Wouldn't it be cool if there was a major city somewhere in Montana/Wyoming/The Dakotas? (theater, living in)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe even throw in Idaho I probably wouldn't count Boise as a major metro either way at least the eastern side of the state you could throw in here. I feel like the only major draw to this area is Yellowstone more then anything else. There's no city, with no major hub airport/no sports team/no place with an incredible urban skyline etc. to draw people in to check out the local area. (Perhaps local residents feel it's for the best) but everywhere else there's a hub metro for the region. Otherwise people don't really find their way to this part of the country. In this spot it just feels like something's missing. Imagine if Bozeman, Montana grew to a 3 million metro. Thoughts?
Yeah, plus I think it is important that the most prominent or prolific cities not just exist on the coasts but don’t people in Wyoming, Montana and those parts of the country have issues with high speed internet? I remember reading that somewhere. I don’t think there’s necessarily the infrastructure to support a major dense, highly populated city in some of those places.
Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas barely have 3 million combined population in their whole region. And that’s with Montana having over a million, but spread out over the 4th largest state. There are counties in Montana double the size of the state of Rhode Island, the smallest state.
Haven't there been discussions about building a new eco city from scratch and Montana/Wyoming area was a consideration? I believe somewhere in Appalachia was to? Though I can't remember for sure.
Why would Idaho want a huge major city, with all the dirt, crowding, traffic, drugs, homeless, and crime?
People move to Idaho to get away from all the crowding and all the bad things that come with over-crowding.
If you like living in a big city, you have your choice of many. Do not try to ruin other areas by moving all that crap to them. Keep it to yourself.
The people in Idaho prefer to look at forest, waterfalls, and lakes instead of admiring an "incredible" urban skyline, which just indicates more crowding, worse traffic, more pollution. Yes, humans are capable of building huge tall ugly concrete structures. I don't see much to admire about that.
Thought it might be interesting to list the largest cities (by metro area population, 2022 estimates) in this four-state region, and show how they rank among the overall metro areas in the country.
Notice that six of these 11 cities are located on or near the edge of the four-state region: Sioux Falls, Fargo, Bozeman, Missoula, Grand Forks, and Cheyenne. Of the remaining cities, none of them are all that centrally located. I'd say it's a toss-up between Billings and Rapid City. Just eyeballing a map, I'd say that Miles City, MT (population 8,354) is probably closest to the geographic center.
So, just going by existing population development and trends, I would say that Sioux Falls would be the best bet to establish a major city, with Fargo being a strong contender. (It also helps that both of these cities are located at the junction of north-south and east-west interstate highways.) Based on tourism potential, I'd say it should be either Bozeman (close to Yellowstone) or Rapid City (close to Mount Rushmore, Devils Tower, etc.). For centralization purposes, either Rapid City or Billings, or else try to build up Miles City.
One more tidbit of information. The busiest airport in this four-state region, by far, is the one serving Bozeman. The big draw there isn't really Bozeman itself, but rather Yellowstone National Park. BZN saw well over 1 million passengers in 2022, which was nearly double the number in runner-up Sioux Falls. Perhaps not coincidentally, BZN is the only airport in these four states that is served by Southwest Airlines.
There is one in AZ-NM, two in NV-UT, one in CO-WY. Does that make anything cool?
Actually, no, large cities in the mountain west are isolated and marginally sustainable if there is serious climate warming and droughts. Phoenix is essentially sprawl. Albuquerque is mostly penned in by terrain, Indian reservations and desert. Las Vegas is mostly an artificial city built on entertainment. Salt Lake City is also penned in somewhat. Denver is the possible exception and part of the front range N-S string of cities from Cheyenne south to Pueblo. The 18 counties have about 5 million people stretched along the entire front range. If climate change brings a dryer climate there will be greater challenges to deal with.
Probably Juarez/El Paso is the largest city complex in the mountain west. with over 3 million people, mostly in Juarez. The Phoenix metro is nearly 5 million people.
Why would Idaho want a huge major city, with all the dirt, crowding, traffic, drugs, homeless, and crime?
People move to Idaho to get away from all the crowding and all the bad things that come with over-crowding.
If you like living in a big city, you have your choice of many. Do not try to ruin other areas by moving all that crap to them. Keep it to yourself.
Second... good post!
Boise is big enough and will continue to grow for the next several years. Not to 3 mil size, and that's a good thing in my opinion. Many people in Montana think Missoula, Bozeman, the Flathead Valley, etc. are big enough already. In those major cities you dream about moving to the inland Northwest, what is good about them? Sports teams... how many people in New York, Chicago, St Louis, Miami, etc. can actually go to a live game, or want to? What's so great about a concrete and glass skyline vs. mountains, trees, green (or often brown) fields of grass and brush? Access to more concerts, theater, galleries, dining, shopping, etc. Guess what. Bands come to Boise, Bozeman, Missoula, Rapid City, etc. There are live theaters in all these towns. They aren't Broadway, but still entertaining. Unless you are into some eccentric specialty dining experience mirroring a food network show, you can find fine dining in many moderately sized cities in the West. If you are a restrictive diner, i.e. no "something" in your diet, then you may have some issues in small towns and moderate cities, but generally good food is prepared and served in many. Shopping is mostly online these days anyway, so no loss there in a town of 100 or 100,000. Plus, all the items/desires that cannot be filled in a small town are a good excuse to travel. Most of the Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota moderately sized towns have good cheap flights to major cities like Denver, SLC, Las Vegas, San Francesco, Portland and/or Seattle.
So, what's so good about having a major/mega metro area in the inland Northwest?
Why would Idaho want a huge major city, with all the dirt, crowding, traffic, drugs, homeless, and crime?
People move to Idaho to get away from all the crowding and all the bad things that come with over-crowding.
If you like living in a big city, you have your choice of many. Do not try to ruin other areas by moving all that crap to them. Keep it to yourself.
The people in Idaho prefer to look at forest, waterfalls, and lakes instead of admiring an "incredible" urban skyline, which just indicates more crowding, worse traffic, more pollution. Yes, humans are capable of building huge tall ugly concrete structures. I don't see much to admire about that.
Agreed.
These are 4 of my favorite states. Being sparsely populated is part of the equation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.