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.
I think it's interesting to look at Europe. Obviously the cities are all quite old, but generally speaking countries that united early (England, France, Spain, etc.) have one hyper-dominant city where all the urbanization flowed to. In contrast, countries that united only in the 19th century (Germany and Italy) are much more multipolar, with many cities of roughly equal stature, since they used to be the primary cities of smaller nations.
My point here is that in the case of a "newer" U.S., we'd likely see a lot less metropolitan areas in general, with all of the growth flowing towards a handful of big urban areas.
This was kinda what I was getting at. Boston and Philly and Baltimore were capitals of their own countries when created. And we don’t bulldoze cities once they become technically obsolete/redundant. Starting from scratch New York would be a mega city, being the best natural port on the northeast coast.
All in all, the country would look more like countries that largely developed in the 19th/20th century.
It would look more like Australia or Brazil for one of the main reasons our interior is largely developed is because it was France; and we don’t bulldoze cities. To think of it, US is one of the only large countries that has a well developed interior. Maybe India as well, but India is ancient.
It is interesting that the city of San Francisco was not abandoned after the 1906 earthquake. I know there was some discussion, but be curious if there was a book are publication that discusses the immediate post earthquake period.
Too many people to abandon it.
There were already fairly strong neighborhood identities at that point too. After Chinatown collapsed, the city leadership wanted to relocate it to an industrial area in Hunter's Point, and the Chinese community wouldn't have it. They threatened to move to Tacoma or Portland --- removing the economic activity Chinatown was bringing --- before the city relented.
Coastal cities being just now founded would build on the highest elevations. In its rewriting of its zoning ordinances, Charleston is looking from here on out to builder “higher and denser” to go along with its Dutch-like seawater mitigation projects.
In geographically large states like Montana and Texas, cities may still be founded just to be capitals due to inconvenient travel times for legislators. Navigable inland rivers may still be a reason to found cities for logistical purposes.
Coastal cities being just now founded would build on the highest elevations. In its rewriting of its zoning ordinances, Charleston is looking from here on out to builder “higher and denser” to go along with its Dutch-like seawater mitigation projects.
In geographically large states like Montana and Texas, cities may still be founded just to be capitals due to inconvenient travel times for legislators. Navigable inland rivers may still be a reason to found cities for logistical purposes.
If worried about sea level rise, southern coastal cities are pretty much screwed. The only ones with high enough ground nearby that could possibly be expanded are Mobile and somewhat Houston.
This question is too hard to answer. The invention of the AC skews things south.
You could equally say that central heating, energy efficient buildings, and high tech fabrics skew things north. I own the clothing to be comfortable outdoors in cold weather. An August afternoon in Florida or Texas, I’m banished to air conditioning.
If worried about sea level rise, southern coastal cities are pretty much screwed. The only ones with high enough ground nearby that could possibly be expanded are Mobile and somewhat Houston.
Charleston’s got a ton of developable real estate on higher ground. Only land immediately adjacent to the big water and inland waterways is at risk. The City has ended housing development in low-lying areas while looking to build thousands of new housing units to try to catch up with demand in the city.
There were already fairly strong neighborhood identities at that point too. After Chinatown collapsed, the city leadership wanted to relocate it to an industrial area in Hunter's Point, and the Chinese community wouldn't have it. They threatened to move to Tacoma or Portland --- removing the economic activity Chinatown was bringing --- before the city relented.
Do you have a book or reference on that time period??
There's precious little that would have drawn people there until Disney chose it for Walt Disney World, prior it was just another bump in the road in the center of the state with no tourist interest/draw being as far as possible from the coast in FL.
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.
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.
