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 don't know man. If that's the case then why the reputation of Bob Wallace hasn't slowed down other parts of the state that is growing.
From 2010-2017, Huntsville has been the only sizable metro posting an above-average growth rate over 7% and you can thank massive federal government investment for that. Birmingham and Mobile are under 2% and Montgomery is actually posting a slight decline. Auburn and Tuscaloosa post above average growth rates but they are small metros to begin with and their universities and nearby huge auto plants have an outsized economic impact. Daphne-Fairhope has great beaches and I'd imagine it largely draws retirees.
Quote:
Like I said Mobile's missed potential had nothing to do with Wallace. The short sighted city leadership is the reason.Our economy is growing and a neighboring county is benefiting from it and not Mobile County. In 2018 I just dont think the state is holding Birmingham back.
I hate to say it but I think you're pretty naive if you think Mobile's location in Alabama doesn't affect it in any way. Unfortunately, a huge part of the state's reputation still hinges on what happened there several decades ago and that trickles down to the state's cities, even those that weren't really known for anything especially bad during the CRM.
And you'd also have to be naive to think that the state hasn't held Birmingham--the biggest, and predominantly Black and Democratic, city in the state--back. And really not just Birmingham, but the cities in the state in general; I recall when the Alabama legislature tried to mimic Arizona in passing that immigration law some years back and representatives from the big auto plants told them how that law would affect that sector. This is something that nearly all Southern states have to deal with in some form or the other. Even with all of the success Atlanta has had over the decades, some of that happened in spite of the state, not because of it. Are you familiar with Georgia's lieutenant governor's feud with Delta for discontinuing discounts for NRA members and how this could potentially affect Atlanta's chances for landing Amazon's second headquarters? And if a big, progressive city like Atlanta has to contend with a conservative, rural-dominated Georgia legislature often, you don't think a smaller, less progressive Birmingham doesn't have to fight with an even more conservative, rural-dominated Alabama legislature on a regular basis? But I wouldn't be surprised to see Birmingham and the state on better terms in the near future as Birmingham continues to see significant amounts of investment in its core which will draw lots of new (White) residents.
From 2010-2017, Huntsville has been the only sizable metro posting an above-average growth rate over 7% and you can thank massive federal government investment for that. Birmingham and Mobile are under 2% and Montgomery is actually posting a slight decline. Auburn and Tuscaloosa post above average growth rates but they are small metros to begin with and their universities and nearby huge auto plants have an outsized economic impact. Daphne-Fairhope has great beaches and I'd imagine it largely draws retirees.
I hate to say it but I think you're pretty naive if you think Mobile's location in Alabama doesn't affect it in any way. Unfortunately, a huge part of the state's reputation still hinges on what happened there several decades ago and that trickles down to the state's cities, even those that weren't really known for anything especially bad during the CRM.
And you'd also have to be naive to think that the state hasn't held Birmingham--the biggest, and predominantly Black and Democratic, city in the state--back. And really not just Birmingham, but the cities in the state in general; I recall when the Alabama legislature tried to mimic Arizona in passing that immigration law some years back and representatives from the big auto plants told them how that law would affect that sector. This is something that nearly all Southern states have to deal with in some form or the other. Even with all of the success Atlanta has had over the decades, some of that happened in spite of the state, not because of it. Are you familiar with Georgia's lieutenant governor's feud with Delta for discontinuing discounts for NRA members and how this could potentially affect Atlanta's chances for landing Amazon's second headquarters? And if a big, progressive city like Atlanta has to contend with a conservative, rural-dominated Georgia legislature often, you don't think a smaller, less progressive Birmingham doesn't have to fight with an even more conservative, rural-dominated Alabama legislature on a regular basis? But I wouldn't be surprised to see Birmingham and the state on better terms in the near future as Birmingham continues to see significant amounts of investment in its core which will draw lots of new (White) residents.
My friend if im naive then 90% of all Mobilians are naive then. It's basically rare to find a Mobilian that blames the state. Majority of us blame past leadership and the old money in the city.
And yes rural Alabama is antiprogressive on the legislative end. At the end of the day 80% of it falls on city leadership.We can agree to disagree though.
Why do you think Mobile?
Because it's on the Gulf Coast and can be a major resort town?
Doesn't have to be a resort town, that's what Gulf Shores is for. I just like Mobile, it's got a good location, nice setting cool underrated small skyline. I can see it growing and offering a lot more than it does, not just for beaches.
Gulf Coast cities like Houston, New Orleans, and Tampa have untapped/missed potential, albeit for various reasons. Same goes for areas of the South Atlantic, especially north of Florida.
Tampa and St. Petersburg are actually doing very well, and the Bay Area is booming. Downtown St. Pete is on fire, and Tampa has become the undisputed corporate anchor for the Bay.
Bill Gates and Jeff Vinik (owner of the NHL Tampa Bay Lightning) are behind the multi-$Billion Water Street development in Tampa, which will be totally transformative to a Downtown that has already turned the corner. USF's new Medical School is one of the anchors of this as well.
Status:
"Pickleball-Free American"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,462 posts, read 44,090,617 times
Reputation: 16856
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl
Tampa and St. Petersburg are actually doing very well, and the Bay Area is booming. Downtown St. Pete is on fire, and Tampa has become the undisputed corporate anchor for the Bay.
Bill Gates and Jeff Vinik (owner of the NHL Tampa Bay Lightning) are behind the multi-$Billion Water Street development in Tampa, which will be totally transformative to a Downtown that has already turned the corner. USF's new Medical School is one of the anchors of this as well.
The Airport is also undergoing a huge expansion & modernization.
They're doing a lot of things right, it should definitely be removed from your untapped/missed potential list.
The mention of Tampa raised an eyebrow here as well. With the exception of Jacksonville, all of the major Florida cities seem to be hitting their stride. Even Miami (a city you know I dislike, jm) seems to be in the process of reinventing itself.
Now, Florida's mid-tier cities are another matter. Here are a few that could use some help:
Pensacola
Gainesville
Ocala
Fort Myers
West Palm Beach
Fort Pierce
Melbourne
Titusville
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville's downtown continues to be a source of frustration for me; the potential there is boundless, but until First Baptist Jax relinquishes its stranglehold on its considerable real estate holdings there nothing material is going to happen.
The mention of Tampa raised an eyebrow here as well. With the exception of Jacksonville, all of the major Florida cities seem to be hitting their stride. Even Miami (a city you know I dislike, jm) seems to be in the process of reinventing itself.
Now, Florida's mid-tier cities are another matter. Here are a few that could use some help:
Pensacola
Gainesville
Ocala
Fort Myers
West Palm Beach
Fort Pierce
Melbourne
Titusville
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville's downtown continues to be a source of frustration for me; the potential there is boundless, but until First Baptist Jax relinquishes its stranglehold on its considerable real estate holdings there nothing material is going to happen.
Phoenix. It's a city that has seen phenomenal growth consistently since the end of World War II. This city was 17 square miles in 1950, compared to its current 519 square miles. Instead of the city being constructed in a more dense manner, typical of many other cities, pieces of land were sold to developers with little thought of overall urban cohesiveness. The city and its suburbs have developed like a tree ring, with the oldest neighborhoods being closest to the downtown areas and the newest areas way out on the fringe.
Until recently, the whole area seem to conform to a "newer is better" model, allowing older neighborhoods to fall in disrepair while the newer areas received all of the focus and attention. This is most evident when you take a look at the various former and current shopping malls in the area. Downtown Phoenix used to be the hub of shopping, which was replaced by a mall about two miles north of downtown in the mid 1950s (Park Central). Because many downtown department stores relocated to Park Central, Downtown Phoenix became a seedy ghost town by the mid 1960s. Then, in the 1960s, another mall (Christown) was built about five miles farther out than Park Central. Thus, the slow decline of Park Central began. By the 1973, yet another mall, Metrocenter, was constructed a few miles out from Christown, precipitating the decline of that mall. This pattern was allowed to continue for decades, due in part to developers being given free reign to build farther and farther out with no regard for maintaining the quality of existing neighborhoods.
Only within the past ten years or so has Phoenix started to invest seriously in revitalizing its downtown with more than sterile office building and the errant professional sports arena. Downtown has seen a tremendous boom in apartment construction, the repurposing of older buildings (some of which have been empty for more than 40 years), numerous new dining options, and the current construction of a full-service grocery store, which downtown has been lacking for about 50 years.
Also a runner up to St Louis I would say is Cleavland.
On the lakefront.
Was the 5th largest city in the country in 1920 with nearly 800,000 people.
Peaked in the 1950s with 900K+
Not sure what the standards are for missed opportunities but if Cleveland and St. Louis are mentioned, why aren’t the other rust belt cities like Chicago Detroit and Cincinnati?
Yeah how in the world is Tampa, or even Houston for the matter missed potential? As for me, I agree with a lot already said.
St Louis probably sticks out to me the most, especially considering its location. The city let the suburbs swipe all the power, wealth, and tax base from under their feet. White flight hit St Louis hard. I actually hear good things about St Louis, and one of my good friends from suburban Atlanta, who fits the typical sorority girl type, moved there [the city] and she just can't get enough it. That said, STL could definitely be much larger, vibrant, and successful, but leadership. Also East St Louis, geezzzz.
Leadership seems to have squandered Memphis as well. Like STL's suburbs, they've let Nashville pull the rug from under them. Outside of Beale St, what does Memphis have to offer (please don't say Graceland) and how are things being made better for residents?
I'm actually curious about Jax. People are saying it's missed, but they seem to be doing fine to me. Sure the core isn't as vibrant as it could be.
^^ JAX is a weird case. It avoided the Saint Louis problem by annexing a huge chunk of its suburbs. In doing so, however, it gave political control of the city to the suburbs. As a result, the "old" Jacksonville that is dense is but a small part of the new "Duval County" Jacksonville. As a result, the suburban parts of the "new" Jacksonville call the shots.
Unfortunately, the reason why Jacksonville expanded to take in nearly all of Duval was to prevent Blacks from getting control of political power. By annexing its white suburbs, it prevented that, but is now a city where urbanity isn't really something to strive for.
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.
