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.
But Charlotte is connected via I-85. This makes a huge difference. There was a study in the mid 90s I believe about the I-85 growth explosion or something like that. The fact that there are so many cities and metro areas along this Interstate it garners attention from such folks as to suggest a megaregion. The Raleigh-Durham, Piedmont Triad, Charlotte, Upstate South Carolina, and Atlanta are all connected via I-85. This suggest Charlotte's huge trucking industry.
I am not aware of how Nashville and Atlanta are connected. What interstate and major metros connect Nashville to Atlanta?
Actually Raleigh-Durham, etc. is not between Charlotte and Atlanta. And Nashville is connected to Atlanta via I24 and I75, which intersect in Chattanooga. There is no big difference in proximity to Atlanta between Nashville and Charlotte.
In other words, riverfront parks, paved pedestrian/bike trails and the interconnectedness of, pedestrian bridges, nature trails, and urban park space were either underweighted or not weighted at all. The index is fine for those things it actually looked at, but those things I just mentioned are things that I would say bode equally important for outdoor recreation as ball diamonds, tennis courts, and pools, if not moreso. An average bike trail is probably used more often than say an average ball diamond or tennis court. I believe if those important recreational amenties I have included were included in the analysis and given the appropriate weighting, Nashville would be ahead of Charlotte.
Just to give one specific example, I can bike from Nashville's Capitol grounds or riverfront park downtown all the way out to J. Percy Priest Lake on pedestrian paths/trails and bridges. Specifically two pedestrian river bridges in addition to creek bridges, underpasses/tunnels. Not only does Charlotte not have an urban riverfront park, but I cannot bike from downtown Charlotte out to a lake on the periphery on pedestrian trails. Huge difference in biking amenities.
My dude. This is why I said YOUR claims that Nashville is a "better" outdoors city than Charlotte were totally subjective. Don't feel bad. Carolinablue has caught me with my foot in my mouth a few times too. Just admit you were giving your biased opinion and move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vivelafrance
You take 1-24 to 1-75 in Chattanooga. It's a straight shot to the south east. Mapquest it. Chattanooga is exactly halfway between the cities. There are major discussions to run high speed rail servcie between Chattanooga and Atlanta and continue the service to Murfreesboro and Nashville. The Chattanooga airport is already considered to be Atlanta second airport and that's why the demand for high speed rail is so high.
Well, I am a trucker (have been for nearly 8 years now) and I have taken the trip from Nashville to Atlanta many times. I have also taken the trip from Charlotte to Atlanta many times. Due to less traffic, one can get from Nashville to Atlanta faster than Charlotte to Atlanta. However, Adavi215 does have a point when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected. The metros of Charlotte/Atlanta/Greenville are almost contiguous for the entire trip. Nashville to Atlanta is more of a "country trip" with larger non-metropolitan areas on the way. This is what he meant when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected.
In addition to Charlotte having a larger CSA than Nashville, Charlotte is connected to two other 1 million plus CSA areas (Greensboro/Winston-Salem and Greenville/Spartanburg). The Raleigh/Durham CSA (also 1 million plus) is not far from Charlotte either. This central location makes Charlotte a distribution powerhouse in ways Nashville could only dream of. This is one of the reasons why Charlotte Douglas International is the Nation's 8th busiest airport (26th busiest in the World). Charlotte/Douglas International Airport - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nashville's airport is the Nation's 41st busiest (according to the latest data I could find).
In other words, riverfront parks, paved pedestrian/bike trails and the interconnectedness of, pedestrian bridges, nature trails, and urban park space were either underweighted or not weighted at all. The index is fine for those things it actually looked at, but those things I just mentioned are things that I would say bode equally important for outdoor recreation as ball diamonds, tennis courts, and pools, if not moreso. An average bike trail is probably used more often than say an average ball diamond or tennis court. I believe if those important recreational amenties I have included were included in the analysis and given the appropriate weighting, Nashville would be ahead of Charlotte.
Just to give one specific example, I can bike from Nashville's Capitol grounds or riverfront park downtown all the way out to J. Percy Priest Lake on pedestrian paths/trails and bridges. Specifically two pedestrian river bridges in addition to creek bridges, underpasses/tunnels. Not only does Charlotte not have an urban riverfront park, but I cannot bike from downtown Charlotte out to a lake on the periphery on pedestrian trails. Huge difference in biking amenities.
I think urbancharlotte said it best above. Your claim is purely subjective. At least I’ve provided an objective ranking. I guess I could claim that we are a better city for outdoor recreation purely based on our whitewater center? I know Nashville doesn’t have anything on that “level”. Correct?
As I showed before, we also have lakes, and a greenway system...
Open Greenways The Mecklenburg County greenway system is quickly becoming one of the finest in the country. There are 33 miles of developed and 147 miles of undeveloped greenways in Mecklenburg County. Link: home (http://www.charmeck.org/Departments/Park+and+Rec/Greenways/Open+Greenways/home.htm - broken link)
Actually Raleigh-Durham, etc. is not between Charlotte and Atlanta. And Nashville is connected to Atlanta via I24 and I75, which intersect in Chattanooga. There is no big difference in proximity to Atlanta between Nashville and Charlotte.
Oops, vivelafrance already answered this.
I did not say Raleigh-Durham et al were in between Charlotte and Atlanta but that Charlotte was connected to these areas. In fact, when you consider MTAs, the region which is centered on Charlotte is one of the top 10 largest. I'm not sure where Nashville ranks. Try to get the point of what I'm saying instead of being picky about my posts.
Charlotte has a busy airport because it is a hub for US airways. Geographics only play a partial role in selection of hubs. Nashville used to have an American Hub and Nashville is less than 4 hours from airport hubs in Memphis and Atlanta.
Many residents and small businesses prefer cities without hub status because there is more competition to keep prices low. Southwest is Nashville's No. 1 carrier and offers lower costs.
This is why I said YOUR claims that Nashville is a "better" outdoors city than Charlotte were totally subjective. Don't feel bad. Carolinablue has caught me with my foot in my mouth a few times too. Just admit you were giving your biased opinion and move on.
Well, I am a trucker (have been for nearly 8 years now) and I have taken the trip from Nashville to Atlanta many times. I have also taken the trip from Charlotte to Atlanta many times. Due to less traffic, one can get from Nashville to Atlanta faster than Charlotte to Atlanta. However, Adavi215 does have a point when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected. The metros of Charlotte/Atlanta/Greenville are almost contiguous for the entire trip. Nashville to Atlanta is more of a "country trip" with larger non-metropolitan areas on the way. This is what he meant when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected.
I have to disagree on this one, charlotte and atlanta are not really connected because its less of a "country trip", going from one city to another along interstate highways whether it be through Pennsylvania or portions of Virginia and SC could be a country trip as well.
However, atlanta and charlotte have gotten a lot of buzz in the northeast then nashville, because people figure hey just keep going straight down a few hours more to atlanta, rather than further inland to nashville.
In addition to Charlotte having a larger CSA than Nashville, Charlotte is connected to two other 1 million plus CSA areas (Greensboro/Winston-Salem and Greenville/Spartanburg). The Raleigh/Durham CSA (also 1 million plus) is not far from Charlotte either. This central location makes Charlotte a distribution powerhouse in ways Nashville could only dream of. This is one of the reasons why Charlotte Douglas International is the Nation's 8th busiest airport (26th busiest in the World). Charlotte/Douglas International Airport - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I wouldn't argue the other CSA's are necessarily connected, its a bit of a debate we had on the previous forum that was mistakenly closed (two mirrors) after only a few posters.
The busiest airport is a misleading indicator, Atlanta has a much busier airport than JFK, in fact its the busiest, does that make Atlanta more of a powerful influence than new york, Dallas, LA no.
Minneapolis and Detroit have busier airports than JFK , the airport argument is not the best argument , I wouldn't say its completely useless, but it really doesn't have that big of a factor. San Francisco's nearby airport is even less busier.
Nashville's airport is the Nation's 41st busiest (according to the latest data I could find).[/quote]
Last edited by FlyDrive100b; 10-08-2009 at 12:28 AM..
My dude. This is why I said YOUR claims that Nashville is a "better" outdoors city than Charlotte were totally subjective. Don't feel bad. Carolinablue has caught me with my foot in my mouth a few times too. Just admit you were giving your biased opinion and move on.
All opinions are necessarily biased towards the beliefs of the opiner. When I gave mine, I DID present tangible reasons for it, quantifiable reasons for it even, as opposed to just one based solely on gut feel or abstract sentiment. I still maintain the difference I cited in the tangible elements I cited. Those are not imagined.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancharlotte
Adavi215 does have a point when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected. The metros of Charlotte/Atlanta/Greenville are almost contiguous for the entire trip. Nashville to Atlanta is more of a "country trip" with larger non-metropolitan areas on the way. This is what he meant when he said that Charlotte and Atlanta are more connected.
THAT, "more connected" is more of a gut feel or abstract sentiment. One indeed may prefer viewing more asphalt than greenery when traveling from one city to another. But translating that into "connected" is really more of an abstract sentiment. But yeah, Adavi215 is correct in the notion of more asphalt alongside the road between Charlotte and Atlanta than between Nashville and Atlanta. But so am I in my notion of more pedestrian bridges and interconnected trails and urban park space in Nashville than in Charlotte.
Actually when you think about it, if you're a business and you have a location, distribution center, etc. in Charlotte and Atlanta and Nashville, from that perspective you might say that your Nashville and Atlanta centers are MORE connected than your Charlotte and Atlanta centers, since the quicker time between locations and easier flow of goods between locations that you cited as a trucker, would foster greater and quicker connectivity. So there are two sides of that coin that can be argued.
In my day to day activities, I personally find it of more aesthetic and practical value which place has more pedestrian bridges, urban riverfront parks, urban park space of other kind, and interconnected paved greenways from one part of the city to another than whether there's more asphalt or greenery in between where I live and the next big city. And I would dare say more people actually move to cities based on such recreational offerings in the city as opposed to there being more asphalt in between cities. But there are probably always going to be some who value the latter.
I think urbancharlotte said it best above. Your claim is purely subjective
As is yours about "connectedness."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue
At least I’ve provided an objective ranking.
Subjective actually, subjected to WHICH amenities are and are not included, ie. including tennis courts and pools and excluding pedestrian bridges and trails connecting downtown to the periphery and urban riverfront parks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue
I guess I could claim that we are a better city for outdoor recreation purely based on our whitewater center?
You could add it to a list of things. I personally wouldn't use just ONE thing to stake a claim of better outdoor recreation, but I would and do COMBINE things to paint an overall picture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina Blue
As I showed before, we also have lakes, and a greenway system...
Big difference between just having some and having a greenway system that connects a downtown riverwalk TO a lake. Smaller metro areas of 500k have lakes and greenway systems too. It's good to have, but it's not like a big city having one which stretches from way over in this part of the city to way over in that part of the city.
The busiest airport is a misleading indicator, Atlanta has a much busier airport than JFK, in fact its the busiest, does that make Atlanta more of a powerful influence than new york, Dallas, LA no.
Minneapolis and Detroit have busier airports than JFK , the airport argument is not the best argument , I wouldn't say its completely useless, but it really doesn't have that big of a factor. San Francisco's nearby airport is even less busier.
Subjective actually, subjected to WHICH amenities are and are not included, ie. including tennis courts and pools and excluding pedestrian bridges and trails connecting downtown to the periphery and urban riverfront parks.
You could add it to a list of things. I personally wouldn't use just ONE thing to stake a claim of better outdoor recreation, but I would and do COMBINE things to paint an overall picture.
Big difference between just having some and having a greenway system that connects a downtown riverwalk TO a lake. Smaller metro areas of 500k have lakes and greenway systems too. It's good to have, but it's not like a big city having one which stretches from way over in this part of the city to way over in that part of the city.
I'll be totally honest with you. I didn't understand the majority of what you wrote above, especially the first sentence
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.
Just admit you were giving your biased opinion and move on.
