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.
It's because these states already have biggest MSA/CSA are already on the Piedmont regions.
Now they do but originally the coast/coastal plain regions of the Carolinas and Georgia had the population advantage. That gets to the gist of the OP's inquiry when compared to the mid-Atlantic/Northeast.
Quote:
In the video the guy is calling this area "empty East coast" but it's not, he even mention the area he's talking about is over 10 million. For example it's more populated then any area of the Midwest outside the great Lakes region. It's more populated then any area of the South not the Texas Triangle, piedmont and Florida. That's a very populated area. So he called it "relative empty" comparing to areas like Atlanta and Charlotte but that's flaw thinking.
He's definitely being hyperbolic but as one who has made countless trips up and down I-95 between SC and DC, I can see his point. I think SC dropped the ball by not having it routed closer to the coast (Charleston at the very least) but that's another story.
Quote:
I think SC especially is being exploited here because it doesn't have a Metro over a million. but what people miss is that SC has 3 metros over 800,000.
He's definitely being hyperbolic but as one who has made countless trips up and down I-95 between SC and DC, I can see his point. I think SC dropped the ball by not having it routed closer to the coast (Charleston at the very least) but that's another story.
I don’t understand what benefit comes from 95 being closer to the ocean. The highway has not been a hotbed of activity in any of the three states, from Rocky Mount to Savannah regardless of closeness to the ocean.
Good question. I also saw that video that TarHeel mentions on youtube recently.
The video makes a good point that the coastal ports of these states; Charleston, Savannah, Wilmington, Georgetown, etc. do not have the deep water harbors that the port cities have in the Northeast, which limited their growth.
Another reasons is that some of the low lying coastal areas are swampy or wetlands and vulnerable to storms.
Yet Florida doesn't have deep water Harbors either yet Miami managed to create and build one to the point it is a Panamex Port now.
I don’t understand what benefit comes from 95 being closer to the ocean. The highway has not been a hotbed of activity in any of the three states, from Rocky Mount to Savannah regardless of closeness to the ocean.
You don't think Charleston would benefit from having two primary interstates running through the region as opposed go just one? Or that Myrtle wouldn't benefit from having an interstate at all?
I don’t understand what benefit comes from 95 being closer to the ocean. The highway has not been a hotbed of activity in any of the three states, from Rocky Mount to Savannah regardless of closeness to the ocean.
I think there’s an argument to be made that proximity to 95 has absolutely added value to Savannah’s port over time. And no doubt, for a city like Charleston, added to its existing coastal advantages, similar proximity to 95 would at least amplify economic and logistical benefits to the city. That direct access to other regions means at least something when time is money.
It would be an interesting thought experiment to imagine a more easterly 95 intersecting Charleston, Myrtle Beach, Wilmington and Norfolk/VA Beach (who constantly complain of being in a cul-de-sac) before proceeding north and how that might have altered/influenced the last 60 odd years of development in those places.
It's kind of weird how the Carolinas and Georgia almost neglect their Ports now but were very productive during the Slave trade.
Charleston recently completed a billion dollar new terminal and dredged to become the deepest port on the east coast. VA wants that title so is dredging theirs a little deeper.
You don't think Charleston would benefit from having two primary interstates running through the region as opposed go just one? Or that Myrtle wouldn't benefit from having an interstate at all?
There may have been marginal benefits (South of the Border on steroids leading into North Myrtle Beach). But the highway was completed in the 70s, and much of the economic building blocks were already baked into the equation for these states. Charlotte, the Triangle, Atlanta, all were already on their way.
It probably would have helped Hampton Roads a bit however. I'm unsure on Charleston. Probably helped moreso than Savannah, but I think it would still have been slow to transition out of where it was.
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.
