HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Unapologetic Occidental
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Province 2, Canadian Empire
Posts: 68,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by ue View Post
Some more background about Montreal and Toronto (the only one I know a good amount about)...

Although Montreal was Canada's city for over a century, it should be noted that for most of the 20th century, Toronto wasn't that far behind. It was far more industrial and less cultural (although that still existed) and its wealthy class preferred not to erect grand monuments and instead act a bit more provincial. This is still something ingrained in Toronto's psyche, even in 2014, although changing. You see it anytime an Olympic bid is brought up or someone wants to build a new landmark for the city.

It has taken awhile for Montreal to shed its importance over Canadian affairs in culture, economy, and politics. In many ways still Montreal has allure and prestige over Toronto for Canadians as our most grand city and most cultured city. Toronto has caught up remarkably fast, though, and now dominates over much of Anglo Canada's affairs (as much as is possible in such a disconnected country). It is plenty cultured and vibrant these days, not being overtly provincial (though perhaps a tad insecure), though it takes time for people to change their perceptions, which is why Montreal is still spoken of with such romanticism. That being said, Quebec growing more insular has definitely pushed things along.
I would say that Quebec mostly turned away from the rest of Canada. It discovered the world, the U.S., Europe, the international Francophonie. It's grossly unfair and inaccurate but the rest of Canada is viewed as boring, and the sense is that Montreal and Quebec think they have bigger fish to fry than Western Canada, Ottawa or even Toronto.
__________________
The Last Word.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
re: ny and chicago. i always regarded chicago in its early history as new yorks "right hand," in a way, bringing prizes to her deepwater port. both cities were on the same trans-continental "team," contrasted with the weaker/looser st. louis/mid-atlantic/new orleans "team." chicago supercharged new york, as new york presented opportunities for chicagos growth (financing for stringing rail around st louis, etc) so it never seemed likely that chicago would overtake her.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 4:03 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Centropolis View Post
re: ny and chicago. i always regarded chicago in its early history as new yorks "right hand," in a way, bringing prizes to her deepwater port. both cities were on the same "team," contrasted with the weaker st. louis/mid-atlantic/new orleans "team." chicago supercharged new york, as new york presented opportunities for chicagos growth (stringing rail around st louis, etc) so it never seemed likely that chicago would overtake her
correct.

William Cronon's masterpiece "Nature's Metrpolis" lays out the 19th century economic relationship between NYC and chicago very well. chicago became the darling interior city of new york capital that, once invested in the city, returned the resource wealth of the interior of the continent back to NYC through the erie canal, immensely enriching both cities in one of the most successful economic feedback loops ever. and once chicago and new york tied the proverbial knot with each other through the bonds of holy railroad matrimony, it was game, set, and match.

but yes, NYC was always going to be the true HQ. chicago just grew so lights-out fast from 1830-1900 because it was virtually an uninhabited swamp before 1830 (yes there was a small federal fort and associated frontier settlement before then, but it was very small potatoes). it's always easier to amass impressive growth rates when you're starting from zero.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 17, 2014 at 4:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 4:09 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is online now
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
uhhh, i take it that is just a mistake and you forgot to type "America's '2nd most populous' city", right?
Oops, corrected
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 4:11 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
Graphs & Tables: http://www.peakbagger.com/pbgeog/histmetropop.aspx

The graph and tables on this page attempt to show how the urban hierarchy of the United States since it's inception. The statistic used here is the population of the metropolitan area (contiguous urbanized area surrounding a central city), not the population of an individual city.


__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 4:17 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
i always thought it was interesting how detroit appears to echo st louis as THE number 5 for a couple of generations on this graphic, probably holds some water economically and culturally.

likewise, LA echoed Chicago.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 5:35 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Centropolis View Post
i always thought it was interesting how detroit appears to echo st louis as THE number 5 for a couple of generations on this graphic, probably holds some water economically and culturally.

likewise, LA echoed Chicago.
Good observation. We're probably looking at Dallas's future, lol...

Baltimore and Boston also have similar trajectories in the number 4 spot, but not quite a match like STL and DET.

ETA: Swapped Dallas for Houston since it seems to be following the line more closely.

ETA 2: I wouldn't be surprised to wake up a century or two from now and see that Philly rebounded to number 2 or 3.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 5:50 PM
Wizened Variations's Avatar
Wizened Variations Wizened Variations is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
Graphs & Tables: http://www.peakbagger.com/pbgeog/histmetropop.aspx

The graph and tables on this page attempt to show how the urban hierarchy of the United States since it's inception. The statistic used here is the population of the metropolitan area (contiguous urbanized area surrounding a central city), not the population of an individual city.


I have a disagreement with the power hierarchy which I would not bring up, if it were not so critical: What about Washington DC?

I am not talking merely about the rise of the Federal Government stating in the 1950s, but, also of the huge amount of private enterprise that is associated directly or indirectly with it.

IMO, Washington DC would have risen to number 3 as a result of the New Deal by 1936. During WWII, Washington DC obviously was number 1. After WWII when millions of service people left the service, Washington DC fell in importance to perhaps right below Detroit. With the rise of the Federal Government following the Korean War, the importance of Washington DC steadily rose, until in 2014, it is either number 1 or number 2, after NYC.
__________________
Good read on relationship between increasing number of freeway lanes and traffic

http://www.vtpi.org/gentraf.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 5:54 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,782
^ ummmmmmmm, that graph only charts the relative positions of US cities as ranked by the population of their urban areas through time.

it's a very straightforward city size exercise. the bigger a "city" is at any given point in time relative to other "cities", the higher it is ranked on the graph.

that's it. it has nothing to do with "power", or any other subjective measurement.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Jan 17, 2014 at 6:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 6:32 PM
ue ue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
Surprised me as well. I thought people would focus only on the North American shift.




I guess Melbourne was ahead Sydney for only a brief moment back on the Australian Gold Rush in 1860. After that, Sydney kept a stable 20% lead, which is now being erode as Melbourne is growing faster.




English used to be Montreal's lingua franca when the city was the biggest one, right? I heard many wealthy English-speakers left in the 70's and 80's.
Melbourne became the largest city in Australia after the Gold rush in the 1860s (before it was Sydney) and remained in that spot until the '70s when Sydney again became Australia's largest city. Now Melbourne is looking to take back that top position. Seems like there's a lot more back-and-forth in Australia.

Montreal was originally a settlement of New France, but after the Seven Years War, in 1763, when the British formally took over New France, the city slowly began developing an Anglo minority population.

It grew over the centuries to the point where, by the early 20th century, although vastly outnumbered by Francophones, the Anglophones controlled almost all of Montreal's wealth. Business, culture, politics, all Anglo-dominated. French was unnecessary for newcomers to know and largely relegated to the poor, Francophone underclass.

Eventually, the Francos had enough and revolted, first with the Quiet Revolution in the '60s, which sought to make Quebec into a secular state (where it was previously very Roman Catholic, even politically). But there was also a sense of not wanting Quebecois culture to wither away like other French-speaking cultures have done in the Americas, namely Acadia and Louisiana. Starting in the mid-'60s, the Front de liberation du Quebec (FLQ) started bombing various places in Montreal, mostly mailboxes, and mostly in Westmount, an affluent Anglo district of Montreal.

Then in 1970, the FLQ provoked the October Crisis, wherein the federal government invoked the War Measures Act for the first and only time outside of wartimes. The act basically temporarily revokes certain democratic rights for the safety of the country. Armed forces were deployed to the streets of Montreal, Quebec City, and Ottawa while the FLQ kidnapped a British diplomat and killed Quebec's minister of labour.

Eventually, the members of FLQ were caught, and while that meant the FLQ ceased to exist, their sentiments lived on in Quebecois, allowing for the separatist movement of the '70s and increasing demands for more autonomy from Ottawa. Referendums were held on Quebec independence in 1980 and 1995, with the latter being just under 50% for 'oui.'

With this growing sense of nationalism and the reclamation of the French language within Quebec, many of the former Anglo aristocracy fled the city en masse for Toronto in the '70s and '80s. It was also coincidental that around this time Toronto overtook Montreal as Canada's largest city, adding fuel to fire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I would say that Quebec mostly turned away from the rest of Canada. It discovered the world, the U.S., Europe, the international Francophonie. It's grossly unfair and inaccurate but the rest of Canada is viewed as boring, and the sense is that Montreal and Quebec think they have bigger fish to fry than Western Canada, Ottawa or even Toronto.
Within Canada, Quebec has grown more insular. Like you say, it couldn't give a fuck about Toronto or Calgary or Vancouver or Halifax. It beats to its own drum these days. Both partitions of Canada, though, have increasingly become more internationally focused since the Parti Quebecois rose to prominence. Quebec is more focused on Europe, New England, and French Africa, while Anglo Canada is more focused on Asia, the Commonwealth, and the US as a whole.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 6:49 PM
ColDayMan's Avatar
ColDayMan ColDayMan is offline
B!tchslapping Since 1998
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Columbus
Posts: 19,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye Native 001 View Post
I'd be curious to see how Ohio's three major cities (Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati) stack up against each other historically. Cincinnati was big in the early to mid 19th century, followed by Cleveland well into the 1950s or 60s, but I'd figure Columbus is now the dominant city in the state, governmentally, economically and population-wise?
Cincinnati dominated Ohio in the 1700's and 1800's.
Cleveland dominated Ohio in the 1900's.
Columbus will start to dominate the state in the 2000's.

From the river, to the lake, to government. Funny how that works.
__________________
Click the x: _ _ X _ _!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 7:19 PM
MTLskyline's Avatar
MTLskyline MTLskyline is offline
The good old days are now
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,256
Quebec City was originally larger than Montreal (which was comparable in size to Trois-Rivières in the 17th century). Montreal became the largest in New France just before the British Conquest.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-008-.../10574-eng.htm
__________________
Montreal Skyline Photo Group
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 7:34 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,523
It's disturbing the rise of government elsewhere. To think of Washington was only the 17th largest metro area in the US in the 1930 to become that huge. It's not a healthy process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 8:09 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
i know much less about milwaukees relationship with chicago. obviously, chicago effectively cut milwaukee off at the pass, so to speak, railroad wise. however, prior to this, were the two cities competitors? it seems so strange that a city would rise to be as large as milwaukee within the inner sanctum, so to speak, of such a subservient hinterland. the only conclusion i can draw is that milwaukee came to (partially) specialize in servicing chicago with things it needed but didnt create or have enough of on its own like natural resources, ships and other specific manufactured items that milwaukee specialized in, and well, beer. in other words, it was drawn into the chicago economic feedback loop, instead of competing.

perhaps not the most popular "theory" amongst wisconsinites...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 8:28 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,782
^ chicago and milwaukee never switched relative positions, chicago has always been the larger of the two ever since the days of frontier settlement, but they were far closer in size in the pre-railroad era of the early 19th century and could have been rightfully called competitors to each other.

milwaukee is blessed with a much better natural harbor than chicago, so in the days of the lake trade, that was a distinctive advantage for milwaukee over its rival to the south and spurred a good deal of its early growth. once the railroads propelled chicago into the de facto capital of the region, milwaukee was left in its tracks, but an industrial base had been established in milwaukee by then, and that continued to grow, particularly from all the iron ore that came down the lake from minnesota and the UP. milwaukee played with all the same things chicago did, wheat stacking, lumber processing, hog slaughtering, steel making, etc. just at a smaller scale.

milwaukee growth has always been stymied to a degree by chicago's presence at the southern tip of the lake, but being 90 miles away and on the other side of a state border helped milwaukee cut out a bit more of a world for itself than had it been located in the same state as chicago.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 8:32 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,523
In Tennessee:

Memphis

Memphis Skyline by joseph a, on Flickr

vs

Nashville

Hill_20121018_MG_5032_web_watermark by Brian.A.Hill, on Flickr


Memphis
1900 ------ 153,557
1910 ------ 191,439
1920 ------ 223,216
1930 ------ 306,482
1940 ------ 358,250
1950 ------ 482,393
1960 ------ 627,019
1970 ------ 770,120
1980 ------ 913,472
1990 ------ 981,747
2000 ---- 1,135,614
2010 ---- 1,316,100
2012 ---- 1,369,548

Nashville
1900 ------ 122,815
1910 ------ 149,478
1920 ------ 167,815
1930 ------ 222,854
1940 ------ 257,267
1950 ------ 321,758
1960 ------ 399,743
1970 ------ 541,108
1980 ------ 850,505
1990 ------ 985,026
2000 ---- 1,231,311
2010 ---- 1,670,890
2012 ---- 1,845,235

Metro area definitions changed several times along the years by the US Census Bureau. Before 1950, Memphis = Shelby County; Nashville = Davidson County


I'm not sure if this one is just a fun-fact (like Cleveland vs Cincinnati) or the real deal (Rio vs São Paulo, Montreal vs Toronto). Maybe people from the area could give us an insight.

I know, however, Nashville's hinterland is way more populated (and wealthier) than Memphis, which is very insular, surrounded by low-density counties. In the long run, that might have hurt the city by the Mississippi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 8:46 PM
Centropolis's Avatar
Centropolis Centropolis is offline
disneypilled verhoevenist
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: saint louis
Posts: 11,866
I feel kind of silly for not realizing that metropolitan Nashville was that much larger than Memphis. They "feel" about the same, with the exception that it feels like Nashville has a massive ring of exurban development when you drive through the area, anecdotally judging by how far out interstates have 3 lanes or more, etc. Whereas suburbs of Memphis feel more "stacked" stretching east of downtown.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 9:09 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,523
Well, up to 2000, they were still neck and neck. Is Memphis showing some kind of recovery or Nashville will be even more distant?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 9:14 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is online now
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Roncesvalles, Toronto
Posts: 11,058
Growth of around 20,000 a year for a place of Memphis' size is still pretty healthy I would say. It's Nashville that has had crazy growth - that's a huge number of people to add in 12 years, and especially the growth over the last 2. I had no idea it was booming to that extent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 17, 2014, 9:28 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,523
Note figures are not comparable from one year to another as I used current metro area definitions and they pretty much changed in every Census from 1960.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:15 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.