Jump to content

If our four largest were gone...


krazeeboi

Recommended Posts

My vote:

Tampa

Charlotte

Birmingham

Nashville

Speaking on Birmingham specifically.... Birmingham is approaching the tipping point as far as a downtown renaissance. Most people really dont understand the potential of Birmingham (even those that live here and have visited). Birmingham is finally beginning to turn the corner. Watch the video in my signature if you wish... really shows off the diversity of the city, its history, and topography.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 244
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Basically this thread is about pimping your own city. I fail to see how Birmingham and the Virgina cities can can be mentioned above Tampa Bay. I'm sure a MSA with 2.5+ mil(?) would be in the top four, especially given the criteria used for other towns mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to beat a dead horse but, Arlington was a part of Washington, DC. Alexandria has been a VA city since its founding. If one were to add Alexandria to the the district it'd be shaped more like New Jersey than a diamond.

I'm sure we Virginian's are casuing some eyes to roll with our splitting hairs and all.

As long as we're weighing in, I'll always consider DC and MD as southern.

Sorry Brent. Alexandria the city, shared its name with the county of Alexandria which was the name of DC's southern county. Both were a part of the district for 58 years. Arlington changed its name from Alexandria County in 1920. And don't forget Brent, the city of Alexandria has annexed since it was part of the southeast corner of DC's square. It hasn't always had the same shape.

http://alexandriava.gov/city/about-alexandria/about.html

http://www.co.arlington.va.us/departments/...?lnsLinkID=1150

Among other sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel that if Atlanta were to disintegrate, Birmingham, Jacksonville and Charlotte would've probably split the difference. Jax for its shipping power; Charlotte for its central location and banking ties; and Birmingham for its already prominent role in the south early on. However, I feel a lot more fortune 500 businesses from Atlanta would've chosen Charlotte because of geography over Birmingham and Jacksonville however.

If the texas kids were out, I would put Austin and New Orleans (pre-Katrina) in their place.

And as for Miami, I'd give a little to Jax, but most to Tampa-Orlando.

So, while I have listed six cities, Austin, Charlotte, Tampa-Orlando, and Jax would definately make the list. And if not for Katrina, I would have NO in a tie with Birmingham for fifth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can approach this from two directions. First, say that our four largest Southern metros (Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Miami) never had the advantages that made them grow and prosper like they did. Which other four Southern metros would have grown to the size that these four are today? Secondly, let's say that these four just all of a sudden vanished into thin air without a trace. Which four would fill the voids?

I hope this isn't interpreted as a "versus" or "my city is better than yours" thread, because it's not; it's purely hypothetical in nature.

I'm kind of amazed that nobody has suggested Nashville. Today, many businesses have relocated there because a huge amount of the nation's population is within relatively easy reach. I think that geography would, at least in today's economy, play an important role. Come to think of it, I'm genuinely surprised that with arguably the nation's best Interstate Highway infrastructure as well as geography going for it, Nashville has sort of underachieved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of 2000 Census:

1. Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX - 5,161,544

2. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL - 5,007,564

3. Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD - 4,796,183

4. Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX - 4,715,407

5. Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA - 4,247,981

6. Baltimore-Towson, MD - 2,552,994

7. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL - 2,395,997

8. San Antonio, TX - 1,711,703

9. Orlando, FL - 1,644,561

10. Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC - 1,576,370

11. Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC - 1,330,448

12. New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA - 1,316,510

13. Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro, TN - 1,311,789

14. Austin-Round Rock, TX - 1,249,763

15. Memphis, TN-MS-AR - 1,205,204

16. Jacksonville, FL - 1,122,750

17. Richmond, VA - 1,096,957

18. Birmingham-Hoover, AL - 1,052,238

So this is all the southern metro's with population over one million in 2000. Safe to assume I think that our new largest would come from this set. And I think the majority of cities mentioned come from this list. There's been plenty of debate as to wheter DC and Baltimore should even be included in the South. That could be a thread unto itself. I personally think that no, they shouldn't count, so I'll toss them out along with our magically disappearing top four.

So which of the following eleven picks up the most slack, and becomes largest?

Well first of all I think you take Dallas and Houston, and just shift them to somewhere else nearby. San Antonio or Austin becomes Dallas. Perhaps New Orleans gets a lot of what was Houston. But maybe not as much as the other two. Because those cities are big cause they are in Texas, so that population I think stays in Texas.

Next, it's hard not to notice the huge lead Tampa already has on the rest of the pack. I think that if Miami goes away, and you spread those people around. A few in Tampa, a few in Orlando or Jacksonville. Tampa still comes out on top by my reckoning.

So that leaves Atlanta. Atlanta is the tough one to me. Houston and Dallas are where they are cause of oil or water, or something I can kinda guess at. Miami is where it is, because it's sunny, and a gateway to the Caribbean. But Atlanta's history of why's it's where it is, is one I'm not as familiar with. Even though I lived there for about a year. So a reasoning of where things would be if it wasnt' there is kinda guesswork.

Perhaps it would all shift to Charlotte, or Nashville. Or maybe you spread it around equal everywhere and then Orlando or Norfolk come out on top. But I think it's a toss-up between Charlotte and Nashville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As of 2000 Census:

1. Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX - 5,161,544

2. Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL - 5,007,564

3. Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD - 4,796,183

4. Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX - 4,715,407

5. Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA - 4,247,981

6. Baltimore-Towson, MD - 2,552,994

7. Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL - 2,395,997

8. San Antonio, TX - 1,711,703

9. Orlando, FL - 1,644,561

10. Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC - 1,576,370

11. Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC - 1,330,448

12. New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA - 1,316,510

13. Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro, TN - 1,311,789

14. Austin-Round Rock, TX - 1,249,763

15. Memphis, TN-MS-AR - 1,205,204

16. Jacksonville, FL - 1,122,750

17. Richmond, VA - 1,096,957

18. Birmingham-Hoover, AL - 1,052,238

So this is all the southern metro's with population over one million in 2000. Safe to assume I think that our new largest would come from this set. And I think the majority of cities mentioned come from this list.

:unsure:

Umm, excuse me but where is the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill MSA? or the Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem MSA? This list can't be complete...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So that leaves Atlanta. Atlanta is the tough one to me. Houston and Dallas are where they are cause of oil or water, or something I can kinda guess at. Miami is where it is, because it's sunny, and a gateway to the Caribbean. But Atlanta's history of why's it's where it is, is one I'm not as familiar with. Even though I lived there for about a year. So a reasoning of where things would be if it wasnt' there is kinda guesswork.

Perhaps it would all shift to Charlotte, or Nashville. Or maybe you spread it around equal everywhere and then Orlando or Norfolk come out on top. But I think it's a toss-up between Charlotte and Nashville.

Atlanta got where it is today from being at a good location for railroads and interstates. It just happened to be a good central location. I know Nashville has a good location for interstates, having three major highways through it, I-65, I-40, and I-24. I don't know about Charlotte. Nashville is also a good spot for railroads, and again, I'm not sure about Charlotte. Maybe someone from there can fill us in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First Question: What is an interstate hub and why does birmingham get that designation?

Birmingham has three interstates going through: I-20, I-59, and I-65, and will soon add a fourth when I-22 is completed to Birmingham in 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Birmingham had become what Atlanta is today, then it stands to reason that Mobile, and not New Orleans, would become the major port. New Orleans traditionally relies on the Midwest for its shipping. So assuming the midwest did not change its development patterns, Mobile would have been the logical choise for state investment in Alabama, thus it would be a much more important port than it is today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Birmingham had become what Atlanta is today, then it stands to reason that Mobile, and not New Orleans, would become the major port. New Orleans traditionally relies on the Midwest for its shipping. So assuming the midwest did not change its development patterns, Mobile would have been the logical choise for state investment in Alabama, thus it would be a much more important port than it is today.

Well, if the Midwest did not change its development patterns, I wouldn't see Mobile ever surpassing New Orleans as the largest Gulf Coast port, simply because of the fact that it is still much cheaper and more economical to ship down the Mississippi River to New Orleans via barge than it is to ship to Mobile using rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta got where it is today from being at a good location for railroads and interstates. It just happened to be a good central location. I know Nashville has a good location for interstates, having three major highways through it, I-65, I-40, and I-24. I don't know about Charlotte. Nashville is also a good spot for railroads, and again, I'm not sure about Charlotte. Maybe someone from there can fill us in.

Charlotte was a railroad hub back in the day, due in large part to the booming textile industry.

Columbia was also a railroad hub, and also has three interstates going through it.

One cannot also discount the progressive leadership that Atlanta has enjoyed, as well as pretty big names in the private sector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Birmingham, AL has suffered more from Atlanta's tremendous growth than any other city. About 1950, Birmingham was about the same size as Atlanta and poised to possibly become the leading city in Dixie. At that time both Nashville and Charlotte were considerably smaller than Birmingham. Had Birmingham been aggressive and built the leading airport in the southeast, it's possible that the tremendous growth would have been in Birmingham, rather than Atlanta and Birmingham might have become the leading city in the Southeast.

I'm going to have to argue because many have said that in the 50s through the 60s, Memphis and Atlanta were competing and both around the same size...however the factors of the MLK shooting, old cotton families, and the interstate/Overton Park garbage gave Atlanta the upper hand. Delta originally had a hub in Memphis but it was moved to Atlanta. Therefore, had this not happened Memphis would have certainly been the capital of the South.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

according to the census website, the 2000 population of the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill was 1,187,941; the Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem, NC population was 1,251,509.

I don't see this debate headed in the direction of Triad vs Triangle vs CLT. Their size is not up for debate and nobody is discounting them. I do however feel Charlotte has a slightly better geographic location and more influence in the private sector than the two to be largely effected by the absense of Atlanta. I do not want to get into a intra-NC city debate, there are other subforums for such debate.

I had forgotten about Mobile's potential. I do have to agree that its power and size would have become much more influential had Birmingham become Atlanta instead. However, as is the case in many states, their growth would have probably been lopsided between the two. Mobile would be much larger than it is now, but would've become far overshadowed by Birmingham in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really surprised that nobody has seriously given Memphis an in-depth look. While Birmingham has the potential, let's take a look at Memphis. Memphis is about to have a third interstate that will be of more significance than any of the interstates running through Birmingham (no offense, but one that runs from Canada to Mexico is quite a big deal), and then Memphis will get its fourth with I-22 (just like Birmingham) in 2011. Now, let's take a look. Miami, Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta all have prominent airports that are hubs. Memphis has that. Memphis has the largest cargo airport in the world. The world is going on a trend towards air rather than rail, but if that weren't enough...Memphis is also a huge railroad hub alongside being one of the largest inland ports in the country. Furthermore, the medical center of Memphis rivals many others of the world. Memphis is also viewed as a great place for business. International Paper recently relocated its corporate HQ to Memphis, and many other companies (i.e. Servicemaster) have been rumored to do the same in the next few years. I could see Memphis becoming something of a Dallas-Fort Worth once Tunica begins to boom within the next few years. The simple fact is to take on the role of one of the big four, you have to basically cater to it all. You must have the significant airport, the rail status, the interstate status, and the service status. Therefore, my list is:

Memphis

Charlotte

Jacksonville/Tampa Bay/Ft. Lauderdale (I'd lean for either J'ville or Ft. Lauderdale)

San Antonio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

according to the census website, the 2000 population of the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill was 1,187,941; the Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem, NC population was 1,251,509.

I was going by Table 3b found at

http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/phc-t29.html

Which lists those areas at:

Raleigh-Cary, NC - 797,071

Greensboro-High Point, NC - 643,430

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really surprised that nobody has seriously given Memphis an in-depth look. While Birmingham has the potential, let's take a look at Memphis. Memphis is about to have a third interstate that will be of more significance than any of the interstates running through Birmingham (no offense, but one that runs from Canada to Mexico is quite a big deal), and then Memphis will get its fourth with I-22 (just like Birmingham) in 2011. Now, let's take a look. Miami, Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta all have prominent airports that are hubs. Memphis has that. Memphis has the largest cargo airport in the world. The world is going on a trend towards air rather than rail, but if that weren't enough...Memphis is also a huge railroad hub alongside being one of the largest inland ports in the country. Furthermore, the medical center of Memphis rivals many others of the world. Memphis is also viewed as a great place for business. International Paper recently relocated its corporate HQ to Memphis, and many other companies (i.e. Servicemaster) have been rumored to do the same in the next few years. I could see Memphis becoming something of a Dallas-Fort Worth once Tunica begins to boom within the next few years. The simple fact is to take on the role of one of the big four, you have to basically cater to it all. You must have the significant airport, the rail status, the interstate status, and the service status. Therefore, my list is:

Memphis

Charlotte

Jacksonville/Tampa Bay/Ft. Lauderdale (I'd lean for either J'ville or Ft. Lauderdale)

San Antonio

i think that nashville would still get the nod over memphis simply due to the fact that it's closer to more of the country's population. they're both similar in size and are both pulling in big companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think that nashville would still get the nod over memphis simply due to the fact that it's closer to more of the country's population. they're both similar in size and are both pulling in big companies.

I'd disagree...I mean, Houston and Dallas aren't exactly close to most of the nation's population, and both are part of the Big Four.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd disagree...I mean, Houston and Dallas aren't exactly close to most of the nation's population, and both are part of the Big Four.

both of those cities were made big by oil, not their proximity to the population (well maybe houston a little). if it wasn't for that, then they wouldn't be there, or at least nowhere near as large as they are. i just see nashville and memphis being very similar. both cities are booming and attracting the same kind of growth. it's just that nashville happens to be geographically closer to other big cities.

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.