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.
It seems that everyone wants New Orleans to see an explosion of growth, and while it might be cool, I can't help but wonder if it would dilute the spirit of the town. It's virtually the only major American city with any real unique culture, and I'd hate to see that be phased out.
Agreed. New Orleans is one of the most unique cities in the country. Its smaller but when it comes to uniqueness its on the level of New York, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Miami. The one thing all those places have in common is you couldn't mistake them for anywhere else.
In the Running Is
1. New Orleans
2. Tampa
3. Sacramento
4. Buffalo
5. Raleigh
6. Peoria
7. Savannah
8. San Antonio
San Antonio would be a good choice if it meant more development like the Pearl Brewery, but I think all of those cities would be ruined with more typical sprawl.
A St. Louis that's as large and thriving as its past would be great. Old pictures of St. Louis has the streets bustling--if the old houses can be fixed up, abandoned, vacant, and parking lots could be put to better use and some mass transit could get going along with an amicable relationship between the city and county, I think a good large St. Louis on the level of Boston and Philly would be great.
My first choice would be Atlanta. I'd love for its urban core to continue becoming denser and more vibrant. Expand MARTA, complete the Beltline, grow the skyline, have incrased rail transport to places like Charlotte, Nashville, and Birmingham, increase the number of people who actually live inside the Perimeter. IMO that would be awesome. A large part of Atlanta's culture is business oriented, being a leader of the "New South" and being a connectivity hub. I think extra growth would highlight that culture and would make the city more of a destination.
Raleigh and St. Louis are two other cities that I think would be very cool with some increased growth (of course Raleigh is already on its way).
Lots of folks are saying New Orleans, but I like New Orleans the way it is, and I would worry that if it were too large it would lose some of its character. I think that is true for a lot of smaller places that rely on historic character (Savanah, Charleston come to mind). Whereas some cities would benefit from extra growth, I think too much growth might detract from those places.
My first choice would be Atlanta. I'd love for its urban core to continue becoming denser and more vibrant. Expand MARTA, complete the Beltline, grow the skyline, have incrased rail transport to places like Charlotte, Nashville, and Birmingham, increase the number of people who actually live inside the Perimeter. IMO that would be awesome. A large part of Atlanta's culture is business oriented, being a leader of the "New South" and being a connectivity hub. I think extra growth would highlight that culture and would make the city more of a destination.
Raleigh and St. Louis are two other cities that I think would be very cool with some increased growth (of course Raleigh is already on its way).
Lots of folks are saying New Orleans, but I like New Orleans the way it is, and I would worry that if it were too large it would lose some of its character. I think that is true for a lot of smaller places that rely on historic character (Savanah, Charleston come to mind). Whereas some cities would benefit from extra growth, I think too much growth might detract from those places.
I think if cities were developed in a tight urban form replacing architectural and urban design missteps of the last half century or so, then there are a lot of cities with beautiful historic neighborhoods which could be preserved (and coveted) while still growing to large sizes. New Orleans has plenty of areas of vacant, abandoned, or parking lots that can be built up without having to intrude on the historical legacy of the city. This is pretty much true of many American cities--especially as so many American cities have large parts of their historical legacy already razed to the ground.
Definitely agree on Pittsburgh and Charleston. They both have nice, contiguous, highly walkable cores, but they're just not very large cities (Charleston anyway). There's just not enough "city."
A St. Louis that's as large and thriving as its past would be great. Old pictures of St. Louis has the streets bustling--if the old houses can be fixed up, abandoned, vacant, and parking lots could be put to better use and some mass transit could get going along with an amicable relationship between the city and county, I think a good large St. Louis on the level of Boston and Philly would be great.
Agreed. I'd also like to see what Cleveland or Detroit looked like in their heyday......these places were once amazing cities!
I would say Buffalo..but only if it would undergo restoration and improve it's economy. It would be nice to see another big city in New York State thrive other than NYC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpolyglot
Jacksonville - beaches, river, port, interesting geography, but man does it need a cultural boost
I agree. Jacksonville is a prime location with its geography having beaches and river. Another plus that it's located in Northern Florida where you see more of a change in seasons compared to Central and South Florida. It's too bad the city has unattractive attributes.
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.