Indianapolis Development News

[cailes]

Ouch.... thats a tough critique

[Round Rock]

from: Inside Indiana Business

The mayor of Carmel says the city is immediately planning to put a Money magazine accolade to use. The publication places the Hamilton County community first among small cities in its annual "Best Places to Live" rankings. Jim Brainard says the honor helps position the city among the most "fertile hunting grounds" for economic development. He says the distinction gives Carmel an opportunity to help build its brand.

The town of Fishers landed the number 12 overall ranking.

Money cites Carmel's high concentration of office workers, low crime rate and housing.

The top 12 are as follows:

1. Carmel, Ind.
2. McKinney, Tex.
3. Eden Prairie, Min.
4. Newton, Mass.
5. Redmond, Wash.
6. Irvine, Cal.
7. Reston, Vir.
8. Columbia/Ellicott City, Mar.
9. Overland Park, Kan.
10. Chapel Hill, NC
11. Woodbury, Min.
12. Fishers, Ind.

[cailes]

Those are the best "small" cities to live.

If you look at all of them, they are all fringe communities to major metro areas.

[arenn]

Interesting piece out of Ft. Wayne: http://www.journalgazette.net/articl...9981/1021/EDIT

[arenn]

Having places like Carmel and Fishers rank so highly on such ratings is critical to Indianapolis. That's what really sets the city apart, not its downtown I hate to say. I like to say Carmel is the secret weapon of Indianapolis because it is better than many of equivalent suburbs in cities Indy goes up against: Dublin, OH (Columbus), Mason, OH (Cincinnati), Franklin/Cool Springs (Nashville). I haven't been to Overland Park so can't directly comment on that, but it's a very big established business suburb.

[cdc guy]

Originally Posted by cailes

Those are the best "small" cities to live.

If you look at all of them, they are all fringe communities to major metro areas.

Not fringe, Curt. Suburbs. Apparently "small cities" is now code for "suburbs"; I'm somewhat familiar with Fishers, Irvine, and Eden Prairie, and it's a real stretch to call an of them a "city". Carmel and McKinney TX probably have enough core to qualify.

I'm really surprised they didn't list actual small cities like Norman OK, State College or West Chester PA, Springfield OH, Bloomington or West Lafayette, IN that may be near major metros but have real downtowns and fairly large in-town college/university life that adds culture and interest.

[moochie]

Originally Posted by mobyhead

At first glance it reminded me of this...

I like Arby's much better. At least some thought was put into it.

[cailes]

Originally Posted by cdc guy

Not fringe, Curt. Suburbs. Apparently "small cities" is now code for "suburbs"; I'm somewhat familiar with Fishers, Irvine, and Eden Prairie, and it's a real stretch to call an of them a "city". Carmel and McKinney TX probably have enough core to qualify.

I'm really surprised they didn't list actual small cities like Norman OK, State College or West Chester PA, Springfield OH, Bloomington or West Lafayette, IN that may be near major metros but have real downtowns and fairly large in-town college/university life that adds culture and interest.

Thanks for the correction ;-)

[MSam]

Long time listener, first time caller here. The thing about these lists tend to be people take them with a grain of salt unless you are on a list that paints you in a positive light. Is Carmel a secret weapon, no, people forgot the name 10 minutes after reading the list. It makes a difference once someone selects Indianapolis. Overland Park probably stronger than Carmel but hamilton is stronger than JoCo top to bottom.

[DowntownIndianapolis]

Originally Posted by mobyhead

At first glance it reminded me of this...

Get me some roast Beef! ROAST BEEF NOW! haha.

[kangaroo1]

Originally Posted by cdc guy

Not fringe, Curt. Suburbs. Apparently "small cities" is now code for "suburbs"; I'm somewhat familiar with Fishers, Irvine, and Eden Prairie, and it's a real stretch to call an of them a "city". Carmel and McKinney TX probably have enough core to qualify.

I'm really surprised they didn't list actual small cities like Norman OK, State College or West Chester PA, Springfield OH, Bloomington or West Lafayette, IN that may be near major metros but have real downtowns and fairly large in-town college/university life that adds culture and interest.

I think Irvine is more of a mid-sized city than the other municipalities on the list. It has a population of about 220,000 people and it is a major employment center for Orange County. It is also denser than some bigger cities such as Indianapolis, Phoenix, or Kansas City. It is about 46 miles away from LA, and most people who live in Irvine do not commute to LA, so I would not call it a suburb. It does not have a traditional downtown, but it has several major commercial clusters.

Norman, OK is 20 miles from Oklahoma City and part of the OKC metro area, and West Chester, PA is very close to both Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia. So, I am not sure why these cities would be considered more urban, unless you are just considering whether a city has a traditional downtown.


As many suburbs like Carmel have grown into edge cities, the definition of a small city as changed. I think when most people look to move to a small city, unless they are considering moving to a college town or a resort area, they generally want to be near a major city and its amenities.

[cdc guy]

Originally Posted by kangaroo1

I think Irvine is more of a mid-sized city than the other municipalities on the list. It has a population of about 220,000 people and it is a major employment center for Orange County. It is also denser than some bigger cities such as Indianapolis, Phoenix, or Kansas City. It is about 46 miles away from LA, and most people who live in Irvine do not commute to LA, so I would not call it a suburb. It does not have a traditional downtown, but it has several major commercial clusters.

Norman, OK is 20 miles from Oklahoma City and part of the OKC metro area, and West Chester, PA is very close to both Wilmington, DE and Philadelphia. So, I am not sure why these cities would be considered more urban, unless you are just considering whether a city has a traditional downtown.


As many suburbs like Carmel have grown into edge cities, the definition of a small city as changed. I think when most people look to move to a small city, unless they are considering moving to a college town or a resort area, they generally want to be near a major city and its amenities.

I was thinking more about places with traditional, less auto-oriented development patterns and actual walkable cores. Places like Irvine might qualify economically and demographically but fail basic form tests of cities. Irvine's form is replicated in many "outer-loop" edge cities, and I understand that might be considered "the evolving urban fom" but it is not urban and the density lacks connectivity. (The streetcar suburbs of the 1920's-40's are both dense and connected.)

I question calling Overland Park (~150,000) and Irvine (200,000) "small cities" anyway when they are well-integrated into large metro areas. LIkewise Carmel and Fishers.

I'd submit that most college towns (as Aaron Renn might say) "punch above their weight" when it comes to jobs, income, health care and amenities, and campus vicinities are inherently walkable. Carmel just built a performing-arts center; places like Bloomington and Norman have had multiple venues and solid performance schedules for decades because they have schools of performing arts. Such places also typically have high-level semi-professional sports teams, and good dining choices.

[CorrND]

Here's a friendly reminder that tomorrow is the first Indy Rezone public workshop to discuss the proposed mixed-use zone around 16th/Monon.

[idyllic indy]

Originally Posted by cdc guy

I was thinking more about places with traditional, less auto-oriented development patterns and actual walkable cores. Places like Irvine might qualify economically and demographically but fail basic form tests of cities. Irvine's form is replicated in many "outer-loop" edge cities, and I understand that might be considered "the evolving urban fom" but it is not urban and the density lacks connectivity. (The streetcar suburbs of the 1920's-40's are both dense and connected.)

I question calling Overland Park (~150,000) and Irvine (200,000) "small cities" anyway when they are well-integrated into large metro areas. LIkewise Carmel and Fishers.

I'd submit that most college towns (as Aaron Renn might say) "punch above their weight" when it comes to jobs, income, health care and amenities, and campus vicinities are inherently walkable. Carmel just built a performing-arts center; places like Bloomington and Norman have had multiple venues and solid performance schedules for decades because they have schools of performing arts. Such places also typically have high-level semi-professional sports teams, and good dining choices.

I agree. I think another way of distinguishing a legitimate independent city (small or large) from being a suburb is to determine (guess?) what portion of its growth occurred due to its own independent economy versus what came as a result of a neighboring city's outward expansion. For Fishers, I'd say the independent growth is pretty close to zero. I don't know that much about Carmel's history, but given that its greatest growth spurt has coincided with the full build-out of the adjacent northside of Indianapolis, I'd say that the vast majority of its growth is to be credited to the growth of Indianapolis as well. Of course, how the City has developed and used its resources to attract a more upwardly mobile segment of Central Indiana residents can certainly be somewhat attributed to Carmel itself, and in my opinion, it's a much more city-like place to live than somewhere like Eden Prairie, MN which is nothing but a jumble of wide, winding, high-speed, multi-lane roads surrounded by cul-de-sac subdivisions with no sense of place (aside from membership in a common public school district). But the bottom line is that even a good, semi-urban, semi-bike/ped-friendly suburb like Carmel wouldn't exist in anything near its current population size if it hadn't been for the steady growth of Indianapolis. Thus, they lack the authenticity or credibility of independent small cities that grew due to the expansion of their own economies and shouldn't be lumped and judged in the same group.

[cdc guy]

Interesting post on Atlantic Cities about bicycle infrastructure here.

Excerpts:
...city officials from around the world ... say that painted bike lanes are a thing of the past and they are no longer investing money in that type of infrastructure...

and

....the likelihood of a resident commuting by bike increases exponentially with the proportion of their commuting trip made possible on a separated bike lane.

I made this same point about a bicycle boulevard on 61st St. and a separated path on 62nd east of Keystone vs. painted bike lanes on BR Ave.

[cailes]

I find it false when they say things like nobody is painting lanes on streets. Cities all over the world are still doing this. Maybe LEADING cities have strayed away from it, but there are still plenty of cities, even ahead of Indy, that are still painting lines on streets.

Not that I prefer that. I would love a separated lane everywhere, or at least a 3 foot buffer

[cdc guy]

Originally Posted by cailes

I would love a separated lane everywhere, or at least a 3 foot buffer

You'd have to go to Carmel or Fishers to get that. They're great small cities.

[sarcasm off]

[cdc guy]

Originally Posted by cailes

I find it false when they say things like nobody is painting lanes on streets. Cities all over the world are still doing this.

They didn't say nobody is doing it. The implication certainly is that nobody with a good bike plan is doing it.

And the measured cycling increases certainly underscores the main point: to get some non-riders to consider riding, it has to be a lot safer than "riding in traffic".

[cailes]

Originally Posted by cdc guy

They didn't say nobody is doing it. The implication certainly is that nobody with a good bike plan is doing it.

And the measured cycling increases certainly underscores the main point: to get some non-riders to consider riding, it has to be a lot safer than "riding in traffic".

Well, and again this is anecdotal only, my family recently went down to 1 vehicle. My wife, who is a full time artist and stay at home mom, has been using IndyGo and more than anything, riding her bike. We have a tow behind trailer, live a half mile from the Monon and near 52nd street where its the single stripe bike lanes.

My wife was very nervous about riding with our son along 52nd. We used to avoid it as much as possible when pulling the little dude around. But as time has gone by, she has turned into an avid cycler and does not mind using the lanes on 52nd now.

The point? Even the most skeptic of protective parents can be convinced to trust the single stripe bike lanes. As parents, we both would love to see more Shelby Street-esque infrastructure, but it got us from 2 cars, down to 1 car and using the bus

[SpiderMonkey]

http://www.ibj.com/web-services-firm.../article/36239

Coming to Downtown Indy
-Appirio - Cloud Computing Computing out of San Francisco
-300 employees by 2015
-12,500 square feet of office space in Pan Am Plaza