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.
Raleigh has the better skyline and bigger population when compared to Durham. But Durham is notorious for being the big city of the triangle. Now at least.
Raleigh has the better skyline and bigger population when compared to Durham. But Durham is notorious for being the big city of the triangle. Now at least.
"Notorious for being the big city of the Triangle"?
Seriously? I completely disagree. I don't see any possible way to to look at Durham as the "big city" when compared to Raleigh.
5 decades ago, the two cities were fairly equal in size with Durham being a Tobacco city with a university while Raleigh was a state capital with a university. Since then, the two cities have taken very different courses while flanking either side of the area's economic engine (Research Triangle Park). Raleigh exploded with growth while Durham's tobacco industry died a slow death and lagged in new growth.
The result are two cities that have as many differences as they have similarities. Now, both have latched onto the growth machine but Raleigh continues to grow at more rapid pace.
I'd really like to know how you come to the conclusion that Durham is notorious for being the big city of the Triangle.
From Wikipedia:
Raleigh: 392,552 (2008) 93,931 in 1960
Wake County: 866,410 (2008)
Raleigh/Cary MSA: 1,088,765 (2008)
cool, but have you been to Durham lately. True, raleigh's growth has been mostly vertical and the population is steady booming, but as far as urban identity, it is stagnant when compared to what is happening in durham. For pete-sakes, durham is known as the "brooklyn of the south." That is as city as a city can get. When I think urban, the last thing that comes to mind is pristine, clean, sometimes bland raleigh. It just does not have the urban edge that gives cities a FEEL as though something is "Poppin." Again I am aware of the skyline. It is beautiful. But when I think of a large city, I think of an urban core with an urban FEEL which is actually what Raleigh lacks and Durham has.
In addition, the aesthetic quality of a large city is lacking in Raleigh while Durham's quality is far more cutting-edge. What the city is doing with the warehouses is straight Brooklyn almost to the point of overkill. When I think of a city, population and skyline is never considered. I think triangle cats need to accept the fact that that once hated city of the triangle that had an economic slowdown at one point finally has gotten its act together. Just look at the recent U.S. News & World Report accolade: One of the top 10. That was without Raleigh. Durham is coming up .Again... the post is "Where is the largest city not actually the 'largest city'?" Notice the quotes.
Last edited by keep_durham_funky; 07-20-2009 at 02:53 PM..
I do have to agree with both of you Raleigh does have the larger population, is growing faster, and etc but Durham seems more urban in the way it feels! Raleigh seems ultra suburban, while Durham feels suburban but not all over! Durham does have a chance of becoming a much more known area though because most people don't even know that most of the Triangle Research Park is acutaly in Durham, people always say it's in Raleigh!
In my opinion Nashville, TN is bigger than Memphis!
People pretty much tend to think of Dallas as the anchor of D/FW. However, the rate of population growth is greater in Ft Worth. As a result, at some point (maybe quite a few years out), Cowtown will overtake Big D. Dallas is more hemmed in which limits its growth chances. If this trend continues, Ft Worth can be added to the list...
...I guess the obvious replies would be in California (SF vs. San Jose) , or in Ohio ( Columbus vs. Cleveland vs. Cincinnati). There could be some confusion in Texas, too, although it depends upon which city is the "big" city in that state (I'm guessing Houston, but it could be Dallas-Ft. Worth), etc.
...I guess the obvious replies would be in California (SF vs. San Jose) , or in Ohio ( Columbus vs. Cleveland vs. Cincinnati). There could be some confusion in Texas, too, although it depends upon which city is the "big" city in that state (I'm guessing Houston, but it could be Dallas-Ft. Worth), etc.
I guess the thing with Houston and Dallas is that neither one seems or feel significantly bigger than the other. Dallas has a larger metropolitan area, but Houston feels more cosmopolitan and international (imo). Houston also is more compact than Dallas, where as Dallas is more spread out (speaking of density, not land size).
San Antonio does get the most tourists to our state and I think that's because of the Alamo. When people visit Houston and Dallas I don't think they care much about the cultural sites. In Houston people go to Nasa/Space Center and in Dallas people go to the airport and pretty much stay there until their flight leaves?? I wouldn't call either one of those cultural. San Antonio definitely has us beat.
cool, but have you been to Durham lately. True, raleigh's growth has been mostly vertical and the population is steady booming, but as far as urban identity, it is stagnant when compared to what is happening in durham. For pete-sakes, durham is known as the "brooklyn of the south." That is as city as a city can get. When I think urban, the last thing that comes to mind is pristine, clean, sometimes bland raleigh. It just does not have the urban edge that gives cities a FEEL as though something is "Poppin." Again I am aware of the skyline. It is beautiful. But when I think of a large city, I think of an urban core with an urban FEEL which is actually what Raleigh lacks and Durham has.
In addition, the aesthetic quality of a large city is lacking in Raleigh while Durham's quality is far more cutting-edge. What the city is doing with the warehouses is straight Brooklyn almost to the point of overkill. When I think of a city, population and skyline is never considered. I think triangle cats need to accept the fact that that once hated city of the triangle that had an economic slowdown at one point finally has gotten its act together. Just look at the recent U.S. News & World Report accolade: One of the top 10. That was without Raleigh. Durham is coming up .Again... the post is "Where is the largest city not actually the 'largest city'?" Notice the quotes.
I was there a couple of weekends ago on Sunday the 5th showing a friend around from out of town. I was on 9th street and it was deadsville. Most of the businesses were closed and nobody was around.
I also went to the Duke gardens. They were lovely but pretty empty as well.
So....Yes, I have been to Durham lately. Perhaps everyone was at the shiny suburban mall? :-)
I enjoy Durham. But, be serious. It's not the big city of the Triangle.
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.
For me..
