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.
This is a riff off of the "Combine two cities" thread. Instead of considering two cities which are in the same state, but not nearby, what adjacent cities should be merged, but it's not in the cards for whatever political reason? Let's not consider sister cities across state lines, because that would be essentially impossible.
Off the top of my head Minneapolis-Saint Paul seems like a gimme. The two downtowns are clearly separate, but plenty of cities have two different CBDs these days, and it works out okay.
The Hampton Roads area is another good example. At minimum, Newport News and Hampton should be merged, and Portsmouth with Norfolk. I could see the argument for merging all four, and maybe Virginia Beach, to form a "five boroughs" type setup. It would really help build up the prominence of the area.
I could see the argument for Yonkers to become a "sixth borough" of New York.
There would be a lot of options in New Jersey. Most of Hudson County is effectively one urbanized area, and should be a mega "Jersey City."
There's also a number of towns and cities which are to the north of Boston which are part of the contiguous urban area. Not just Cambridge and Somberville, but everything up to Revere and Malden.
I wouldn't combine Minneapolis and St. Paul, it's such a source of cultural identity. Apart from the fact that there would be no more twin cities in the Twin Cities, people there identify very strongly with one or the other, even in the suburbs. If you're from Minnetonka, that's Minneapolis, period, and if you're from White Bear Lake, that's St. Paul. The rivalry and shared history is such a huge point of cultural pride, it would honestly change the metro irreparably. And, you know, there's not really any reason to, they do fine by themselves.
I definitely agree about Hampton Roads, though, it's such a confusing place. There's not really an anchor city (maybe Norfolk? Virginia Beach is more touristy and kind of far away from the rest of them). Or rather, there are maybe too many anchor cities? How many are really that important to the area? Four? Five? Six? What about Chesapeake? I would say at least Portsmouth and Norfolk should merge, and maybe also Hampton and Newport News. I could see a kind of Tri-Cities thing working with Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Hampton.
There are a bunch of coastal regions on all four sides that could use some consolidation. Certainly parts of Florida and California. There's also a big swath of inhabited coastline on Lake Michigan in Indiana and Michigan that doesn't seem to belong to any metro or anything, and it would be good to have some clearer political boundaries there.
I definitely agree about Hampton Roads, though, it's such a confusing place. There's not really an anchor city (maybe Norfolk? Virginia Beach is more touristy and kind of far away from the rest of them). Or rather, there are maybe too many anchor cities? How many are really that important to the area? Four? Five? Six? What about Chesapeake? I would say at least Portsmouth and Norfolk should merge, and maybe also Hampton and Newport News. I could see a kind of Tri-Cities thing working with Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Hampton.
The four core Hampton Roads cities (Portsmouth, Norfolk, Newport News, and Hampton) are all relatively similar in terms of urbanity, political balance, and relative wealth, so it's one of best arguments for mergers in the country.
Virginia Beach may be a bridge too far though. It's mostly suburban, a lot whiter, and a lot more Republican. It would stand to lose a lot more being in a consolidated city. I'd say places like Chesapeake and Suffolk are even more beyond the pale, as they are right wing and even more suburban. They're basically only incorporated as cities because it stopped the "core cities" from annexing them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steel03
There are a bunch of coastal regions on all four sides that could use some consolidation. Certainly parts of Florida and California.
Sun Belt states in general seem to have much crazier municipal boundaries - lots of jaggly lines, cities inside of cities, unincorporated islands, etc. I think it springs from their history as all being unincorporated instead of springing from towns/townships.
This is a riff off of the "Combine two cities" thread. Instead of considering two cities which are in the same state, but not nearby, what adjacent cities should be merged, but it's not in the cards for whatever political reason? Let's not consider sister cities across state lines, because that would be essentially impossible.
Off the top of my head Minneapolis-Saint Paul seems like a gimme. The two downtowns are clearly separate, but plenty of cities have two different CBDs these days, and it works out okay.
The Hampton Roads area is another good example. At minimum, Newport News and Hampton should be merged, and Portsmouth with Norfolk. I could see the argument for merging all four, and maybe Virginia Beach, to form a "five boroughs" type setup. It would really help build up the prominence of the area.
I could see the argument for Yonkers to become a "sixth borough" of New York.
There would be a lot of options in New Jersey. Most of Hudson County is effectively one urbanized area, and should be a mega "Jersey City."
There's also a number of towns and cities which are to the north of Boston which are part of the contiguous urban area. Not just Cambridge and Somberville, but everything up to Revere and Malden.
Anyway, other ideas?
There's a pretty clear east/west split along I93 of those "just north of Boston" cities... I think Cambridge/Somerville and MAYBE Medford could be merged, and separately Chelsea/Revere/Everett/Malden could be merged; but trying to combine the two would be a disaster.
I think combining Utica and Rome, NY might create enough critical mass to get something positive going for those cities. I also think that the NYS Capital cities could be merged. I never understood why Albany and Troy were separated.
Even though they were actually were combined at one time i think Alexandria Va and D.C. would merge well with one another, and maybe Camden NJ and Philly.
Raleigh should absorb two of its adjacent suburbs: Garner & Knightdale. Garner to the south and Knightdale to the east of the city lag Raleigh's other adjacent burbs in terms of financial stability and economic vitality. Adding them to Raleigh will add less than 40,000 people to the population of the city but would better position those areas for more significant development & redevelopment nearer the city center of Raleigh and give the city more control of its entire SE side. From what I understand, the town of Garner already has a ton of operational dependency on the Capital city.
As for the aforementioned combining of Miami Beach with Miami...over my dead body.
Atlanta and Decatur, GA.
Boston, Brookline, and Cambridge, MA.
Chicago, Oak Park, and Cicero, IL.
Cleveland and Parma, OH.
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.
