America’s 7 mega regions.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by pj3000

And west of Cleveland, it gets really sparse.

the biggest gap in the lower lakes actually appears to be between buffalo and cleveland.


source: https://www.greatlakesnow.org/2017/0...ht-from-space/

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by McBane

Not to pile on but this is ridiculous. As someone who lives in Philly and frequently travels to NY, CT, NJ, DE, MD, and VA, there are not "plenty of large swaths" of undeveloped land. Certainly, there's rural-ish exurbs at each metro's edge but by no means are we even remotely close to "large swaths of undeveloped land and small towns", like say you'd find in Wyoming. It sounds like your perspective is way off.

Yeah, this has gone into Friday bullshit fuckery territory.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

the bggest gap in the lower lakes actually appears to be between buffalo and cleveland.

You'll find much more density and activity along the lakeshore in that Buff-Cle stretch along the I-90 corridor than you would between, say Toledo and Elkhart/South Bend area and between Lorain and Toledo area. But yeah, no doubt south of I-90 in SW NY and NW PA is sparse... the terrain gets much hillier and low pop. density.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Rochester and Chicago are not situated contiguously.

First, there is a bigger development gap between Rochester and Buffalo than there exists anywhere between Boston DC.

Second, the Lake Erie shoreline is developed between Buffalo to Erie to Cleveland, but is narrow and sparse in SW NY and then once you get to the western side of Cleveland area, it really drops off in western Oh thru IN until one gets into the Chicago orbit. There is nowhere near the same level of density/activity along that linear stretch as one finds along the east coast corridor.

What is the appropriate level of density to be considered a contiguous region?

[McBane]

This might be as "rural" and "undeveloped" as it gets along the Rt. 1 - I-95 corridor between NY and Philly. From here, you're 15 minutes from Whole Foods, which is telling. There really is no gap between Philly and NY. Like that Will Ferrell SNL skit, this is something. This is nothing.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

What is the appropriate level of density to be considered a contiguous region?

You tell me.

Drive I-90 the roughly 350 miles between Cleveland and Chicago.

And compare with the roughly 450 mile drive on I-95 between DC and Boston.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

You tell me.

Drive I-90 the roughly 350 miles between Cleveland and Chicago.

And compare with the roughly 450 mile drive on I-95 between DC and Boston.

Well you're the one telling me I'm wrong. I've driven I-80/76 across Ohio probably almost 100 times. I know exactly what it looks like.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Well you're the one telling me I'm wrong. I've driven I-80/76 across Ohio probably almost 100 times. I know exactly what it looks like.

Well, have you driven on I-95 from DC to Boston once?

[Obadno]

I feel like this needs to be said again

The Mega-Region designations are presumptive. They are meant to show emerging mega-regions not mega-regions as they might exist today.

[pj3000]

We know that this is a map of “emerging” megaregions.

And in no realistic future is State College, PA going to become somehow connected regionally to Green Bay, WI.

No development is going to emerge that connects western NY to eastern Iowa.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Well, have you driven on I-95 from DC to Boston once?

Nope. But I don't see why it matters. Nobody has said not one single time in this thread that ChiPitts is exactly like BosWash. You're apparently saying that if it doesn't look like BosWash then it doesn't count.

[pj3000]

I never said that.

The point is that this map does not exist and will never exist in reality. To call the vast, totally disparate, and totally disconnected swath of the non-coastal Northeast, upper Midwest, southern Ohio valley, and Great Plains, etc. a “Great Lakes” megaregion is absurd if only considering it from a geographic standpoint.

We currently have a cohesive and contiguous megaregion to compare this fantasy to, which you chose to do. The Bos-Wash megalopolis is integrated and contiguous and fully connected. This Great Lakes fantasy is none of that and could never in the foreseeable future have anything that resembles a region that displays any cohesiveness to an extent that we could say it functions as a single-named section of the nation.

It’s lazy, plain and simple, to make a map like that.

[chris08876]

South Florida is growing. Could be a mega region in due time.

[pj3000]

^ Maybe Florida as a whole could be. Or potentially a Florida/Coastal South megaregion

[jd3189]

It could potentially be Florida cities linking to the Gulf Coast cities all the way to Texas ( Houston/ Galveston). But all of that will be underwater if climate change isn’t reversed.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

I never said that.

The point is that this map does not exist and will never exist in reality. To call the vast, totally disparate, and totally disconnected swath of the non-coastal Northeast, upper Midwest, southern Ohio valley, and Great Plains, etc. a “Great Lakes” megaregion is absurd if only considering it from a geographic standpoint.

We currently have a cohesive and contiguous megaregion to compare this fantasy to, which you chose to do. The Bos-Wash megalopolis is integrated and contiguous and fully connected. This Great Lakes fantasy is none of that and could never in the foreseeable future have anything that resembles a region that displays any cohesiveness to an extent that we could say it functions as a single-named section of the nation.

It’s lazy, plain and simple, to make a map like that.

Nobody in Brooklyn thinks it is the city they live in is any more connected to Boston than a person in Chicago thinks their city is connected to Detroit. Is the Northeast Corridor more densely populated? Yes. Is it more connected? Other than New York and Philly, not really.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by ThePhun1

First time I'm seeing Oklahoma City included in the Texas Triangle.

I've seen it included, along with Tulsa, as the northern region of the Texas Triangle because of close economic ties to the rest of Texas.

[pj3000]

just look at basic geography, and consider the Northeast corridor/East Coast of the US and then look at some central Midwest/upper Midwest/interior Northeast/Great Plains/Ontario, etc. fantasy agglomeration. And to suggest that the Northeast corridor is not exponentially more connected than the other is beyond silliness. And considering that I’m in eastern time zone, I’m going to go get a drink seeing as we’re well into Friday happy hour here... and I’m not waiting for my ultra-connected with Great Lakes megaregion brethren because they still got a half hour til whisky o’clock

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by pj3000

You'll find much more density and activity along the lakeshore in that Buff-Cle stretch along the I-90 corridor than you would between, say Toledo and Elkhart/South Bend area and between Lorain and Toledo area. But yeah, no doubt south of I-90 in SW NY and NW PA is sparse... the terrain gets much hillier and low pop. density.

well, i've driven I-90 between cleveland and buffalo a handful of times and.........

fuckload of farms, just like everywhere else in the midwest between cities.

it's certainly not that treeless "infinite cornfield" effect of I-55 in central illinois, but i'd hardly call it an active and dense corridor.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by pj3000

We know that this is a map of “emerging” megaregions.

Based on the conversation you could of fooled me.