the freedom to do whatever it likes and grow without waiting on the Beltway to help.
On DC economy by itself, there is little "vulnerablity" in its economy as it's basically recession proof. Will it boom forever no, but the local economy would be vulnerable only if the US economy as a whole is vulnerable. Chicago has a strong economy overall and diverse, but many cities in the past few decades have matched or surpassed its economy including DC.
Ok, so Baltimore is about to be a larger metro than Chicago, correct? Only NYC and LA will be larger than Baltimore.... Let's let that breathe for a minute.
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.
