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.
I think the southeast is a major player right now, but the region definitely does not have the "big city" power combinations of the northeast, midwest or west, yet.
For example--
northeast--
nyc: 20 million
boston: 5 million
philadelphia: 6.2 million
pittsburgh: 2.3 million
baltimore: 2.8 million
washington, dc: 6.4 million
midwest--
chicago: 9.2 million
detroit: 4.2 million
minneapolis: 3.7 million
cleveland: 2.2 million
kansas city: 2.3 million
st louis: 2.8 million
west--
denver: 3.1 million
phoenix: 4.9 million
los angeles: 13.5 million
san francisco: 4.5 million
seattle: 4 million
san diego: 3.3 million
las vegas: 2.4 million
south--
miami: 6.3 million
atlanta: 6.2 million
houston: 7.1 million
dallas/ft worth: 7.7 million
austin: 2.4 million
charlotte: 2.6 million
nashville: 2.1 million
I think Charlotte is already there pretty much, for the southeast. Austin is coming up super fast, and Nashville would be next to follow suit, I think.
Southern cities do not really have the same infrastructure of northeast and midwest cities though, on the whole.
But with both Charlotte and Nashville, I think by 2030 Charlotte will hit roughly 2.8 million metro, while Nashville will be around 2.250 million. Then by 2040, Charlotte could come in at 3.2 million, with Nashville at 2.5 million.
Also, worth noting, is that if Clarksville becomes part of Nashville's metro area, that would add a current additional 325k to the metro, and by 2030 probably another 400k, and in 2040, another 550k-ish or more.
You left out San Antonio. The Texas Triangle is the most populated corridor in the South, but it's obviously not going to catch the Northeast given that NYC alone has a slightly larger population than the entire triangle.
I guess connectivity and accessibility matters, but they aren’t preconditions to be grouped togetherness La and Sf are grouped together as California despite distance.
And I didn’t mean to imply that Miami- Atlanta- Tampa would somehow merge into one, bor really outshine the northeast, but I think we will make strong case for second place having those 3.
Then very strong growing mid-size like Charlotte, Raleigh, Orlando, Nashville .. and Greenville.
Honestly outside of Miami, these are all drivable places from where im located in Atlanta.
Barring some natural disaster I honestly don’t see the southeast competing with the financial and political hubs of this country. I still think the collection of west coast cities are holding down the #2 spot for the time being.
Well, how are you defining West. Because if you extend too far inland, then we can group the Texan cities and New Orleans
I think the growth in the south is promising. Someone mentioned us not being able to outcompete them Midwest, it’s almost if people are unaware of the growth in the south.I think we passed Chicago/Detroit /Cleveland a while ago. Are mid-sized metros are more important by a long shot.
south--
miami: 6.3 million
atlanta: 6.2 million
houston: 7.1 million
dallas/ft worth: 7.7 million
austin: 2.4 million
charlotte: 2.6 million
nashville: 2.1 million
I think you have Atlanta and Miami switched.
Atlanta passed Miami a few years ago.
The 2021 estimates: southern and NE cities in the top 50 shown
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA 19,768.46
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 7,759.62
Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX 7,206.84
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 6,356.43
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD 6,228.6
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta, GA 6,144.05
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 6,091.75
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH 4,899.93
Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 3,219.51
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD 2,838.33
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC 2,701.05
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 2,691.93
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX 2,601.79
Pittsburgh, PA 2,353.54
Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown, TX 2,352.43
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro-- 2,012.489k
Virginia Beach- VA-NC 1,803.33
Providence-Warwick, RI-MA 1,675.77
Jacksonville, FL 1,637.67
Raleigh-Cary, NC 1,448.41
Oklahoma City, OK 1,441.65
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 1,336.1
Richmond, VA 1,324.06
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN 1,284.57
New Orleans-Metairie, LA 1,261.73
Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT 1,211.91
Bos-wash is in red, SE in blue and Texas in green.
Quote:
Originally Posted by meep
Well, how are you defining West. Because if you extend too far inland, then we can group the Texan cities and New Orleans
I think the growth in the south is promising. Someone mentioned us not being able to outcompete them Midwest, it’s almost if people are unaware of the growth in the south.I think we passed Chicago/Detroit /Cleveland a while ago. Are mid-sized metros are more important by a long shot.
I think you would have to include all of the south to even have a spot in the conversation. The SE corridor might not even emerge as#1 in the south, let alone #2 in the country
The Piedmont Corridor is only 18.5M
The Texas Triangle is over 23M
The Florida Corridor is approx 20M
The Gulf Coast is about 14M
The NE is over 50M.
Last edited by atadytic19; 02-24-2023 at 02:54 PM..
Charlotte( 3 million) and Nashville( 2.1 million) are already legitimate major cities ...but the problem is there aren't alot of in between built up cities...
Charlotte isn’t at 3 million yet. It’s not major, neither is Nash. However, these cities are super recognizable mid sized cities in 2023.
What other region has these kinda cities. Most mature regions just have mega cities ( or 5 million plus ones) with no in between.
We have Charlotte, Nashville, Orlando, Raleigh that are amenity rich mid sized metros.
Greenville being couched between Atlanta and Charlotte also punches way above its size imo.
Charlotte isn’t at 3 million yet. It’s not major, neither is Nash. However, these cities are super recognizable mid sized cities in 2023.
What other region has these kinda cities. Most mature regions just have mega cities ( or 5 million plus ones) with no in between.
We have Charlotte, Nashville, Orlando, Raleigh that are amenity rich mid sized metros.
Greenville being couched between Atlanta and Charlotte also punches way above its size imo.
Midwest? Indy, Columbus, Cincy, KC, St. Louis (closer to 3M)...not to mention Detroit and Cleveland which are still big despite losing a fair amount of population. Pittsburgh while not technically "Midwest" is the anchor of the so-call "ChiPitts" megaregion.
And as I already said - the southeast cities are not particular close to each other especially if you throw Florida in the equation. Florida is a world of its own either way. Yes, Charlotte has grown a lot, as did RDU, as did Nashville. They don't come close to, let say, Philly alone let alone NYC.
You make it sound so far fetched that I brought up the Hartford and Providence for the Bos- Wash corridor, when they are basically the same size as cities that the OP brought up.
Again, you have to weigh the cities the OP brought up:
Atlanta, Miami, Tampa, Charlotte and Nashville with
NY, Philadelphia, DC, Boston and yes Hartford, and Providence.
People are bringing up much smaller cities with smaller GDPs, less fortune 500 companies etc so why am I not serious when I bring up the less talked about NE metros?
Dude....
Quote:
Originally Posted by atadytic19
You think the likes of Atlanta, Miami, Nashville, Charlotte and Tampa are equivalent to the likes of Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Hartford, Providence and DC? Those are some high hopes.
I think the South can match up to the West or Midwest (when you factor in the Texas cities) but even with the Texas Cities the NE is still the king
You asked if Atlanta, Tamp, Charlotte, or Nashville "were equivalent" to the likes of Hartford and Providence. That answer is no...those southern cities/metros are all much larger than the two I had bolded. Yet your implication was essentially that any northeastern city; including those two smaller ones, is "more significant" to any Southeastern city. Very silly.
At least that is how it reads. But by all means feel free to explain if that is not what you meant.
You have to realized that the straight line distance between Tampa and Miami is the same as DC to NYC. In reality Miami and Tampa (SW Florida for that matter) will always be separated as Everglades is in the smack middle of them.
There are two stretches in Florida anyway - Miami to Daytona Beach or so on the East Coast, and Naples to Tampa on the west coast (SW Florida overall). Atlanta? It's like 200+ miles from Atlanta to Valdosta, and another 200 from Valdosta to Tampa. Macon is not big, Valdosta is not big, Gainesville FL is not big...
Atlanta-Chattanooga-Nashville would makes a little bit more sense, but even then there's miles of nothing between Chattanooga and Nashville with Cumberland Plateau separating the two.
The I-85 corridor (Atlanta to Charlotte to Raleigh) will also converge more...but even then there is also miles of separation between Atlanta and Greenville SC.
And as other said, Charlotte and Nashville are already somewhat large metros...they are the same size as Baltimore and are larger than the like of Hartford or Providence.
Atlanta to Miami, in a straight line, is almost an exact 600 miles. The halfway point would be about Waldo, FL, near Gainesville.
Boston to DC is almost an exact 400 miles, in a straight line. The halfway point, ironically, is EWR.
In the Texas Triangle, Dallas to Houston is about 225 miles in a straight line, Houston to San Antonio is about 200 miles in a straight line, and 250 miles between Dallas and San Antonio.
Los Angeles to San Diego is about 111 miles, and Los Angeles to San Francisco is about 345 miles.
But let's think about these halfway points in all these major corridors. In Boston-DC, NYC is obviously the halfway point. And we know that NYC is a major city, but it's important to note that NYC is about 200 miles between DC and Boston both the two ends. In between Houston and Dallas, there's nothing, but then again, they themselves are 225 miles apart, not much different from NYC or Boston, or NYC to DC. In the Texas Triangle the longest distance is Dallas and San Antonio but guess what... Austin is there too.
San Diego to San Francisco is pretty close in miles apart as Boston to DC. San Jose is 300 miles exactly from LA. And I know what you're thinking "But Prickly Pear! There's mountains in the way and Californians like to divide by North and South Californians!" And you'd be right. But that doesn't stop Californians from traveling between their other cities often maybe even more so than Las Vegas and Phoenix for southern Californians and why they are trying to build High Speed Rail between the two cities. So while San Jose is 300 miles from LA, it's not the perfect fit of the "200 mile distance for corridor cohesion" formula that we see in all other parts of the US, it's close enough...
If Atlanta and Miami, the two biggest cities in the Southeast, wanted to be a corridor, they'd need another major city at about the 300 mile mark between them. There's one there--Jacksonville. Gainesville is also about the right location but let's be honest with ourselves, Gainesville isn't the answer in it's current state. So we have Jacksonville and that's cool, and Jacksonville is well linked to the rest of Florida, the East Coast of Florida anyway, enough to justify a solid corridor. But what about Jacksonville to Georgia as a whole? There's an argument that Jacksonville could develop links with Brunswick and Savannah especially as Brunswick and Savannah continue to expand their seaports, but that's going in a direction away from Atlanta. The I-75 completely negates Jacksonville and there's no direct corridor to Atlanta for travel, meaning the connection is lost. So maybe Jacksonville is too far east at that spot or an Interstate is needed there. But let's not forget that Orlando to Miami is a well built stretch enough for Brightline expansions, and Orlampa is becoming a thing, so what if we go west from Miami and head towards Orlando? The turnpike from Orlando to The Villages is a fairly used corridor and Ocala and Gainesville are not big cities but they are something... The problem with this corridor is that the connection gets lost once you cross the Georgia line. What is needed is a big city in southern Georgia this is the problem. Jacksonville, while 300ish miles from Atlanta is too close to the other big Florida cities and too far away from Atlanta. Now if Jacksonville was located where say, Brunswick was, and Savannah was also where Brunswick was with a direct Interstate connection, that could maybe work. But that's also when Georgia's coastline starts going eastward and doesn't help. What's really needed is a Jacksonville sized entity around Tifton/Valdosta, GA. And Atlanta viciously sprawling northward treating central and southern GA like a plague isn't helping either, if Atlanta had been more "well-rounded" Atlanta could have already incorporated Macon as a "nearby city" in the way that Athens is almost part of greater Atlanta at this point. But that is not what is happening.
--
As an Atlantan, I see more Alabama plates than anyone else, and if Atlanta is in a corridor with anybody, it's Alabama whether I want it to be or not. And most of those plates are probably from the greater Birmingham area because I honestly do not believe Atlanta is big enough to pull the attention of Alabamans from Huntsville or Montgomery. I personally live 90 miles from the Tennessee line and see more Alabama plates probably on a 5 or 6 to 1 ratio than Tennessee if I had to guess. And from where I live I'd have an easier time getting to Chattanooga than Alabama. Atlanta is 140 miles away from Birmingham, so that tracks. The I-20 is fairly easy between these two. Now Chattanooga and Atlanta is about 105 miles apart, a direct shot on the I-75. The I-75 I recently learned is a top 10 travel corridor for the entire US, which actually makes sense, it goes from Miami all the way to Canada on the Upper Peninsula in Michigan and hits a lot of cities in between. Now I'm new around these parts but people around here only have good things to say about Chattanooga. I heard they have a great aquarium (it's no GA Aquarium though), the river is pretty and there's great hiking just west of the city and east in the Appalachians. If this is true, Chattanooga is probably growing or at least isn't declining, and in somewhat of a healthy state. One of my bosses in corporate lives in Chattanooga and seems to think so.
Chattanooga to Nashville is about 114 miles in a straight line. Now I don't know Tennessee, the most I've seen is the two seconds it took me to get from Arkansas to Mississippi by way of Memphis, and Memphis is just not a good city to leave an impression on. Nashville as we all know is growing southward-ish with it's high growth, and if Chattanooga continues to be a selling point especially if both Atlanta and Nashville continue to be expensive then there's definitely an opportunity here for a corridor. However like I said, Atlanta is involved with Alabama. So how does Alabama play into this? Between Nashville and Birmingham is Huntsville, what's going on there? Is Huntsville growing, is Birmingham growing?
Birmingham-Atlanta-Charlotte (ABCs... lol) I can see only if Greenville comes out to play OR Charlotte becomes much much bigger (Atlanta's level basically) and I am not seeing that right now. Maybe if Columbia and Greenville were switched but right now Greenville just looks too small. The NC cities seem to be doing their own thing and there's no feasible way for Nashville and Charlotte to have any decent connection based on their locations. Atlanta's vicious sprawl swallowing towards the North (and Northeast in particular) helps create this corridor but there really needs to be something else there. Atlanta and Charlotte are 225 miles apart on a straight line (just like Dallas and Houston interesting) but a lot of interest in NC is actually going to Raleigh and not Charlotte which is hurting Charlotte significantly here.
So there are two ways this can go the way I see it:
- SET (Southeast Triangle): Atlanta, Nashville, Birmingham--with Huntsville and Chattanooga as auxiliary cities AND The Carolinian: Charlotte, Greensboro, and Raleigh
- The Piedmont: Birmingham, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh--with Greenville and Greensboro as auxiliary cities
I think people forget other regions are growing too.
In the last decade, NYC (city limits) added more people than the entire city of Atlanta. The NY metropolitan area in the last decade has added around 50% of the entire population of metropolitan Nashville.
The DC metropolitan area added as many people in the last decade as Charlotte & Nashville did combined.
Boston’s metropolitan area added more than Nashville & the same as Charlotte
Philadelphia metropolitan area added around the same as Nashville.
Asking when they will catapult the south to the Bos-Wash corridor is like asking when Greenville SC is going to surpass Charlotte because it’s growing way faster & GrubHub Articles rank it as a great low cost place that’s growing, etc.
I think the southeast is a major player right now, but the region definitely does not have the "big city" power combinations of the northeast, midwest or west, yet.
For example--
northeast--
nyc: 20 million
boston: 5 million
philadelphia: 6.2 million
pittsburgh: 2.3 million
baltimore: 2.8 million
washington, dc: 6.4 million
midwest--
chicago: 9.2 million
detroit: 4.2 million
minneapolis: 3.7 million
cleveland: 2.2 million
kansas city: 2.3 million
st louis: 2.8 million
west--
denver: 3.1 million
phoenix: 4.9 million
los angeles: 13.5 million
san francisco: 4.5 million
seattle: 4 million
san diego: 3.3 million
las vegas: 2.4 million
south--
miami: 6.3 million
atlanta: 6.2 million
houston: 7.1 million
dallas/ft worth: 7.7 million
austin: 2.4 million
charlotte: 2.6 million
nashville: 2.1 million
I think Charlotte is already there pretty much, for the southeast. Austin is coming up super fast, and Nashville would be next to follow suit, I think.
Southern cities do not really have the same infrastructure of northeast and midwest cities though, on the whole.
But with both Charlotte and Nashville, I think by 2030 Charlotte will hit roughly 2.8 million metro, while Nashville will be around 2.250 million. Then by 2040, Charlotte could come in at 3.2 million, with Nashville at 2.5 million.
Also, worth noting, is that if Clarksville becomes part of Nashville's metro area, that would add a current additional 325k to the metro, and by 2030 probably another 400k, and in 2040, another 550k-ish or more.
I don't know why it hasn't been updates in so long(wiki) but Charlotte's metro is over 2.9 million and csa 3.1 million
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.
