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.
Yes, most of those Sunbelt developments are so auto-centric it seems like the majority of the built environment is not human scaled, but sprawl scaled.
Not to defend sunbelt metros, but uncontrolled sprawl is by no means just a Sunbelt thing.
I’m staying in a Chicago suburb right now (Downers Grove) and it is just miles of auto centric sprawl in every direction, with a few cute small town centers here and there. Yeah the urban core of Chicago itself is not sprawly but that is what, a little over one hundred square miles? Chicagoland just goes on forever. Many other northern metros like this.
Not to defend sunbelt metros, but uncontrolled sprawl is by no means just a Sunbelt thing.
I’m staying in a Chicago suburb right now (Downers Grove) and it is just miles of auto centric sprawl in every direction, with a few cute small town centers here and there. Yeah the urban core of Chicago itself is not sprawly but that is what, a little over one hundred square miles? Chicagoland just goes on forever. Many other northern metros like this.
But that's condensed and interconnected sprawl, and it's much more proportionate to the population size of Chicagoland. And yes, certainly sprawl can be found in every large metro area.
When sprawl is particularly harmful is when it becomes super disproportionate to population size, and offers much less continuity between road networks, doesn't incorporate transportation corridors (i.e, bus and rail), and lacks sidewalk infrastructure. However, Chicagoland excels greatly at all of these attributes.
One of the most ignored factors and cases against the idea that growth will continue uninterrupted in currently fast-growing Sun Belt states is the sustainability of its infrastructure.
I just don't see how much less dense and sprawly metropolitan regions can sustain millions more people with the current trajectory of traffic and very little investment in alternative transportation modes. It's literally impossible: https://fortune.com/2023/03/14/sunbe...onomic-growth/
Moreover, politically, the GOP has an increasing lock in governing all Sun Belt states (even the most Democratic-leaning state of GA), so investments in alternative transportation modes, and the power of localities to do so, looks dim. Make no mistake, these regions are not growing in any fashion like Northern/Midwestern cities have in the past, with much greater built-in walkability and propensity to concentrate growth in already-developed areas.
Sun Belt states have yet to truly understand what real growing pains look like, which will take away any competitive advantage they once had.
Furthermore, a place like Philadelphia sees 67% driving to work (28 minute commute). Atlanta sees 72% (29 minute commute). Infrastructure will be an issue no matter where in the country, but hoping in infrastructure collapse to be what turns the trend around seems much.
But that's condensed and interconnected sprawl, and it's much more proportionate to the population size of Chicagoland. And yes, certainly sprawl can be found in every large metro area.
When sprawl is particularly harmful is when it becomes super disproportionate to population size, and offers much less continuity between road networks, doesn't incorporate transportation corridors (i.e, bus and rail), and lacks sidewalk infrastructure. However, Chicagoland excels greatly at all of these attributes.
Chicagoland is over 10,000 square miles! It certainly does not feel condensed at all. For reference, LA County has the same population of greater Chicago in half of the land area. And LA County has a massive national forest taking up parts of its area.
I’m just saying where I’m staying right now looks basically no different from most of Phoenix. The roads are wide, the parking lots are massive, there’s sidewalks but who is going to want to use them when cars are zipping past as 50 mph?
Not just picking on Chicago, I’m using them because that’s where I currently have first hand experience.
Comal county in metro SA was ranked as the second fastest growing county in the country recently, I think it should have a much larger population total by 2060. I doubt Austin will surpass SA but if it does it won't be by that much. If all counties are included in each metro the totals would be greater for both metros. Anyhow, That equates to almost 10 million people in an area smaller than DFW if only the 8 corridor counties are included in about 6,732 square miles.
What's your reasoning for not thinking Austin won't surpass San Antonio? Is it cost of living issues? Beyond that Austin is a more attractive part of the central Texas. Its the state capital. It has industries that pay more in general than what one can find in SA. It has the University of TX and last its still has quite a lot of undeveloped or underdeveloped land.
One of the most ignored factors and cases against the idea that growth will continue uninterrupted in currently fast-growing Sun Belt states is the sustainability of its infrastructure.
I just don't see how much less dense and sprawly metropolitan regions can sustain millions more people with the current trajectory of traffic and very little investment in alternative transportation modes. It's literally impossible: https://fortune.com/2023/03/14/sunbe...onomic-growth/
Moreover, politically, the GOP has an increasing lock in governing all Sun Belt states (even the most Democratic-leaning state of GA), so investments in alternative transportation modes, and the power of localities to do so, looks dim. Make no mistake, these regions are not growing in any fashion like Northern/Midwestern cities have in the past, with much greater built-in walkability and propensity to concentrate growth in already-developed areas.
"Make no mistake, these regions are not growing in any fashion like Northern/Midwestern cities have in the past" - Pre WWII, the east coast grew due to Euro immigration; Post WWII, the south & west grew because of Latin and Asian country immigration.
Sun Belt states have yet to truly understand what real growing pains look like, which will take away any competitive advantage they once had.
Really, Southerners are just hicks who can't get out of there way? You know when the Great Depression hit, that was when the south was very rural and lacking much industrialization. Can't blame that on economic fiasco on folks down south. BUT I digress as the topic was alternative modes of transit:
Rivian and Telsa both have or are opening EV plants in two southern states - GA and TX.
Tesla just broke ground this month in Corpus Christi on a new lithium battery plant.
Dallas is constructing its 5th light rail line and since 2003, the DFW has added/extended two rail lines and built a 3rd plus added a street car.
Austin is expanding its nascent light rail line.
SE Florida opened Brightline Rail a few year back between multiple counties.
there's a 3-county heavy rail line in metro Orlando.
Charlotte recently opened a light rail line.
Chicagoland is over 10,000 square miles! It certainly does not feel condensed at all. For reference, LA County has the same population of greater Chicago in half of the land area. And LA County has a massive national forest taking up parts of its area.
I’m just saying where I’m staying right now looks basically no different from most of Phoenix. The roads are wide, the parking lots are massive, there’s sidewalks but who is going to want to use them when cars are zipping past as 50 mph?
Not just picking on Chicago, I’m using them because that’s where I currently have first hand experience.
Chicagoland sprawl is nuts and it really is underrated on here how much Chicago sprawls. Chicago itself is pretty condensed and contained but those suburbs go on and on so far out. Chicagoland sprawls 40+ miles in pretty much every direction except east (the lake) and south/southeast.
Really, Southerners are just hicks who can't get out of there way? You know when the Great Depression hit, that was when the south was very rural and lacking much industrialization. Can't blame that on economic fiasco on folks down south. BUT I digress as the topic was alternative modes of transit:
Rivian and Telsa both have or are opening EV plants in two southern states - GA and TX.
Tesla just broke ground this month in Corpus Christi on a new lithium battery plant.
Dallas is constructing its 5th light rail line and since 2003, the DFW has added/extended two rail lines and built a 3rd plus added a street car.
Austin is expanding its nascent light rail line.
SE Florida opened Brightline Rail a few year back between multiple counties.
there's a 3-county heavy rail line in metro Orlando.
Charlotte recently opened a light rail line.
For the amount of population growth in these regions, the lack of serious investment in public transportation is nothing short of embarrassing. Without a huge about face in political winds, the South will remain far more vulnerable to things like climate change, interruptions to fossil fuel supply chains, and congestion. That's a fact.
Also, electric cars are not exactly considered "alternative transit."
California: 49,530,438 Seems about 4-5 million too high
Texas: 46,169,753 Also seems about 2-3 million too high
Florida: 32,997,995 About right
New York: 20,547,881 I would say the population would be closer to 25 million by then. If climate change forces climate migration at higher levels, Upstate NYs population could boom. I would add more to that then.
Georgia: 15,315,237 I would bet GA doesn't hit 15 million
North Carolina: 14,815,292 I would give NC another few hundred thousand to pass GA slightly since Raleigh, Charlotte and increasing Wilmington are gaining a ton of folk.
Pennsylvania: 13,839,390 Seems about right
Illinois: 13,166,236
Ohio: 12,466,063
Arizona: 11,591,438 This is a big overshoot. I would put it closer to 9.75-10 million people.
Virginia: 11,562,893
Washington: 10,756,780
Michigan: 10,191,803
New Jersey: 10,006,354 I would place NJ at about 11 million given how much housing construction + continued urban sprawl + TOD + NYC Overflow there is.
Tennessee: 8,963,454
Colorado: 8,413,917 Seems low given its potential
Indiana: 7,770,534
Massachusetts: 7,663,245 I would also put this population just over 8.5 million
Maryland: 7,327,710
South Carolina: 7,185,042 Exactly what I predict too
Missouri: 7,020,900
Minnesota: 6,887,919
Wisconsin: 6,554,954
Alabama: 5,866,460
Nevada: 5,678,448 Will Vegas continue to grow like it did from 2000-2010? Maybe closer to 4mil
Oregon: 5,552,724
Utah: 5,360,394
Kentucky: 5,199,529
Louisiana: 5,055,982
Oklahoma: 4,806,154
Connecticut: 3,849,143 Seems about right
Arkansas: 3,727,762
Iowa: 3,506,928
Kansas: 3,322,046
Mississippi: 3,282,218
Idaho: 2,857,957
New Mexico: 2,655,441 It could be a future hot spot of growth in time, so it could continue its plateau, stay the same, or really boom.
Nebraska: 2,281,857
West Virginia: 1,899,879 If WV bucks the trend of pop loss it could be well over this number, but realistically, I dont even see it this high.
Hawaii: 1,792,090
New Hampshire: 1,571,994 I bet even higher.. 1.7+ mil
Maine: 1,489,237
Montana: 1,394,117 Hmm this low? I would give it more 1.5-1.6 range
Delaware: 1,316,558
South Dakota: 1,110,455
Rhode Island: 1,110,176
North Dakota: 970,647
Alaska: 936,713
Wyoming: 727,220
Vermont: 680,904 Something needs to change big time in VT to see this growth. Once the boomers start dying off in 10-30 years, VT will be an extremely unattractive place to move to. Little/no jobs, extremely high COL and low pay. Yes its pretty and Burlington is great.. but 90% of the state is economically depressed. Non-Burlington VT is just Rural PA or NY at 75-100% more the cost.
Cool state rankings. I added a few comments
Last edited by masssachoicetts; 05-16-2023 at 02:45 PM..
For the amount of population growth in these regions, the lack of serious investment in public transportation is nothing short of embarrassing. Without a huge about face in political winds, the South will remain far more vulnerable to things like climate change, interruptions to fossil fuel supply chains, and congestion. That's a fact.
Also, electric cars are not exactly considered "alternative transit."
Remember the "Big Dig" in Boston, the most expensive highway project in the US. The project was originally scheduled to be completed in 1998 at an estimated cost of $2.8 billion (in 1982 dollars, US$7.4 billion adjusted for inflation as of 2020). However, the project was completed in December 2007 at a cost of over $8.08 billion (in 1982 dollars), $21.5 billion adjusted for inflation, meaning a cost overrun of about 190%) as of 2020.
Send similar size monies to southern metropolises and watch things improve.
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.
