Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordo
Sorry if I upset you - you asked questions, I posted an answer. And as another poster mentioned, San Jose is in Northern California.
|
Hey, sorry if i came across strongly. Anyway, while San Jose is is northern California and I made a mistake there, but when we look back at the numbers, San Jose actually grew slower than Atlanta both in terms of raw numbers and percentage wise and didn't grow by 70,000 or put on 100+ per year per square mile.
Los Angeles put on more people, but we must understand that it is several times larger than Atlanta standing at nearly 500 square miles while Atlanta stands at 132 square miles. In terms of the Los Angeles metropolitan area versus the Atlanta metropolitan area, Atlanta grew faster in terms of absolute numbers and of course by percentage. I know this doesn't all represent density as neither areas are completely built out. It is hard to come up with a comparable area in Atlanta to compliment the mammoth city of Los Angeles, but it only grew a little more than twice as much as Atlanta while being almost four times the size.
Anyway, my initial claim was in error because i missed the growth of Fort Worth. So, yep, I'm wrong. In any case, Atlanta's growth isn't "sad."