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.
Often on threads with southern cities being compared, we see “but they day to day living in these places are neglible” or “X is just a larger city Y except [insert minute difference controlled for size] here”. I don’t really see this with northern cities, they have their own flavors and identities (outside of maybe Philly and Bmore).
Are differences between large sunbelt (Houston/Miami/ Atlanta/ Dallas) and Smaller ones (Charlotte/ Raleigh/ Tampa/Nashville) more quantitative than qualitative due to the short histories of these cities?
The big sun belt cities aren't particularly dense or urban. In fact the most urban sun belt city is one of the mid-size ones: New Orleans. Because of that the largest sun belt cities mostly feel the same as the mid size ones, just geographically larger and sprawling. You really have to go north or to the west coast to truly get the "big city" feel.
The larger cities do have more volume however. More employment options, more shopping, more sports teams, more neighborhoods to live in, etc. So that'd the main advantage of them. Some of the mid-size cities on the other hand have more unique identities I think.
The big sun belt cities aren't particularly dense or urban. In fact the most urban sun belt city is one of the mid-size ones: New Orleans. Because of that the largest sun belt cities mostly feel the same as the mid size ones, just geographically larger and sprawling. You really have to go north or to the west coast to truly get the "big city" feel.
Often on threads with southern cities being compared, we see “but they day to day living in these places are neglible” or “X is just a larger city Y except [insert minute difference controlled for size] here”. I don’t really see this with northern cities, they have their own flavors and identities (outside of maybe Philly and Bmore).
Are differences between large sunbelt (Houston/Miami/ Atlanta/ Dallas) and Smaller ones (Charlotte/ Raleigh/ Tampa/Nashville) more quantitative than qualitative due to the short histories of these cities?
There both sub regional and induvial identities to all sunbelt cities no different than Northern cities etc.
Like if I said Colonial history and culture being that broad would default be a regional identity with NY, Philly, Boston and Bmore all have in common. So would that make NY just a bigger Philly? Of course not because we also know there also induvial identity and addition to regional share history and culture.
One of the most common thing I see is generalizing sunbelt cities age. And size is only partly indicator. There's the timing when at city is founded and there's the time that a city really started to boom into a major city.
The Sunbelt boom started after the 60's, but some cities were major cities before the boom itself, While some were medium size cities. and other just small town and came out of no where. So identity and culture base of the timing are radically different.
For example Charlotte became a town 70 years before Atlanta, while Atlanta become a major city like 50 years before Charlotte. Think about that for a second.
Charlotte was actually a small colonial town, It's called the Queen city because it's name after Queen charlotte, ironically, The Charlotte Hornets their NBA team gets it's name because during American revolution the British called Charlotte a Hornet nest. Then small town latter become home to the Charlotte Mint because of the NC gold rush, today Charlotte is still consider a financial center. But Charlotte didn't really started bomming until after WW2. Then started booming even faster in the 90's.
Atlanta was founded because the early railroad, It's gilded age city Atlanta actually has more in common with Pittsburgh and Cleveland then it does with some Sunbelt cities, because Atlanta was product of the late industrial revolution. As a small town it become the second biggest industrial center for The South during the civil war, which Atlanta was burn. Afterward in the city boomed to reach 200k by 1910 and metro a million before 1960., The Phoenix bird became a symbol for Atlanta which in on the city flag and many sports teams are birds, Hawks, Falcons "Thrashers were" which is the state bird also. Atlanta also continue as logistics center
Atlanta does have a significant stock of Victorian homes and warehourse, tho most the mills are gone.. Cabbagetown, Atlanta
So there both......there things that Atlanta and Charlotte share regionally. While at same time you can dig deeper to there induvial culture and history. These two as just an example.
The day-to-day life for much of America is similar and even more so when you look at specific subregions. The daily lives of people living in Charlotte, Nashville, Raleigh, and Atlanta are very similar. The differences are the quantity, quality, and variability of amenities. Someone living in Atlanta will have access to amenities that may not exist in Raleigh. Charlotte and Nashville may be in between.
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.
