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 funny though because while the metro area 100 miles west is counted, North Salt Lake which is less than 6 miles from downtown SLC is counted as a different metro.
I think that that there's a fundamental flaw in the premise that these are somewhat similar sized cities. It might certainly be true if one only looks at one piece of data in a vacuum, but that's ignoring context. Clearly there seems to be a presumption among many that Nashville is on a different level than the other two cities, but let's look at the context of these 3 places before agreeing to that premise.
From the OP's assertion that these 3 cities are similar sized cities, I can only presume that it's based on urbanized area, because it's the only data point that puts them in a similar category. However, the context of those 3 urbanized areas is very different from each other. Let's look at them one by one. First let's consider that we are using this link for the data and start with Richmond and scroll from city to city: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/...rbanized-area/
Richmond: Richmond is the "cleanest" case for urbanized area because it exists as a singular entity from a context perspective. It doesn't abut other urbanized areas, and it's significantly removed from the next closest one. Its 1.024M population has the least amount of nuance.
Nashville: Nashville's urbanized area is slightly larger than Richmond's at 1.083M, but its context isn't isolated from other urbanized areas. It all but abuts Murfreesboro's UA and its 164K additional people. There's also a smattering of small urban clusters around Nashville that add another 150K or so, depending on where you stop counting them. It's by far the most spread out in terms of its "total" population.
Salt Lake City: Salt Lake City's core urbanized area is 1.129M people, but it's just the center of a string of urbanized areas that include Ogden (621K) to its north and Provo-Orem (561K) to its south. While the SLC MSA and CSA have huge land areas due to the enormous size of its counties, the greater SLC urban area is by far the most densely populated among the urbanized areas with its core urban area nearly twice the density of Richmond's and more than double of Nashville's. Both Ogden and Provo-Orem urban areas are also more dense than either Richmond's or Nashville's.
Using this data alone, one could make an argument that it's Salt Lake City that's truly on another level from the others. Clearly Nashville has a much more visible energy happening around its singular core, but the Wasatch Front has a nearly contiguous 2.3M+ people in it.
I think that that there's a fundamental flaw in the premise that these are somewhat similar sized cities. It might certainly be true if one only looks at one piece of data in a vacuum, but that's ignoring context. Clearly there seems to be a presumption among many that Nashville is on a different level than the other two cities, but let's look at the context of these 3 places before agreeing to that premise.
From the OP's assertion that these 3 cities are similar sized cities, I can only presume that it's based on urbanized area, because it's the only data point that puts them in a similar category. However, the context of those 3 urbanized areas is very different from each other. Let's look at them one by one. First let's consider that we are using this link for the data and start with Richmond and scroll from city to city: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/...rbanized-area/
Richmond: Richmond is the "cleanest" case for urbanized area because it exists as a singular entity from a context perspective. It doesn't abut other urbanized areas, and it's significantly removed from the next closest one. Its 1.024M population has the least amount of nuance.
Nashville: Nashville's urbanized area is slightly larger than Richmond's at 1.083M, but its context isn't isolated from other urbanized areas. It all but abuts Murfreesboro's UA and its 164K additional people. There's also a smattering of small urban clusters around Nashville that add another 150K or so, depending on where you stop counting them. It's by far the most spread out in terms of its "total" population.
Salt Lake City: Salt Lake City's core urbanized area is 1.129M people, but it's just the center of a string of urbanized areas that include Ogden (621K) to its north and Provo-Orem (561K) to its south. While the SLC MSA and CSA have huge land areas due to the enormous size of its counties, the greater SLC urban area is by far the most densely populated among the urbanized areas with its core urban area nearly twice the density of Richmond's and more than double of Nashville's. Both Ogden and Provo-Orem urban areas are also more dense than either Richmond's or Nashville's.
Using this data alone, one could make an argument that it's Salt Lake City that's truly on another level from the others. Clearly Nashville has a much more visible energy happening around its singular core, but the Wasatch Front has a nearly contiguous 2.3M+ people in it.
Thanks you for that info, I wasn’t aware of the large differences in density. Like you said Nashville has a lot of visible energy, easily seen in the skyline and population growth in the last few years. It’s pretty clear SLC isn’t as popular as Nashville or doesn’t have the same reputation. SLC has seen an economic boom as well, it has had a 31% growth in tech jobs over the past 10 years. For example Adobe has a huge presence in Lehi, EBay has a 1800 employee campus in Draper and there are many others. There are other huge tech campuses being built throughout the valley and you wouldn’t know by looking at the skyline.
Salt Lake has a good foundation for growth, there is an expanding light rail system and a commuter rail. A new $3.6B airport is currently being built next to the current one, which is almost complete. Plus the airport is very close to downtown unlike many cities. Nashville’s airport had 18.3 million passengers in 2019, SLC had 26m+ and it’s a major hub for delta.
SLC is also very young with a high % of college grads.
I think both have a bright future and will continue to have high growth.
On what are you basing core density?
Richmond has twice the population density of SLC and 2.5 times the density of Nashville.
Of course city size is everything so I’m not objecting to the idea that SLC may have a more densely populated “core” but what does that mean? Richmond has census tracts in the 15k + per square mile range. The center of Richmond is probably a good bit more densely populated than these other cities but the core is also small (the city is only about 60 square miles) and density (particularly south and east of the city) drops off the proverbial cliff just a few miles from the city limits.
I’ve never been to SLC or Nashville. Both are places that I’m extremely interested in visiting.
For the near future Nashville probably has the best shot. Long term SLC. Both are media darlings. Nashville is “cool” and SLT is beautiful.
Richmond will chug along at a good clip but the city is so known (mostly for bad things until recently) that it will be hard for people to think of it as a fresh destination. It won’t achieve that national/international lure. Richmond’s regional pull will grow (attracting talent from neighboring states but not from 3 states over) and it will be lovely and super cool but for most will just illicit a “meh” reaction.
These are 3 somewhat similarly sized cities that are on the rise and a bit underrated (not as much Nashville). Do any of these cities have the potential to grow in status and economically in the 2020s similarly to how Denver or Austin did in the last decade? Which has the most potential?
Salt Lake and Nashville for sure.
Salt Lake City is the only one that has any appeal to me personally.
I think that that there's a fundamental flaw in the premise that these are somewhat similar sized cities. It might certainly be true if one only looks at one piece of data in a vacuum, but that's ignoring context. Clearly there seems to be a presumption among many that Nashville is on a different level than the other two cities, but let's look at the context of these 3 places before agreeing to that premise.
From the OP's assertion that these 3 cities are similar sized cities, I can only presume that it's based on urbanized area, because it's the only data point that puts them in a similar category. However, the context of those 3 urbanized areas is very different from each other. Let's look at them one by one. First let's consider that we are using this link for the data and start with Richmond and scroll from city to city: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/...rbanized-area/
Richmond: Richmond is the "cleanest" case for urbanized area because it exists as a singular entity from a context perspective. It doesn't abut other urbanized areas, and it's significantly removed from the next closest one. Its 1.024M population has the least amount of nuance.
Nashville: Nashville's urbanized area is slightly larger than Richmond's at 1.083M, but its context isn't isolated from other urbanized areas. It all but abuts Murfreesboro's UA and its 164K additional people. There's also a smattering of small urban clusters around Nashville that add another 150K or so, depending on where you stop counting them. It's by far the most spread out in terms of its "total" population.
Salt Lake City: Salt Lake City's core urbanized area is 1.129M people, but it's just the center of a string of urbanized areas that include Ogden (621K) to its north and Provo-Orem (561K) to its south. While the SLC MSA and CSA have huge land areas due to the enormous size of its counties, the greater SLC urban area is by far the most densely populated among the urbanized areas with its core urban area nearly twice the density of Richmond's and more than double of Nashville's. Both Ogden and Provo-Orem urban areas are also more dense than either Richmond's or Nashville's.
Using this data alone, one could make an argument that it's Salt Lake City that's truly on another level from the others. Clearly Nashville has a much more visible energy happening around its singular core, but the Wasatch Front has a nearly contiguous 2.3M+ people in it.
I agree with all of this. Also it should be mentioned that Richmond's urbanized area includes Petersburg (although Petersburg isn't named as part of the urbanized area but it is part of the MSA nomenclature) whereas the UAs of Nashville and SLC do not include any smaller nearby cities.
It also makes perfect sense that SLC is uniformly denser, by a good bit, than either Richmond or Nashville since it is hemmed in by major geographic features (mountains and lakes) which tends to be the case for Western cities/urban areas in general.
Using the Census Reporter website, you can actually view statistics for urbanized areas as well as a map of the urbanized area (or city, MSA, CSA, metropolitan division, etc.) for any jurisdiction in the US.
On what are you basing core density?
Richmond has twice the population density of SLC and 2.5 times the density of Nashville.
Of course city size is everything so I’m not objecting to the idea that SLC may have a more densely populated “core” but what does that mean? Richmond has census tracts in the 15k + per square mile range. The center of Richmond is probably a good bit more densely populated than these other cities but the core is also small (the city is only about 60 square miles) and density (particularly south and east of the city) drops off the proverbial cliff just a few miles from the city limits.
I’ve never been to SLC or Nashville. Both are places that I’m extremely interested in visiting.
For the near future Nashville probably has the best shot. Long term SLC. Both are media darlings. Nashville is “cool” and SLT is beautiful.
Richmond will chug along at a good clip but the city is so known (mostly for bad things until recently) that it will be hard for people to think of it as a fresh destination. It won’t achieve that national/international lure. Richmond’s regional pull will grow (attracting talent from neighboring states but not from 3 states over) and it will be lovely and super cool but for most will just illicit a “meh” reaction.
Well if we start talking about the core of all three cities it becomes Richmond by a wide margin that is only evened if one takes the argument that the others have greater entertainment districts, which is subjective...
The core city of Richmond has 10 tracts with density above 10k, peaking at ~19.3k ppsm (higher peak densities than Det, Clt, StL for instance); all ten tracts are contiguous and cover a land area of 2.3m², population 29,668, density of 12,899 ppsm. And when you start doing tracts above 5k, Richmond has more of its residents living in said areas than the other two...
Obviously Spence knows this, but for the audience here, here's some residential images of core Rich:
In contrast, Salt Lake has five mostly contiguous tracts above 10k, totaling a population of 18,982 across 1.6m² for a density of 11,864, peak density of ~18.3k. And here's what those areas in Salt Lake look like:
Nashville has only two tracts in the entire city with a density over 10k, and they aren't contiguous; peak density of ~12.5k and a total population between the two of 7013 over 0.6 square miles, 11,688 ppsm. Here's what those two spots in Nashville look like:
So if the conversation is strictly about the core of all of these cities, it's pretty easily Richmond...
Nashville certainly feels a little larger than Richmond, and because it's the largest city within about a 250-mile radius, it has attractions and amenities that Richmond doesn't offer. Still, Richmond holds its weight pretty well against Nashville overall, this isn't a "Nashville runs off and smokes Richmond" kind of thing. And I'd suspect Rich and SLC compare mostly well with each other also...
I have a bias but I'd take Richmond by a landslide over these two. I'd take Nashville over SLC, which seems like a nice enough city but for the life of me I can't imagine not only what it would take to get me to Utah, but to also find my time there as appealing and enjoyable as living smack in the middle of the East Coast in Richmond, arguably one of the strongest locations to live anywhere in the country...
In contrast, Salt Lake has five mostly contiguous tracts above 10k, totaling a population of 18,982 across 1.6m² for a density of 11,864, peak density of ~18.3k. And here's what those areas in Salt Lake look like:
Nashville has only two tracts in the entire city with a density over 10k, and they aren't contiguous; peak density of ~12.5k and a total population between the two of 7013 over 0.6 square miles, 11,688 ppsm. Here's what those two spots in Nashville look like:
So if the conversation is strictly about the core of all of these cities, it's pretty easily Richmond...
Were you looking at city limits for these stats? If so it would be interesting to look at it by urbanized area. Apparently 59% of the city of Salt Lake City is undeveloped and non-residential with highly urbanized and developed areas contiguous to the city limits. I don't think that's true of either Richmond or Nashville.
Quote:
Nashville certainly feels a little larger than Richmond, and because it's the largest city within about a 250-mile radius, it has attractions and amenities that Richmond doesn't offer. Still, Richmond holds its weight pretty well against Nashville overall, this isn't a "Nashville runs off and smokes Richmond" kind of thing. And I'd suspect Rich and SLC compare mostly well with each other also...
I have a bias but I'd take Richmond by a landslide over these two. I'd take Nashville over SLC, which seems like a nice enough city but for the life of me I can't imagine not only what it would take to get me to Utah, but to also find my time there as appealing and enjoyable as living smack in the middle of the East Coast in Richmond, arguably one of the strongest locations to live anywhere in the country...
Your preferences pretty much mirror mine.
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.
