Jump to content

Florida or North Carolina?


Fruit Cove

Which state do you prefer more than the other?  

181 members have voted

  1. 1. Which state do you prefer more than the other?

    • Florida
      87
    • North Carolina
      94


Recommended Posts

:P

What's amazing to me is that you guys are going to prove one issue or the other until you can't prove it any more. People will make their choice of Florida or North Carolina for very different reasons. I think, in the long run, you are not going to convince someone who is hell bent on calling Florida home to move to North Carolina.....and vice versa.

Both states are very distinct in what they offer. They are very different. You just can't argue why an apple is better than an orange. They offer different benefits. We all can agree, some will choose Florida and some will choose North Carolina. That's not a knock on either state.....it's just the person's personal prefrence. No harm, no foul........right?  ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right LC......I am out guys. I don't care if FL has more shoreline or not, this is pointless. I like both states. I just prefer to live in NC. TL you like FL. As well as Bricknell. I can appreciate that.

LC,Why did you not interupt this foolishness earlier. I would have been able to do a little more work at the office, instead of looking up shorline stats. :P

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 266
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What's amazing to me is that you guys are going to prove one issue or the other until you can't prove it any more. People will make their choice of Florida or North Carolina for very different reasons. I think, in the long run, you are not going to convince someone who is hell bent on calling Florida home to move to North Carolina.....and vice versa.

Both states are very distinct in what they offer. They are very different. You just can't argue why an apple is better than an orange. They offer different benefits. We all can agree, some will choose Florida and some will choose North Carolina. That's not a knock on either state.....it's just the person's personal prefrence. No harm, no foul........right?  ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No ill will intended, both states are great places. However, there's nothing wrong with an innocent good clean debate, as long as no one takes it personal. You can learn a lot about other places in discussions, such as this. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's amazing to me is that you guys are going to prove one issue or the other until you can't prove it any more. People will make their choice of Florida or North Carolina for very different reasons. I think, in the long run, you are not going to convince someone who is hell bent on calling Florida home to move to North Carolina.....and vice versa.

Both states are very distinct in what they offer. They are very different. You just can't argue why an apple is better than an orange. They offer different benefits. We all can agree, some will choose Florida and some will choose North Carolina. That's not a knock on either state.....it's just the person's personal prefrence. No harm, no foul........right?  ^_^

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As long as the conversations are civil, I see no harm in it at all as we all learn something. I did not know, for example that NC had such a large shoreline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I reread my last post.

Nowhere in my entire last post did I tell anyone to stop discussing the differences. What I noted however was that the initial poll was which would you choose Florida or North Carolina. Some choose Florida and some choose North Carolina. I;m sure for distinct reasons.

I didn't tell you all to stop finding facts and tidbits. Knock yourselves out. What I am trying to say to you guys is that even with all those tidbits you offer, it is not going to change anyones personal preference. Some of you are at work and yet you are still finding all of this information so you can't begin to tell me that deep down some of you are not taking it personal.

By all means, continue with your fact finding....you are right, it's not hurting anyone but I was not limiting myself to just this particular discourse. I have much more sense than that. If you have been following the whole thread you will see that it's going back and forth. To what avail? Perhaps you guys can start fun fact threads in your prespective states.....especially for people like me. I find the stats interesting. I never knew about the coastline/shoreline issue. My preference would lean more so towards Florida and no amount of mountains or shoreline can change that. That's all I was saying. Anyway, carry on.............

Edit:

p.s- I felt the need to come back to add that my preference of Florida was not slight to North Carolina. North Carolina is a splendid state. Charlotte is a wonderful city. The Triangle area a haven for intellect. Like I said earlier, both offer distinct living choices. I just happen to love south Florida.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When looking at urban area population and density statistics this gets one sided, pretty quick.  North Carolina doesn't even have one urban area over 1 million or with at least 2,000 per square mile.  This shows me that low density sprawl is definately a bigger problem there than it is in Florida.  A better and fair comparison would be to take Florida's three largest urban areas out (Miami, Tampa & Orlando) and then use Jax and the state's secondary cities, such as Sarasota and Melbourne to compare with NC's big boys.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree. I already conceded that Miami (and I mean S. Fla) are more urban. That is why I did not include any cities from that area. But the other numbers that you have posted, for urbanized area don't prove any significant difference between the cities in NC and Fla, especially considering how the US census defines urban area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that poll were the Gospel than

Atlanta would be 116th

Houston 41st

Chicago 20th

If that is the way they rank a city as more Urban I would be glad to be considered low on this poll. BTW, the land area of the FL cities cited are 2, and 3 times larger than the NC cities you cited. That is the reason you do not have any cities listed onve 1M. CLT's city pop is roughly 650K and the county is almost 850K. These numbers are skewed. If we look at it the way that you want to TL, then we would have to assume that Melbourne and Sarasota is more urbanized that Charlotte. Or even dare to say Pensacola is more so that Greensboro, but I think we call all agree (both FL and NC posters alike) that this is FAR from the truth.

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know that city limit numbers really don't amount too much, because those are basically political boundaries for taxation purposes.  A much more telling and realistic statistic is urban area.  Anyway, its still interesting that you've left off many large Floridian cities with densities well over 4,000 people per mile, such as St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Fort Lauderdale, Hialeah and Miami Beach.

Urban Area Statistics from 2000 US Census

Florida

urban area -- population -- square miles -- density per sq. mile

1. Miami -- 4,919,036 -- 1,116.09 -- 4,407.4

2. Tampa -- 2,062,339 -- 802.27 -- 2,570.6

3. Orlando -- 1,157,431 -- 453.19 -- 2,554.0

4. Jacksonville -- 882,295 -- 410.52 -- 2,149.2

5. Sarasota -- 559,229 -- 270.44 -- 2,067.8

6. Melbourne -- 393,289 -- 219.36 -- 1,789.0

7. Cape Coral -- 329,757 -- 191.82 -- 1,719.1

8. Pensacola -- 323,783 -- 219.36 -- 1,476.0

9. Daytona Beach -- 255,353 -- 113.56 -- 2,248.6

North Carolina

urban area -- population -- square miles -- density per sq. mile

1. Charlotte -- 758,927 -- 434.91 -- 1,745.0

2. Raleigh -- 541.527 -- 319.61 -- 1,694.3

3. Winston-Salem -- 299,290 -- 251.38 -- 1,190.6

4. Durham -- 287,796 -- 156.78 -- 1,835.7.

5. Fayetteville -- 276,368 -- 167.13 -- 1,653.6

6. Greensboro -- 267,884 -- 135.47 -- 1,977.5

link to population numbers:

http://www.demographia.com/db-uauscan.htm

When looking at urban area population and density statistics this gets one sided, pretty quick.  North Carolina doesn't even have one urban area over 1 million or with at least 2,000 per square mile.  This shows me that low density sprawl is definately a bigger problem there than it is in Florida.  A better and fair comparison would be to take Florida's three largest urban areas out (Miami, Tampa & Orlando) and then use Jax and the state's secondary cities, such as Sarasota and Melbourne to compare with NC's big boys.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to this poll Orlando would be MORE URBAN THAN BOSTON !!! ;)

A2

Orlando's rank is 65th

and

Boson is ranked 81st !!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Lady Celeste. The discussion turned to Tallahassee being quite hilly and I posted this as a comparison

Florida

Elevation Range 0-345 ft.

Mean Elevation - 100 ft

Ocean Shoreline - 2276 miles

Land Area - 53,997 sq/mi

North Carolina

Elevation Range 0 - 6684 ft (highest point in Eastern North America)

Mean Elevation - 700 ft

Ocean Shoreline - 3375 Miles

Land Area - 48,708 sq/mil

I only added the shoreline stuff as I ran into the information and it seemed as if it would be of interest. BTW, Lakelander I believe it was you that brought up the hilly terrain stuff, which is a curious response considiering your subsequent comments that implied that we should only focus on urban issues since this is an urban forum. I don't mind, BTW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.  I already conceded that Miami (and I mean S. Fla) are more urban.  That is why I did not include any cities from that area.  But the other numbers that you have posted, for urbanized area don't prove any significant difference between the cities in NC and Fla, especially considering how the US census defines urban area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The significant difference is in size alone. Cities with large populations on paper, such as Winston-Salem or Raleigh actually being smaller in size than rarely mentioned secondary communities such as Sarasota and Pensacola. Even Charlotte, NC's largest, with all its glitz and glamour is 100,000 residents smaller than Florida's 4th largest urban area (Jacksonville). That also makes a big difference when you consider that one has 100,000 more residents living within a smaller amount of land area. This is something I definately noticed last year during my brief stops in Winston-Salem and Charlotte. Places like Tampa fell more urban and larger......because they are, depite actually city populations stating otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Lady Celeste.  The discussion turned to Tallahassee being quite hilly and I posted this as a comparison

Florida

Elevation Range 0-345 ft. 

Mean Elevation - 100 ft

Ocean Shoreline - 2276 miles

Land Area - 53,997 sq/mi

North Carolina

Elevation Range 0 - 6684 ft (highest point in Eastern North America)

Mean Elevation - 700 ft

Ocean Shoreline - 3375 Miles

Land Area - 48,708 sq/mil

I only added the shoreline stuff as I ran into the information and it seemed as if it would be of interest.  BTW, Lakelander I believe it was you that brought up the hilly terrain stuff, which is a curious response considiering your subsequent comments that implied that we should only focus on urban issues since this is an urban forum.  I don't mind, BTW.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No it wasn't me. I responded to a post that stated that all of Florida was flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The significant difference is in size alone.  Cities with large populations on paper, such as Winston-Salem or Raleigh actually being smaller in size than rarely mentioned secondary communities such as Sarasota and Pensacola.  Even Charlotte, NC's largest, with all its glitz and glamour is 100,000 residents smaller than Florida's 4th largest urban area (Jacksonville).  That also makes a big difference when you consider that one has 100,000 more residents living within a smaller amount of land area.  This is something I definately noticed last year during my brief stops in Winston-Salem and Charlotte.  Places like Tampa fell more urban and larger......because they are, depite actually city populations stating otherwise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, but Jacksonville's city limits are 758 square miles.

Charlotte's a whopping 174 square mile, over 4 times as small as Jacksonville. If Charlotte were to incorporate that much land than our population would be north of 3 MILLION people. That would include statesville, hickory, mooresville, etc, etc. Jacksonvilles city limits are HUGE.

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well no doubt. Florida has twice as many people living in it as NC. But thus far that does not change what I said about its cities. The cities are auto dependant, sprawly, and no more urban than the cities in NC. There is just more of it in Florida because there is more population sprawled over a larger area. Your numbers prove that.

And I will point out that NC's cities are all agressively working on commuter rail, light rail, and the NC Railroad is light years ahead of Florida in connecting the cities together with a state funded intercity rail network. Not bad for a state that is supposidly less urban than Florida. This is the real measure of urban vs rural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that poll were the Gospel than

Atlanta would be 116th

Houston 41st

Chicago 20th

If that is the way they rank a city as more Urban I would be glad to be considered low on this poll. BTW, the land area of the FL cities cited are 2, and 3 times larger than the NC cities you cited. That is the reason you do not have any cities listed onve 1M. CLT's city pop is roughly 650K and the county is almost 850K. These numbers are skewed. If we look at it the way that you want to TL, then we would have to assume that Melbourne and Sarasota is more urbanized that Charlotte. Or even dare to say Pensacola is more so that Greensboro, but I think we call all agree (both FL and NC posters alike) that this is FAR from the truth.

A2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Atlanta is actually one of the worst in the country. Just fly in to their airport and you'll see what I mean. There's sparsely populated cul-de-sac communities miles out from the core. Chicagoland is well known for its sprawl too. It just gets masked by the city's urban core. These stats just show the densest urban areas, not densest census tracts. There's nothing skewed about that. To dig deeper, you'll have to find the population numbers for each city's core urban tracts to get a better figure for the inner city. There was a thread with this info on it a couple of months ago, maybe someone can find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but what about the LA vesus NYC comparison. I honestly think that NYC is more urban, but they have LA listed as #1. I think that this poll is skewed.

A2

BTW they have Toronto, San Jose and San Francisco higher on the Uraban poll than NYC !!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget that most of New Jersey is NYC's sprawl. These numbers aren't new, they've been around since Census 2000. Goes to show some areas known for sprawl aren't as bad off as they seem or they're sprawl comes in a denser from such as zero lot line subdivisions and higher number of suburban multi-family developments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just hit me why FL has topped out on this type of Urban poll. The reason you claim density is becasue more of the residences and office areas art VERY close to the coast. That is why the numbers are off the chart. The reason the Atlanta's and Charlotte's of the world fall so low on the poll, is because development is able to spead out.  Unlike the FL cities you listed (outside of Orlando), which can't build on water. Your FL cities density will always be 2x higher in density since half of the circle that would be able to be developed in Charlotte or Atlanta (or many other land locked cities,  is H2O in Florida !

A2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've always said Florida's cities are in general, denser. Multi-family developments along water create density, which is a prime ingredient in urbanity. Thus my claim that Florida's cities are typically more urban than those in North Carolina is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always said Florida's cities are in general, denser.  Multi-family developments along water create density, which is a prime ingredient in urbanity.  Thus my claim that Florida's cities are typically more urban than those in North Carolina is true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I will not concede.

I will not concede.

I will not concede. Screw it.....

I concede.

TL you are too much like me to give this one up, so I guess I will waive the white flag. Now back to work.

:P

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well no doubt.  Florida has twice as many people living in it as NC.  But thus far that does not change what I said about its cities.  The cities are auto dependant, sprawly, and no more urban than the cities in NC.  There is just more of it in Florida because there is more population sprawled over a larger area.  Your numbers prove that. 

And I will point out that NC's cities are all agressively working on commuter rail, light rail, and the NC Railroad is light years ahead of Florida in connecting the cities together with a state funded intercity rail network.  Not bad for a state that is supposidly less urban than Florida.  This is the real measure of urban vs rural.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The most impressive rail expansion plans in the South are in Miami. All of Florida's other major urban areas are actively working on alternative forms of transit as well. For example, Orlando's new rail line should be up and running by 2009. The only one that isn't is Tampa, which recently had to go back to the drawing board after being rejected by the federal government for the third time.

In addition, Florida's high speed rail is only being held back by our anti-transit governor Jeb. As soon as he leaves office, its back on track. Btw, despite our governor's stance, the Federal Railroad Administration recently notified Florida that it has approved the Environmental Impact Statement for the first leg of a high speed rail system in Florida. This is an important milestone, because this is the first HSR project in the US to achieve this status.

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=14532

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Density and Urbanity are two different things. First of all there isn't much difference in 2500 people/sq mile vs 1800 people/sq mile. 700 spread over an area of a square mile doesn't make that much difference in how urban an area is.

Other measures matter. Is a city building a mass transit system. Does a city have funding in place for present and future mass transit. Does the state goverment support intercity rail. These determine the real urbanity of an area.

But another measure is how auto dependant has become, is the city walkable. In Mean Streets 2004. Florida's cities are the worst in the nation.

Danger Index Most Dangerous Metros in the USA for Pedestrians, 2004

  1. Orlando - 244

  2. Tampa-St. Pete - 215

  3. West Palm Beach - Boca Raton - 209

  4. Miami - Ft Lauderdale - 166

  5. Memphis - 159

  6. Atlanta - 144

  7. Greensboro-Winston Salem - 122

  8. Houston - 121

  9. Jacksonville - 120

  10. Phoenix - 117

Orlando, West Palm and Tampa also lead the national list in continuing declines in pedestrian safety.

Florida's contains 6 of the nation's ten most pedestrian unfriendly metros in the USA and its most dangerious metro, Orlando, is twice as dangerous as the most dangerous one in NC. I think this is a telling story on the reality of "urbanity" of Fla's cities and how much the depend upon the automobile there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.