HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 5:53 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,563
T
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
ding ding ding ding ding!

always measure your dick with whatever ruler makes your junk sound largest.

"nah, baby, it ain't 6 inches, it's 152 millimeters!"




tangentially, did you know that the great lakes/midwest is home to a MEGAREGION of over 60M people!?! OMG, it's HUGE!!!!!!!!!


source: wikipedia


or, you know, it's just the midwest. a smattering of major cities dispersed among 1,000,000 sq. miles of corn fields with some gigantic lakes in the middle.
The problem with these megaregions is that they are not all that interdependent. What does Rochester have to do with Milwaukee (both in Great Lakes conurbation), or Boston with Richmond or Hampton Roads (Norfolk area) in the Northeast conurbation? Richmond and Hampton Roads have more affinity with the southern Piedmont cities like Charlotte.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 12:10 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
I see and agree. Dallas will probably supplant Chicago as the #3 metro in the US. I see Dallas CSA growing by about 13-15% this decade. New York CSA, Los Angeles CSA, and Chicago CSA will all shrink.
I don't know about Los Angeles. I don't know where I can check data about it, but I guess Los Angeles has a very healthy natural growth as result of past of immigration turning its population young. It would require lots of emigration and very few international immigration to place them on negative terrain.

About Chicago, it seems they problem is the "Black flight" and not great numbers of international migration. I guess if the US has a better decade, Chicago might become slight positive again. You see, even places like Detroit and Cleveland haven't had continuous decline since 1970. Some decades up, some decades down.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 12:32 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,026
A bit off-topic, but as we were discussing Dallas, I've spent time GSVing it. No offence intended, but their suburbs are incredibly unimaginative and bland. I don't understand how people bare to live in such settings. Atlanta, for instance, at least has its charming tree canopy everywhere, some charming roads.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 1:14 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is offline
Wears a grey cowboy hat
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canada (see below*)
Posts: 48,436
I apologize if I missed anyone mentioning it, but I am surprised there has been virtually no talk of LA passing NYC in the U.S.

Isn't LA growing faster than NYC?
__________________
*An assembly of shareholders that likes to pretend it is a close-knit family, in order to maintain access to grandpa's inheritance.

Still a really nice group of people to spend Christmas dinner with, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 1:52 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
I apologize if I missed anyone mentioning it, but I am surprised there has been virtually no talk of LA passing NYC in the U.S.

Isn't LA growing faster than NYC?
In the past that's was a common point, but now Los Angeles barely grows, so it probably won't happen in our lifetime.

I posted that in another thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
^^
The Big 3 has slowed down considerably. It's even more pronounced than the US as a whole:

NEW YORK CSA

2000 --- 21,501,800 --- 8.5%
2010 --- 22,255,628 --- 3.5%
2019 --- 22,589,036 --- 1.5%


LOS ANGELES CSA

2000 --- 16,373,645 -- 12.7%
2010 --- 17,877,006 --- 9.2%
2019 --- 18,711,436 --- 4.7%


CHICAGO MSA

2000 ---- 9,098,970 -- 11.2%
2010 ---- 9,461,537 --- 4.0%
2019 ---- 9,458,539 -- -0.0%


And the United States for comparison:

2000 -- 281,421,906 -- 13.2%
2010 -- 308,745,538 --- 9.7%
2020 -- 330,047,526 --- 6.9%
Between 1980 and 1990, for instance, Los Angeles grew impressive 26%, while New York had had a very hard time between 1970-1990, going full Rust Belt during this period.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 6:43 PM
BG918's Avatar
BG918 BG918 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
A bit off-topic, but as we were discussing Dallas, I've spent time GSVing it. No offence intended, but their suburbs are incredibly unimaginative and bland. I don't understand how people bare to live in such settings. Atlanta, for instance, at least has its charming tree canopy everywhere, some charming roads.
It's the southern Plains. Denver is arguably worse as far as bland suburbs go but at least you can sometimes see the mountains in the distance.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 7:09 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 10,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliNative View Post

The problem with these megaregions is that they are not all that interdependent. What does Rochester have to do with Milwaukee (both in Great Lakes conurbation), or Boston with Richmond or Hampton Roads (Norfolk area) in the Northeast conurbation? Richmond and Hampton Roads have more affinity with the southern Piedmont cities like Charlotte.
And they ignored the Quebec City - Windsor corridor completely. They chose to carve it in half and lump Southern Ontario in with the US Great Lakes region instead. From a Canadian POV, that makes no sense whatsoever. Perhaps one could lump Buffalo/Rochester in with that Canadian corridor but even that is a stretch.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 7:20 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 10,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
I don't know about Los Angeles. I don't know where I can check data about it, but I guess Los Angeles has a very healthy natural growth as result of past of immigration turning its population young. It would require lots of emigration and very few international immigration to place them on negative terrain.

About Chicago, it seems they problem is the "Black flight" and not great numbers of international migration. I guess if the US has a better decade, Chicago might become slight positive again. You see, even places like Detroit and Cleveland haven't had continuous decline since 1970. Some decades up, some decades down.
The 2019 population data according to the US Census Bureau suggest that Los Angeles is shrinking while Riverside grew by roughly the same amount. The overall effect (net change) for the region (+3,009) is close to zero. For a region that big it's essentially 'no growth'. Going forward the overall net change will likely go negative. Migration to the LA CSA isn't going to go up much while natural increase (births - deaths) is trending down. I agree that places like Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland are treading water but that can't continue because natural increase isn't constant.... it will head to zero as the Boomer generation starts dying off. Couple that with out-migration from these cities and they'll see population decline this decade.


Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim MSA: 13,214,799 (-35,080)
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario MSA: 4,650,631 (+38,089)
Los Angeles-Long Beach CSA; 18,711,436 (+873)


https://www.census.gov/data/tables/t...al-areas.html#
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams

Last edited by isaidso; Sep 30, 2020 at 7:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 7:55 PM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is offline
He/his/him. >~<, QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Loop, Chicago
Posts: 2,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
A bit off-topic, but as we were discussing Dallas, I've spent time GSVing it. No offence intended, but their suburbs are incredibly unimaginative and bland. I don't understand how people bare to live in such settings. Atlanta, for instance, at least has its charming tree canopy everywhere, some charming roads.
It's not just the suburbs . People sure aren't moving to DFW for the urban experience.
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead. Trump delenda est.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 8:55 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 277
This is an interesting website with city growth trends but I am not sure how accurate it is - for example, it shows the Houston metro is bigger than Dallas.

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/l...-by-population

It would be interesting what would happen to LA if the Camp Pendleton Base ever closed - "Greater Los Angeles" does not include San Diego County; that county's urbanized area is separated from San Clemente, the southernmost contiguous urbanized area south of Los Angeles, by a 16.4-mile (26.4 km) stretch of the Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton.

Last edited by DCReid; Sep 30, 2020 at 10:34 PM. Reason: Did not complete
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2020, 10:18 PM
Stay Stoked Brah Stay Stoked Brah is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
I see and agree. Dallas will probably supplant Chicago as the #3 metro in the US. I see Dallas CSA growing by about 13-15% this decade. New York CSA, Los Angeles CSA, and Chicago CSA will all shrink.
There is no way that New York and LA csa will shrink. LA will continue to outpace NY and both la and ny will be outpaced by Dallas, but none of those will shrink. Since the year 2000, the US has added 51 million people to the population, that is 1 and 1/3 the entire population of 2020 Canada.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 12:44 AM
jd3189's Avatar
jd3189 jd3189 is online now
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 4,682
LA could only one day supercede NYC if most of it was dramatically upzoned. Instead of mostly SFH districts, add more small apartments and continue the revitalization of Downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods. NYC is doing the same thing though in its own way.
__________________
“We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools.”

Martin Luther King Jr.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 1:05 AM
DetroitSky's Avatar
DetroitSky DetroitSky is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnyc View Post
all wrong!

speilberg said columbus will be biggest city top dawg by 2045.
Didn't they say that Columbus was the fastest growing city in the US, not the largest?
__________________
My Emporis photos.
My Instagram.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 9:07 AM
CaliNative CaliNative is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitSky View Post
Didn't they say that Columbus was the fastest growing city in the US, not the largest?
Is the growth due partly to annexation of outlying areas? Columbus does have the capitol advantage + the big state U. advantage that Cleveland & Cincy don't have. Franklinton has grown up. Not all state capitols grow much. Jeff. City, Frankfort, etc. are still pretty dinky. Harrisburg is pretty small. It helps to have the big Univ. also. Madison has grown to a respectably sized small city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 11:40 AM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by BG918 View Post
It's the southern Plains. Denver is arguably worse as far as bland suburbs go but at least you can sometimes see the mountains in the distance.
Those suburbs seem affluent, why don't they hire good architects to have a better design for their homes? It's a shame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
It's not just the suburbs . People sure aren't moving to DFW for the urban experience.
While I was checking it, however, I found out a rather interesting section just east of Dallas CDB loop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
The 2019 population data according to the US Census Bureau suggest that Los Angeles is shrinking while Riverside grew by roughly the same amount. The overall effect (net change) for the region (+3,009) is close to zero. For a region that big it's essentially 'no growth'. Going forward the overall net change will likely go negative. Migration to the LA CSA isn't going to go up much while natural increase (births - deaths) is trending down. I agree that places like Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland are treading water but that can't continue because natural increase isn't constant.... it will head to zero as the Boomer generation starts dying off. Couple that with out-migration from these cities and they'll see population decline this decade.


Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim MSA: 13,214,799 (-35,080)
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario MSA: 4,650,631 (+38,089)
Los Angeles-Long Beach CSA; 18,711,436 (+873)


https://www.census.gov/data/tables/t...al-areas.html#
Those blips are common on the US yearly estimates. However, I still don't see Los Angeles going negative for a long period (2020-2030).
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 2:05 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 21,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
Those suburbs seem affluent, why don't they hire good architects to have a better design for their homes? It's a shame.
Why do you assume that affluent suburbanites want different home designs? Many (most?) seem to like tacky, outdated architectural trends. Wealth has nothing to do with taste.

Check out this home in an affluent area of suburban Detroit. Horrible, but this style is quite common with higher-end U.S. homes:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4...3712572_zpid/?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 2:25 PM
yuriandrade's Avatar
yuriandrade yuriandrade is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Why do you assume that affluent suburbanites want different home designs? Many (most?) seem to like tacky, outdated architectural trends. Wealth has nothing to do with taste.

Check out this home in an affluent area of suburban Detroit. Horrible, but this style is quite common with higher-end U.S. homes:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4...3712572_zpid/?
But why is that? There are plenty of tackless wealthier people in Brazil, but on the other hand it seems there are a higher share of good designs.

Why American architects don't manage to influence their clients in greater numbers, making them buying better products? They have the money, they have the big suburban plots, so much potential.
__________________
Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 2:29 PM
badrunner badrunner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,008
They're not necessarily bad designs. Middle America just has very conservative tastes when it comes to housing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 2:31 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 21,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuriandrade View Post
But why is that? There are plenty of tackless wealthier people in Brazil, but on the other hand it seems there are a higher share of good designs.

Don't American architects manage to influence their clients in greater numbers, making them buying better products?
Well, style is subjective. I agree this is horrible, but lots of people like it.

There's probably also a cultural difference. My wife is from a moderately affluent Mexican family, and everyone in the Mexican upper class prefers modernist homes and interiors. I think wealthy Latin Americans generally like modern-style homes, and wealthy Americans generally like fake Italian villa-style homes.

Of course, there are exceptions. The Hamptons and West LA are heavily modernist. Wealthy urban neighborhoods usually have attractively designed homes. Some of the more affluent metros like NY, LA, SF have better design, and Miami is heavily modernist (probably due to Latin influence).

And old money WASP types generally hate the tacky look. Places like Coastal Connecticut, Westchester County, NY and North Shore of Chicago have little tacky design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 2:44 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 3,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Well, style is subjective. I agree this is horrible, but lots of people like it.

There's probably also a cultural difference. My wife is from a moderately affluent Mexican family, and everyone in the Mexican upper class prefers modernist homes and interiors. I think wealthy Latin Americans generally like modern-style homes, and wealthy Americans generally like fake Italian villa-style homes.

Of course, there are exceptions. The Hamptons and West LA are heavily modernist. Wealthy urban neighborhoods usually have attractively designed homes. Some of the more affluent metros like NY, LA, SF have better design, and Miami is heavily modernist (probably due to Latin influence).

And old money WASP types generally hate the tacky look. Places like Coastal Connecticut, Westchester County, NY and North Shore of Chicago have little tacky design.
New money vs old money.
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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:14 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.