Does urban consolidation work? - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > United States > United States Urban Issues

United States Urban Issues Discussions and pictures of highrises, urbanity, architecture and the built environment of US cities


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 4th, 2006, 03:28 PM   #1
edsg25
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,194
Likes (Received): 106

Does urban consolidation work?

Have social scientists and political scientists ever been able to offer evidence that cities that merge with counties (i.e. Miami-Dade and Indianapolis) provide for a better and more efficient metropolitan areas than the traditional model of these governmental units staying apart?

It would seem today that we are still living at a time when the overriding reason why cities stop and suburbs begin is related to when city groowth finally bit a brick wall of suburbs that refused to be annexed (and most of this probabl occurried a t least a centur ago).

Should we be considering in all metro areas a way to eleiminate the artiifical divisons and conslidate into an aea wide whole.
edsg25 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 5th, 2006, 03:40 AM   #2
Sean in New Orleans
Registered User
 
Sean in New Orleans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 2,889
Likes (Received): 43

I don't think we should. Local government is the lifeblood of the US. For some population is prestige, but, the bottom line is we are humans that live in neighborhoods and local government is what really matters. We don't need a bunch of conglomerate cities in the US.
__________________
"America has only three cities: New York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland." Tennessee Williams
Sean in New Orleans no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2006, 08:01 AM   #3
sargeantcm
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,034
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean in New Orleans
...Local government is the lifeblood of the US. For some population is prestige, but, the bottom line is we are humans that live in neighborhoods and local government is what really matters. We don't need a bunch of conglomerate cities in the US.
Come to Buffalo. Local government here is a noose. We have 341 politicians over 30 or so jurisdictions (some overlapping) for 940k people in Erie County. Regional consolidation is something often talked about, but nobody seems to care about it. Politicians like to keep their power and patronage, of course they're not going to agree to cut themselves out of the equation.

It seems most of your progressive, growing cities nowadays are cities which have regionalized. Maybe it's better apt to handle sprawl, I don't know.
sargeantcm no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 5th, 2006, 05:02 PM   #4
Sean in New Orleans
Registered User
 
Sean in New Orleans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 2,889
Likes (Received): 43

It's been discussed in New Orleans since Katrina. There are those that would like to consolidate several suburbs with New Orleans (on the Southshore of Lake Pontchartrain), and create a New Orleans, of around 950,000. I don't support it. I don't think we need a New Orleans that size. It would make a bunch of people think that we are really big, but, who cares what people think? This amount of people already live here. They don't need to see these stats in an almanac to gain respect, IMO. I like my neighborhood, Uptown, in New Orleans. And I like having my city councilwoman's cell phone on my cell phone and I can call her if there is a problem. I know she has a large amount of constituents, and I don't call her often, but, I'm not one to think we need a bunch of large conglomerates. Maybe it would work in Buffalo (and even here), but, I don't support these types of ideas.
__________________
"America has only three cities: New York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland." Tennessee Williams
Sean in New Orleans no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2006, 09:37 PM   #5
sargeantcm
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,034
Likes (Received): 2

The issue is duplication of services here, more or less. You send tax $$$ to each entity, and a great number of the services you are paying for overlap. These entities all tend to compete for pieces of the same "pie" (turf wars) so-to-speak as well, and that turns everyone into losers when compared to a single regional vision. Generally, I think consolidation to eliminate that from occuring should work just about anywhere. The degree of improvement is just a matter of how layered the region is previous to the consolidation.

As for population, it is largely a statistic. However, to use Buffalo as an example again, we'd jump from 280k+ to 940k+, 60th to 16th in the US in population. What I'm not looking at here is pride, what I'm looking at is political clout. The 16th largest city is undoubtedly going to carry more weight than the 60th.

Losing "neighborhoods" is an argument commonly heard around here as well, but I don't really buy it. Sure some things will change, things like the city benefiting more than the suburbs (which frankly I think is the best thing that could happen). Realistically, the neighborhood one lives in will remain the same, will be called the same, etc. Really, the biggest difference is you'll just be sending your tax $$$ (and theoretically fewer of them) to a different entity and receiving services from a different entity (police, fire, highway, etc. depending on how far the consolidation goes).

Those are the issues here at least. Indy and Louisville are probably the two most prominent examples, and Pittsburgh and Buffalo seem to be leading the way towards that goal currently (from what I've heard, and it's admittedly still far off).

Last edited by sargeantcm; March 5th, 2006 at 09:43 PM.
sargeantcm no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2006, 12:02 AM   #6
veryprotourism
registered boozer
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: upstate disgruntled
Posts: 1,090
Likes (Received): 1

it can also improve declining cities credit ratings.
think about your credit. it not only based on your past performance but also on what kind of money you earn.(i know its more complicated than this but for this simple argument it works)
veryprotourism no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2006, 08:08 PM   #7
cwilson758
Cory
 
cwilson758's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco via Indianapolis
Posts: 3,403
Likes (Received): 15

As I mentioned in the "Indy on Indy" thread, for Indy it helped. Made it much more easy for things to get approved and the whole "growing population" reality does wonders for a cities sense of itself.

Louisville now claims 16th largest city, despite what some may think, this does a lot for the residents that live there.
cwilson758 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 09:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us