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.
We are talking strictly about big construction projects...in which case GR cannot compete with SLC, Richmond, and Louisville.
Population growth wise, there's not a heck of a lot difference between 4 and 6 %....I consider that within margin of error. Fact of the matter is, like a smaller version of Detroit, Louisville has massive black population that imply doesn't exist in very vanilla GR. You don't have to beat around the bush to realize any city with old industrial centers with large improverished African American communities don't look as good on paper when compared with their vanilla white peers.
You really need to do your research before making these statements. Louisville's massive African American population accounts for 22.9% of its population. "Very vanilla" Grand Rapids is 20.9%. Louisville has a Hispanic population that accounts for 4.5% of it's population. "Very Vanilla" Grand Rapids is 15.6% Hispanic. Louisville has a non-hispanic white population of 68.3%. "Very Vanilla" Grand Rapids is 59%. Again please stop making these hyperbole driven statements and do some research.
Grand Rapids like all cities that grew through in the industrial north has absolutely struggled with an impoverished AA community, and less than desirable neighborhoods. Downtown Grand Rapids was all but boarded up and abandoned during the 70s and 80s like every other Rust Belt city. Grand Rapids revitalization started in the 1980s when the 3 billionaire families that call it home started heavliy investing in it, to prevent it from having the same fate the other Michigan cities suffered. Perhaps that is why it is further along than some of it's peers.
Quote:
What you failed to point out is Kent County (GR) MI has almost three times the land area of Jefferson County KY yet it has 120,000 less people and not much over 1/3 the population density county wide. That's a massive difference you failed to point out.
I'm not sure how having a lower density because of a smaller population is an omitted detail in context of a larger and more dense Jefferson County only having 29 more building permits for the year.
Quote:
With regards to construction permits, GR has had arguably the best economy in the Midwest in the last decade, and along with Indy, its downtown was solid well before many others. My point is that Louisville has a handful of projects worth more than everything in a place like GR combined. If I am wrong, please post several 50-100+ million mega projects for Grand Rapids.
I don't know that I would agree with this. As someone who spends a lot time in Louisville I know it has momentum. I'd like to know how far back you'd have to chart developments and what would be included to see how it got to the $10 billion dollar figure. When i'm in Louisville the progress is remarkable, but it does not seem like the most construction or momentum by far.
Please respond with facts, and research the other cities on this list before making these claims instead of resorting to the typical hyperbole.
Ditto this! I've asked the same question and only received a quote of their mayor's in one of their local newspapers. Never anything documented. I frequently travel to the city on business and NKY, and while things seem to be improving there, it's not exactly what I would call booming.
Buffalo I think seems like the biggest city on this list mostly due to the Fort Erie area does contribute to Buffalo, often 15% of the Liscense plates are Ontario ones.
Buffalo definitely doesn't feel larger than Richmond, and probably some other cities in this thread as well. Buffalo actually feels quite small...
@btown, Buffalo definitely has the more urban built form overall by a considerable margin, and no one should oppose that. Yet the most urban areas of Richmond are almost unquestionably more urban than the most urban areas of Buffalo. Buffalo's downtown is a ghost town compared to Richmond's. Buffalo's most lively neighborhoods are only as lively as some of its Richmond counterparts, but definitely not more So. Have you even been to Richmond? Only someone who hasn't been to Richmond would consider Buffalo a larger city, as Richmond is factually larger in every metric besides the least important one (city limit)...
Richmond has a more interconnected core than Buffalo that is at minimum as structurally dense as Buffalo's, but more structurally dense in pockets, with a more vibrant street scene and pedestrian flow, and the sane number, if not more, amenities that matter to urbanites...
According to this link, Richmond's densest census tracts is over 22k/ppsm. Only New Orleans and Hartford I'm this thread have higher peak densities, so try again...
Also, you pulled 2010 population numbers. Richmond thru 2016 has grown by over 19,000 residents, with a city density over 3700/ppsm. The urban core of Richmond rivals any city in this thread and bests most others...
Now, a few of these cities have more widespread urban form than Rich, and others of these cities have dense suburbia in the city limits, which is why population density doesn't equal a full picture of urbanity. Over 40% of Richmond's land area is clearly suburban, with even rural strips on the furthest reaches. This isnt intelligible looking strictly at numbers, because the inner 60% of Richmond (roughly 37.5 mi2, or the exact same size of Rochester), has a density between 7-9k/ppsm with many areas above that. Hence, why I'd have no qualms saying inner city Richmond is a more urban city than Rochester...
Going by the same links I just posted, Chicago is more urban than Philadelphia by a wide margin--yet the general thought of most people familiar with both is slightly in the reverse in favor of Philly, or that both cities are virtually equal in urban scale. There is countless examples of cities that would appear more urban than another looking strictly at numbers...urbanity is deeper and more nuanced than just people per square mile...
Buffalo definitely doesn't feel larger than Richmond, and probably some other cities in this thread as well. Buffalo actually feels quite small...
@btown, Buffalo definitely has the more urban built form overall by a considerable margin, and no one should oppose that. Yet the most urban areas of Richmond are almost unquestionably more urban than the most urban areas of Buffalo. Buffalo's downtown is a ghost town compared to Richmond's. Buffalo's most lively neighborhoods are only as lively as some of its Richmond counterparts, but definitely not more So. Have you even been to Richmond? Only someone who hasn't been to Richmond would consider Buffalo a larger city, as Richmond is factually larger in every metric besides the least important one (city limit)...
Richmond has a more interconnected core than Buffalo that is at minimum as structurally dense as Buffalo's, but more structurally dense in pockets, with a more vibrant street scene and pedestrian flow, and the sane number, if not more, amenities that matter to urbanites...
I think the bigger issue is the only time I've been to Buffalo was for Sabres games which brings 20K Downtiwn so I don't know what a typical night in Buffalo actually is.
Richmond might be more Vibrant but Buffalo has the more urban and Dense core area.
According to this link, Richmond's densest census tracts is over 22k/ppsm. Only New Orleans and Hartford I'm this thread have higher peak densities, so try again...
Also, you pulled 2010 population numbers. Richmond thru 2016 has grown by over 19,000 residents, with a city density over 3700/ppsm. The urban core of Richmond rivals any city in this thread and bests most others...
Now, a few of these cities have more widespread urban form than Rich, and others of these cities have dense suburbia in the city limits, which is why population density doesn't equal a full picture of urbanity. Going by the same links I just posted, Chicago is more urban than Philadelphia by a wide margin--yet the general thought of most people familiar with both is slightly in the reverse in favor of Philly, or that both cities are virtually equal in urban scale. There is countless examples of cities that would appear more urban than another looking strictly at numbers...urbanity is deeper and more nuanced than just people per square mile...
Census Blocks are a couple of Blocks, Zip Codes can be a couple of square miles, that's the difference it's not wrong info it's different info.
Census Blocks are a couple of Blocks, Zip Codes can be a couple of square miles, that's the difference it's not wrong info it's different info.
Got it, got you on both counts. My only issue with that would be that all zip codes aren't created equal--meaning all zip codes aren't the same size, and RocketSci used "zip code" and "neighborhood" interchangeably. Richmond's densest neighborhoods are in the Top 3 of this list, literally the only city I'd think could best Rich here is New Orleans and Hartford. Again though, I'm talking neighborhood, a term he also used, not just zip code, with generally cover large swaths of multiple neighborhoods and cut many neighborhoods in two...
I've always thought Buffalo was more urban over a larger spread than Richmond (which is backed up factually), in many visits to Buff, but likewise, the most vibrant areas of Richmond have always appeared well more vibrant than the most vibrant areas of Buff. And the innermost inner city areas of Richmond have at the very least a comparable, equal appearance of urbanity to Buffalo...
Last edited by murksiderock; 07-08-2017 at 10:19 PM..
Very interesting, as many would probably think that New Orleans would have the most dense zip code, not Buffalo. I think people are underestimating Buffalo's density, as its Urban Area is only second to New Orleans in terms of density for the cities in this thread.
People may also be underestimating that Buffalo also scenes with some visible nightlife outside of Buffalo city limits in some of the smaller cities and villages in the area like Niagara Falls, Lockport, Hamburg, etc. This isn't even taking Niagara Falls or perhaps Fort Erie in Ontario into account in this regard or even in terms of Urban Area(would put it over 1 million in terms of the latter).
It is also the only metro in this thread with a municipality that has at or over 10,000 people per square mile(Kenmore).
So, when looking at this aspect in totally, Buffalo actually does pretty well in comparison.
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.
