News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Fastest-growing suburbs

Started by webny99, June 02, 2017, 10:38:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

dvferyance

#100
Avon OH ( West Cleveland suburb) Has seen massive growth recently. Between 1990-2000 population increased by 56% and increased by 85% between 2000-2010. While Cleveland itself has been in major decline for decades this is one part of the metro area that is growing. A factor could be the retail boom there. With Cabala's, Meijer Menards and possibly Ikea. The city is known for hosting the Avon Heritage Duck Tape Festival held every Father's Day Weekend.


Desert Man

It turns out my top 20 AZ cities list needs to be revised. The other suburbs of Phoenix (in the 12-20th rank): Avondale, Buckeye, Carefree, Cave Creek, El Mirage, Fountain Hills, Goodyear, Queen Creek, Tolleson, and unincorporated Sun Cities are larger. The winter seasonal residencies can alter the statistics, so I'm not fully accurate nor inaccurate here.
Get your kicks...on Route 99! Like to turn 66 upside down. The other historic Main street of America.

Desert Man

For eastern half of AZ, Douglas is the largest city on the Mexican border (the other side is Agua Prieta). Most population growth in AZ is in the Valley of the Sun (Phoenix metro) and Tucson, the state's 2nd largest city and metro area. I've named 33 good-sized cities in a state in the "middle of the desert" (well, the southern and western sections are), 3 of them are too seasonal: Maricopa, Quartzsite, and Sun Cities (not officially a city). And Yuma (90-99,000 people) on the border (like Nogales) doesn't normally fit the top 10 list.
Get your kicks...on Route 99! Like to turn 66 upside down. The other historic Main street of America.

bing101

Quote from: sparker on June 21, 2017, 01:31:45 AM
At present, the major suburban/exurban expansion in Northern California can be divided into two distinct regions:  the Madera-Turlock-Modesto-Manteca-Stockton-Lodi continuous corridor, and the Eastern Sacramento "arc" from Elk Grove south of the main city around the east side and ending up at the north side of Lincoln.  The former not only serves its own region (the north San Joaquin Valley) but functions to serve the "spillover" from the Bay Area -- particularly instigated by substantially lower initial housing costs.  Besides the main corridor arrayed along CA 99, there is the western branch along CA 120 and I-205 encompassing Lathrop and Tracy -- the latter being the original Valley exurb to experience the commuter crunch as early as the '80's.  The interim towns such as Ripon and Salida have seen outsized growth as well; even new communities (Mountain Home NW of Tracy as an example) have been established to handle the influx.  Right now, the north side of Stockton is about the farthest suburban area efficiently accessible to Bay Area commuters (partially due to the ACE rail commuter service from San Jose to Stockton); Lodi, to the north, is seeing growth not only from spillover from the North Bay (Vallejo, Fairfield, Benicia, etc.) but also as a budding employment center due to its recent growth as a wine-country destination. 

Greater Sacramento has its own growth pattern, primarily arrayed along a reverse-C arc from Elk Grove south of Sacramento itself and extending northeast through Rancho Cordova, Folsom, Citrus Heights/Orangevale, and up through Roseville and Rocklin before curving NW through Lincoln.  The region has become a major distribution area due to its extensive rail network (the major UP hub/yard in Northern California is in Roseville).  Unlike the 70-80 mile single-direction commutes seen by Stockton-area residents working in the Bay Area, the typical commute around Sacramento is about 20-25 miles, as employment tends to be significantly closer to home there than with the Bay/Valley situation (this is also abetted by the large number of state personnel in the area -- in this respect, being the state capital intrinsically involves a multitude of employees). 

If not for the twin watersheds/"bottomlands" of the Consumnes and Mokelumne Rivers (delineating the north end of Lodi and the south side of Elk Grove respectively), each of which have multiple channels and are prone to severe flooding in wet winters, it's likely that the two growth areas would have merged by this time.  Also, that area between Lodi and Galt (about 10 miles apart) is "wine central", extensively planted with vineyards and dotted with wineries, most of which have tourist-oriented tasting rooms; besides the flooding potential, the acreage has become just too costly to convert to housing tracts. 

Despite almost continual criticism regarding "sprawl", housing starts in the Valley have continued almost unabated since the late 1970's; the housing/mortgage crisis of 2007-2011 was something of a "hiccup", but for the past 5 years or so it has become virtually impossible to traverse the area without witnessing more and more homes, condos, and the strip malls and other such amenities that accompany such development being deployed.  And it's all dollar-driven -- cheap (by relative standards) housing located in areas and communities with the proverbial "welcome mat" out; save another significant recession, the trend is more than likely to continue.     




I remember at one point Oakley, Antioch and Brentwood in Contra Costa County were the fastest growing suburbs in the Bay Area due to the Dot Com boom of the 1990's.

sparker

Quote from: bing101 on November 26, 2018, 08:06:31 AM
Quote from: sparker on June 21, 2017, 01:31:45 AM
At present, the major suburban/exurban expansion in Northern California can be divided into two distinct regions:  the Madera-Turlock-Modesto-Manteca-Stockton-Lodi continuous corridor, and the Eastern Sacramento "arc" from Elk Grove south of the main city around the east side and ending up at the north side of Lincoln.  The former not only serves its own region (the north San Joaquin Valley) but functions to serve the "spillover" from the Bay Area -- particularly instigated by substantially lower initial housing costs.  Besides the main corridor arrayed along CA 99, there is the western branch along CA 120 and I-205 encompassing Lathrop and Tracy -- the latter being the original Valley exurb to experience the commuter crunch as early as the '80's.  The interim towns such as Ripon and Salida have seen outsized growth as well; even new communities (Mountain Home NW of Tracy as an example) have been established to handle the influx.  Right now, the north side of Stockton is about the farthest suburban area efficiently accessible to Bay Area commuters (partially due to the ACE rail commuter service from San Jose to Stockton); Lodi, to the north, is seeing growth not only from spillover from the North Bay (Vallejo, Fairfield, Benicia, etc.) but also as a budding employment center due to its recent growth as a wine-country destination. 

Greater Sacramento has its own growth pattern, primarily arrayed along a reverse-C arc from Elk Grove south of Sacramento itself and extending northeast through Rancho Cordova, Folsom, Citrus Heights/Orangevale, and up through Roseville and Rocklin before curving NW through Lincoln.  The region has become a major distribution area due to its extensive rail network (the major UP hub/yard in Northern California is in Roseville).  Unlike the 70-80 mile single-direction commutes seen by Stockton-area residents working in the Bay Area, the typical commute around Sacramento is about 20-25 miles, as employment tends to be significantly closer to home there than with the Bay/Valley situation (this is also abetted by the large number of state personnel in the area -- in this respect, being the state capital intrinsically involves a multitude of employees). 

If not for the twin watersheds/"bottomlands" of the Consumnes and Mokelumne Rivers (delineating the north end of Lodi and the south side of Elk Grove respectively), each of which have multiple channels and are prone to severe flooding in wet winters, it's likely that the two growth areas would have merged by this time.  Also, that area between Lodi and Galt (about 10 miles apart) is "wine central", extensively planted with vineyards and dotted with wineries, most of which have tourist-oriented tasting rooms; besides the flooding potential, the acreage has become just too costly to convert to housing tracts. 

Despite almost continual criticism regarding "sprawl", housing starts in the Valley have continued almost unabated since the late 1970's; the housing/mortgage crisis of 2007-2011 was something of a "hiccup", but for the past 5 years or so it has become virtually impossible to traverse the area without witnessing more and more homes, condos, and the strip malls and other such amenities that accompany such development being deployed.  And it's all dollar-driven -- cheap (by relative standards) housing located in areas and communities with the proverbial "welcome mat" out; save another significant recession, the trend is more than likely to continue.     




I remember at one point Oakley, Antioch and Brentwood in Contra Costa County were the fastest growing suburbs in the Bay Area due to the Dot Com boom of the 1990's.

And......they're still growing, particularly Brentwood and Oakley.  Antioch itself is a bit too far north and west to be a really viable commute from the South Bay/"Silicon Valley" area, while Vasco Road, despite its Alameda County substandard segment, functions as a "conveyor belt" to and from the Brentwood/Oakley/Discovery Bay area.  That trio of cities has the (mis?)fortune of being positioned as accessible from both the northern portion of the Bay area via CA 4 as well as the slog from the South Bay through Livermore and/or Dublin via I-580, I-680, and CA 84.  Discovery Bay is pretty much built out to its maximum, limited by the Delta on its north and east sides; but there seems to be enough property turnover there (it's far enough east to be a part of Valley summer heat, which has made some Bay transplants turn tail and run after a few hot years) to keep it going as a place to resettle.  Oakley stays relatively cool because of its position as "east Antioch" along the banks of the lower San Joaquin river -- but Brentwood is currently "development central" -- a full-fledged heterogeneous city, with new housing, commercial development, and industrial parks being opened almost constantly.  And home prices there are typically 40% less than over the hill in Fremont or Milpitas, so the differential tends to carry the day for those who would rather stay in a Bay county (Contra Costa) rather than locate in the actual Valley, where about another 15-20% housing cost savings can be realized.     

The Nature Boy

Quote from: silverback1065 on December 18, 2017, 07:28:46 AM
Quote from: Desert Man on December 18, 2017, 02:18:48 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 09, 2017, 01:42:56 PM
I found a list of the top 1000 cities (38k+). This includes growth from 2000-2016 (not 2010-2016 as you would expect). The listing of which major city they are a suburb of was done manually, without using any formal definitions, and may be arguable.

Top growth rates on the list (growth is 2000-2016, population numbers are for 2016):

Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix, 2583%, 47k)
Little Elm, TX (DFW, 842%, 43k)
Buckeye, AZ (Phoenix, 562%, 65k)
Kyle, TX (Austin, 552%, 39k)
Leandar, TX (Austin, 406%, 43k, not recognized by spellcheck)
Frisco, TX (DFW, 364%, 164k)
Surprise, AZ (Phoenix, 310%, 133k)
Lincoln, CA (Sacramento, 300%, 47k)
Beaumont, CA (Inland Empire, 297%, 45k)
Goodyear, AZ (Phoenix, 293%, 77k)
Plainfield, IL (Chicago, 212%, 43k)
Lehi, UT (Provo, 211%, 61k)
McKinney, TX (DFW, 208%, 172k)
Wake Forest, NC (Raleigh-Durham, 207%, 40k)
Wylie, TX (DFW, 205%, 47k)
Marana, AZ (Tucson, 202%, 43k)

Number of suburbs between 100% and 200% growth:
Atlanta: 1
Austin: 3
Bay Area: 1
Boise: 1
Cape Coral FL: 1
Charlotte: 2
Dallas-Fort Worth: 4
Denver: 3
Des Moines: 1
Gold Coast (Miami area): 3
Houston: 2
Indianapolis: 2
Kennewick-Pasco WA: 1
Las Vegas: 1
Orlando: 2
Palm Coast: 1
Phoenix: 3
Raleigh-Durham: 1
Sacramento: 1
Salt Lake City: 1
Seattle: 1
Springdale AR: 1
Temecula-Murrieta CA (is this a separate area?): 4 - Actually Riverside-San Bernardino, but closer to San Diego than L.A. - Desert Man
Tucson: 1

There were also 5 cities on the list that incorporated after 2000 and therefore didn't have growth rate values.

Maricopa, AZ was reportedly home to 112,000 people - may be as a result of winter seasonal residents. All 10 largest cities in the Phoenix Metro area - actually 9 in April and 8 in the summer. Tucson has to be 2nd largest enough, amirite? and Surprise! It's bigger than Yuma in summer, but not in the winter. Phoenix and its suburbs: Mesa is #3, then (in alphabetical order): Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Peoria, Scottsdale, Surprise and Tempe. The other 9 cities (12-20th, all under 100k people) in Arizona: Bullhead City, Kingman and Lake Havasu City in Mohave county; Flagstaff, Prescott and Sedona in Northern half of the state; and Casa Grande, Globe (I think Apache Junction is bigger) and Nogales in southern half. And up to 100,000 winter residents in their RVs in Quartzsite 30 miles from the Colorado River (CA-AZ state line).

all those cities will have massive water problems in the future

Our development of the American Southwest is entirely unsustainable and IMO very foolish. In 20 years, it'll be the ecological disaster that we should've seen coming but didn't.

MantyMadTown

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 27, 2018, 11:00:46 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on December 18, 2017, 07:28:46 AM
Quote from: Desert Man on December 18, 2017, 02:18:48 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 09, 2017, 01:42:56 PM
I found a list of the top 1000 cities (38k+). This includes growth from 2000-2016 (not 2010-2016 as you would expect). The listing of which major city they are a suburb of was done manually, without using any formal definitions, and may be arguable.

Top growth rates on the list (growth is 2000-2016, population numbers are for 2016):

Maricopa, AZ (Phoenix, 2583%, 47k)
Little Elm, TX (DFW, 842%, 43k)
Buckeye, AZ (Phoenix, 562%, 65k)
Kyle, TX (Austin, 552%, 39k)
Leandar, TX (Austin, 406%, 43k, not recognized by spellcheck)
Frisco, TX (DFW, 364%, 164k)
Surprise, AZ (Phoenix, 310%, 133k)
Lincoln, CA (Sacramento, 300%, 47k)
Beaumont, CA (Inland Empire, 297%, 45k)
Goodyear, AZ (Phoenix, 293%, 77k)
Plainfield, IL (Chicago, 212%, 43k)
Lehi, UT (Provo, 211%, 61k)
McKinney, TX (DFW, 208%, 172k)
Wake Forest, NC (Raleigh-Durham, 207%, 40k)
Wylie, TX (DFW, 205%, 47k)
Marana, AZ (Tucson, 202%, 43k)

Number of suburbs between 100% and 200% growth:
Atlanta: 1
Austin: 3
Bay Area: 1
Boise: 1
Cape Coral FL: 1
Charlotte: 2
Dallas-Fort Worth: 4
Denver: 3
Des Moines: 1
Gold Coast (Miami area): 3
Houston: 2
Indianapolis: 2
Kennewick-Pasco WA: 1
Las Vegas: 1
Orlando: 2
Palm Coast: 1
Phoenix: 3
Raleigh-Durham: 1
Sacramento: 1
Salt Lake City: 1
Seattle: 1
Springdale AR: 1
Temecula-Murrieta CA (is this a separate area?): 4 - Actually Riverside-San Bernardino, but closer to San Diego than L.A. - Desert Man
Tucson: 1

There were also 5 cities on the list that incorporated after 2000 and therefore didn't have growth rate values.

Maricopa, AZ was reportedly home to 112,000 people - may be as a result of winter seasonal residents. All 10 largest cities in the Phoenix Metro area - actually 9 in April and 8 in the summer. Tucson has to be 2nd largest enough, amirite? and Surprise! It's bigger than Yuma in summer, but not in the winter. Phoenix and its suburbs: Mesa is #3, then (in alphabetical order): Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Peoria, Scottsdale, Surprise and Tempe. The other 9 cities (12-20th, all under 100k people) in Arizona: Bullhead City, Kingman and Lake Havasu City in Mohave county; Flagstaff, Prescott and Sedona in Northern half of the state; and Casa Grande, Globe (I think Apache Junction is bigger) and Nogales in southern half. And up to 100,000 winter residents in their RVs in Quartzsite 30 miles from the Colorado River (CA-AZ state line).

all those cities will have massive water problems in the future

Our development of the American Southwest is entirely unsustainable and IMO very foolish. In 20 years, it'll be the ecological disaster that we should've seen coming but didn't.

Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.
Forget the I-41 haters

Brandon

Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

The Nature Boy

Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.

I feel like the growth of the Southwest was driven by people from the Midwest and East Coast who were tired of being cold and just thought that living in the Southwest would be a cure for their problems. I mean, Florida's development was driven by people wanting to flee the cold and move to somewhere that's warm year-round. The advent of the air conditioner accelerated this growth and Florida boomed.

I can see where the Southwest might be preferable to Florida because it doesn't have humidity. But of course, those people arrived and wanted the amenities of home, which requires water because those places naturally have a lot of it.

It's basically the epitome of the "ME! ME! ME!" world. The Southwest is breathtakingly gorgeous but people who move there seem to want New York in the Desert so you get what we have now. The Southwest cannot support large urbanization and I have no idea why more people aren't sounding the alarm bells about it.

abefroman329

Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.
Also, I'm not sure how much will be left after Foxconn gets their hands on all the Lake Michigan water they were promised in exchange for building their factor in Wisconsin.

Brandon

Quote from: abefroman329 on November 29, 2018, 09:37:25 AM
Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.
Also, I'm not sure how much will be left after Foxconn gets their hands on all the Lake Michigan water they were promised in exchange for building their factor in Wisconsin.

That's water that will be returned to the lake after use, unlike the Chicago Diversion.  Hell, the Jardine Water Purification Plant takes in over 1 billion gallons of water a day from the lake that is never returned.  Foxconn's only taking 7 million gallons per day, much of which will see the lake again.  It's stunning how hypocritical the two Chicago papers are regarding this use of water when you consider the enormity of the Chicago Diversion from the lake.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

silverback1065

Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:57:42 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on November 29, 2018, 09:37:25 AM
Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.
Also, I'm not sure how much will be left after Foxconn gets their hands on all the Lake Michigan water they were promised in exchange for building their factor in Wisconsin.

That's water that will be returned to the lake after use, unlike the Chicago Diversion.  Hell, the Jardine Water Purification Plant takes in over 1 billion gallons of water a day from the lake that is never returned.  Foxconn's only taking 7 million gallons per day, much of which will see the lake again.  It's stunning how hypocritical the two Chicago papers are regarding this use of water when you consider the enormity of the Chicago Diversion from the lake.

let's hope that water will be cleaned when they put it back...

paulthemapguy

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 29, 2018, 09:34:41 AM
Quote from: Brandon on November 29, 2018, 09:12:11 AM
Quote from: MantyMadTown on November 29, 2018, 04:17:56 AM
Makes me glad I live in a state where we have a ton of water. Sooner or later the Southwest is going to have to get their water shipped from somewhere else, probably either fresh water from the Great Lakes states or desalinated water from the Pacific Ocean. Either way it's going to be very expensive.

Not a fucking chance it's coming from the Great Lakes if we have anything to do about it here.  They can desalinate their way out of it or move back to where there's water.

I feel like the growth of the Southwest was driven by people from the Midwest and East Coast who were tired of being cold and just thought that living in the Southwest would be a cure for their problems. I mean, Florida's development was driven by people wanting to flee the cold and move to somewhere that's warm year-round. The advent of the air conditioner accelerated this growth and Florida boomed.

I can see where the Southwest might be preferable to Florida because it doesn't have humidity. But of course, those people arrived and wanted the amenities of home, which requires water because those places naturally have a lot of it.

It's basically the epitome of the "ME! ME! ME!" world. The Southwest is breathtakingly gorgeous but people who move there seem to want New York in the Desert so you get what we have now. The Southwest cannot support large urbanization and I have no idea why more people aren't sounding the alarm bells about it.

I loved what you wrote here.  Phoenix has become a second Chicago, complete with Portillo's and Giordano's, because a desert with no winters and nothing else to look at, either, for some reason, sounds like a magical exotic paradise for someone from the flat, snowy Midwest.  It's especially a hotbed for pensioners sourced from the Midwest.  Old people don't like how the cold weather enhances pain and soreness, I think.  And old people have a lot of that.  So now we have God's Waiting Room East (Florida) and God's Waiting Room West (Arizona).  I think it's interesting that both states now have wacky politics and wacky news stories, too, since the demographics have changed in both places. 

Phoenix will probably collectively panic and abandon ship before my lifetime is over, once their water supply runs out.  Maybe they'll try to run a giant water pipeline along I-8 from San Diego to Arizona so they have something to drink.  It should be pretty obvious that a serious desert is not a livable place--unsustainable, at best.  The problem is that land is cheap (because hint hint, the sucks) and people clamor for the right to do whatever they want with property more than they clamor for their own health or their considerations of the future.  If you're old, I suppose your considerations for the future aren't a high priority, though...

I went to Phoenix and had my hand on my head the whole time--not to keep the intense sun out of my eyes, but because looking at this misplaced expanse of suburbia caused a permanent facepalm.
Avatar is the last interesting highway I clinched.
My website! http://www.paulacrossamerica.com Now featuring all of Ohio!
My USA Shield Gallery https://flic.kr/s/aHsmHwJRZk
TM Clinches https://bit.ly/2UwRs4O

National collection status: 361/425. Only 64 route markers remain

abefroman329

Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 29, 2018, 12:09:48 PMI went to Phoenix and had my hand on my head the whole time--not to keep the intense sun out of my eyes, but because looking at this misplaced expanse of suburbia caused a permanent facepalm.
It's Atlanta if Atlanta had a hideously ugly landscape.  And the opaque walls surrounding EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY explains so, so much.

sparker

^^^^^^^^
Circa 1964 my great-aunt and her husband, their Glendale, CA property having been taken for the 134 Freeway, moved to the AZ Sun City just west of the other Glendale for much the reasons folks in their 60's have moved to PHX for decades -- low humidity and mild winters for aches & pains.  My great-aunt was a quite outspoken person (our family's equivalent of Bea Arthur's character Maude, originating, of course, on All in the Family).  They seemed to spend more time on trips back to CA than they did at their AZ home; she opined that she had to get away from the "idiots" who where her neighbors in Sun City to maintain her sanity.  They were back in CA by early '67; cited for the move back were much the sentiments mentioned in previous posts -- many of the newer arrivals in PHX were escaping climatic or other troubles -- and once they arrived in the desert they simply hid away behind walls.  And that was 50+ years ago -- imagine that dynamic multiplied to a metro area of over 4M population!  AZ growth appears to be a self-generating phenomenon -- movements by retirees followed by the requisite services for that population, followed in turn by corporate investment looking for relatively cheap lands (and costs of business), followed by more folks in the service sector -- and so on and so forth.  Very much like L.A. but without the beaches -- and outsize development compressed into 60 years rather than the 230+ years it's taken L.A. to get where it is today. 

abefroman329

Quote from: sparker on November 29, 2018, 12:49:47 PMAZ growth appears to be a self-generating phenomenon -- movements by retirees followed by the requisite services for that population, followed in turn by corporate investment looking for relatively cheap lands (and costs of business), followed by more folks in the service sector -- and so on and so forth. 
Oh, absolutely, particularly as it relates to health care of the elderly.  My company maintains an office in Phoenix, but it's primarily entry-level employees and the handful of lower management positions that supervise them - anyone higher than that is in the home office.

silverback1065

it always surprised me how a city of 4 million people could possibly exist in the middle of the desert.  Albuquerque has less than half the population, but similar weather.  Why is it that Albuquerque and New Mexico as a whole didn't experience the same influx of people?   

kphoger

Quote from: silverback1065 on November 29, 2018, 02:24:56 PM
it always surprised me how a city of 4 million people could possibly exist in the middle of the desert.  Albuquerque has less than half the population, but similar weather.  Why is it that Albuquerque and New Mexico as a whole didn't experience the same influx of people?   

They tried but got lost due to New Mexico's god-awful signage.  That's how they managed to overshoot their intended destination by one whole state.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Brandon

Quote from: silverback1065 on November 29, 2018, 02:24:56 PM
it always surprised me how a city of 4 million people could possibly exist in the middle of the desert.  Albuquerque has less than half the population, but similar weather.  Why is it that Albuquerque and New Mexico as a whole didn't experience the same influx of people?   

No sé.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

kphoger

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

hotdogPi

Quote from: silverback1065 on November 29, 2018, 02:24:56 PM
it always surprised me how a city of 4 million people could possibly exist in the middle of the desert.  Albuquerque has less than half the population, but similar weather.  Why is it that Albuquerque and New Mexico as a whole didn't experience the same influx of people?

Albuquerque is nowhere near as desert-like. It's in the mountains.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

silverback1065

Quote from: abefroman329 on November 29, 2018, 12:18:40 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 29, 2018, 12:09:48 PMI went to Phoenix and had my hand on my head the whole time--not to keep the intense sun out of my eyes, but because looking at this misplaced expanse of suburbia caused a permanent facepalm.
It's Atlanta if Atlanta had a hideously ugly landscape.  And the opaque walls surrounding EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY explains so, so much.

Atlanta has a lot of problems as well from a city design standpoint.  Too car oriented.  Phoenix is unsustainable though. 

US 89

Quote from: 1 on November 29, 2018, 02:56:24 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on November 29, 2018, 02:24:56 PM
it always surprised me how a city of 4 million people could possibly exist in the middle of the desert.  Albuquerque has less than half the population, but similar weather.  Why is it that Albuquerque and New Mexico as a whole didn't experience the same influx of people?

Albuquerque is nowhere near as desert-like. It's in the mountains.

Eh, Albuquerque is no more in the mountains than Phoenix, and it's actually similarly desert once you get out of the city. Sure, it's a little cooler than Phoenix, but that's simply due to its 5000-foot elevation (Phoenix is 1500 feet). Rainfall is about the same in both places.

If anything, Albuquerque should have less water problems than Phoenix, because they have the Rio Grande draining some high mountains to the north in Colorado. In fact, you can spot the I-25 corridor south of ABQ on satellite view by the narrow strip of green fields.

silverback1065

isn't the largest American suburb Mesa?  If not what is, in terms of area and population?

The Nature Boy

Quote from: silverback1065 on November 29, 2018, 03:20:15 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on November 29, 2018, 12:18:40 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on November 29, 2018, 12:09:48 PMI went to Phoenix and had my hand on my head the whole time--not to keep the intense sun out of my eyes, but because looking at this misplaced expanse of suburbia caused a permanent facepalm.
It's Atlanta if Atlanta had a hideously ugly landscape.  And the opaque walls surrounding EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY explains so, so much.

Atlanta has a lot of problems as well from a city design standpoint.  Too car oriented.  Phoenix is unsustainable though.

The entirety of the Phoenix metro area is probably the stupidest development idea in American history.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.