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.
Manhattan is the center of NYC, but it's not really in the center like other city centers in world cities. If Hudson county was consolidated, Manhattan would become more or less in the center plus it's so close and it's closer to Manhattan than Staten Island, which is NYC to begin with so it would make sense if Hudson County was NYC too. I think NJ border should start with Hackensack river and Newark Bay. I suppose parts of Bergen should be joined too. I already asked this on NJ forum, but it's interesting to see how the opinions will differ between NY and NJ residents. What do you think?
Last edited by OleSchoolFool; 01-07-2012 at 12:19 PM..
A city doesn't have to be entirely within one state. Look at Kansas City (split between Kansas and Missouri).
And yes, Hudson County would definitely fit in better with the rest of NYC than Staten Island. Bergen County not so much (overall, it's more suburban than SI).
But hey, what's done is done. And living on SI, I'm definitely not complaining about being a part of NYC. And there's nothing saying that there has to be a trade-off (Hudson County for SI), so sure, why not?
It's because of geography. There is water separating NY from NJ. Also, except for JC and Hoboken, the development of Bergen County as endless suburbs is fairly recent. A lot of the places in Bergen County that are now suburbia were still farms or at least partly farms when I was a kid.
When I was growing up in the Sixties, 30 miles NW of Manhattan, nobody I knew had parents who worked in the city. We never went to the city except for school field trips to the UN or a museum. It was a completely different world. Most people were of Dutch/German/English/Scandinavian descent and had been in the area for generations. In the late 60's, "white flight" began as a result of race riots, and hordes of people of Polish/Italian/Irish descent who previously lived in the Bronx and Manhattan since their parents/grandparents immigrated to the US came flying out of the city into the burbs and built houses. And Catholic churches. I remember my grandfather (a/k/a Archie Bunker) being particularly upset about that last part. Hehehe, he must be spinning now at the mix of races and religions in his old hometown.
But by that logic, the other boroughs shouldn't be part of NYC because there are bodies of water seperating them from Manhattan.
And indeed they were not. But consolidating them around the turn of the 20th century was possible because they were part of the same state. Consolidating across state boundaries is essentially impossible in the US.
Note that the pattern of two cities across a river from another, with separate governments, is not uncommon at all. A river makes a natural border, and the banks of a river are a good place to settle.
By Bergen I mean only a few towns like Cliffside Park, Fort Lee and those nearby ones, etc. I was just looking at the map of the metro area, and it just kinda made sense to me. NJ people seem a little offended by this question, but NYC is the megapolis here, not the other way around so NYC should be the one extending. I know it's not likely, since it's different states. By the way, I am in NJ, and I am just being real. For example, I come from Moscow, Russia originally, which is pretty similar to NYC in size and atmosphere and recently they expanded their borders behind a few freeways there that used be the difference between city and suburbs. Basically, it's just weird to me that you are in JC or even Fort Lee and much closer to Manhattan, the NYC epicenter, than a lot of parts of Queens and Brooklyn even though you are in another state and another city.
Last edited by OleSchoolFool; 01-07-2012 at 02:33 PM..
And indeed they were not. But consolidating them around the turn of the 20th century was possible because they were part of the same state. Consolidating across state boundaries is essentially impossible in the US.
Note that the pattern of two cities across a river from another, with separate governments, is not uncommon at all. A river makes a natural border, and the banks of a river are a good place to settle.
But then what about Kansas City? That seems like a pretty old city. (Unless there are technically two Kansas Cities on opposite sides of the Missouri River)
There's a little thing known as state sovereignty that throws a major roadblock in your little idea. Besides, other than your artistic view of what the map should look like, explain exactly what the point of this change would be?
Last edited by Airborneguy; 01-07-2012 at 08:50 PM..
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.