HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #201  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2014, 3:01 AM
Double L's Avatar
Double L Double L is offline
Houston:Considered Good
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,846
The south is not only growing via cheap land. It is growing because that's where the jobs are. The factors which determine where businesses choose to send their employees is determined by the business climate and yes, the map proves that cheap land is a part of that but it is not the only factor. The total business climate is the main factor here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #202  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2014, 4:06 AM
atlantaguy's Avatar
atlantaguy atlantaguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Area code 404
Posts: 3,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double L View Post
The south is not only growing via cheap land. It is growing because that's where the jobs are. The factors which determine where businesses choose to send their employees is determined by the business climate and yes, the map proves that cheap land is a part of that but it is not the only factor. The total business climate is the main factor here.
Exactly. And globalization is important too. The amount of foreign investment and jobs across the region continues to increase.

It doesn't hurt that 5 of the largest airline hubs in the U.S. are located in Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Houston and Miami. All of these places are globally connected on an impressive scale.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #203  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2014, 4:26 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double L View Post
The south is not only growing via cheap land. It is growing because that's where the jobs are. T
Texas has far higher-than-average job growth, but the South, as a whole, is not really an outlier in terms of jobs created.

And Texas has very particular attributes (mostly the border with Mexico and resource extraction economy) not really really related to cheap land or business climate, or really anything common to other states in the South.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #204  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2014, 3:14 PM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double L View Post
The south is not only growing via cheap land. It is growing because that's where the jobs are. The factors which determine where businesses choose to send their employees is determined by the business climate and yes, the map proves that cheap land is a part of that but it is not the only factor. The total business climate is the main factor here.
depends on the business. some businesses need to be where certain types of employees are, some need to be where the population is, some need to be where population growth is, some need to be where minerals are, or transportation hubs, etc.

an unemployment map of the country by state reveals that there's no clear geographic trend with regard to the "south." unemployment in much of the south is well above average, and it's well below average in parts of the northeast, texas, and all of the northern interior, in large part due to the energy boom. unemployment is high in states which depended heavily on housing production, like Nevada or Florida.

i agree that business "climate" is important, but it includes many, many factors beyond the usual politically charged rhetoric about taxes and labor laws.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #205  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2014, 3:58 AM
KB0679's Avatar
KB0679 KB0679 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Washington, DC/rural SC
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
The vast majority of growth in the Atlanta area, both in terms of population and housing units, is on the fringe, not the core.
No question that suburban growth is happening, and that's not going to stop. But I think folks are getting frustrated because the significant infill that's planned and under construction within the core of Atlanta is being ignored. I don't expect for infill to outstrip suburban growth; that's unrealistic. But urban growth is definitely ramping up and you've got to know something about what's actually happening here to appreciate that; it goes beyond the numbers on paper, especially with the gentrification going on in the city proper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #206  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2014, 3:41 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double L View Post
The south is not only growing via cheap land. It is growing because that's where the jobs are. The factors which determine where businesses choose to send their employees is determined by the business climate and yes, the map proves that cheap land is a part of that but it is not the only factor. The total business climate is the main factor here.
Low wages, ability to pollute, cheap land, low workers comp, and other factors like them are all key. At least to the extent you're hiring workers as commodities. Other industries tend to cluster in big, expensive urban centers, one reason being that the (highly-paid) stars of those industries like to live there, as well as the synergies and inertia of clustering.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #207  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2014, 5:08 PM
novawolverine novawolverine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Low wages, ability to pollute, cheap land, low workers comp, and other factors like them are all key. At least to the extent you're hiring workers as commodities. Other industries tend to cluster in big, expensive urban centers, one reason being that the (highly-paid) stars of those industries like to live there, as well as the synergies and inertia of clustering.
Yes, all of those are factors in addition to lower taxes and corporate welfare that is being aggressively offered by jurisdictions.

I would only add that it's not as if places like Dallas, Houston, Austin, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh, and some others are bad places to live. Companies are not by and large setting up shop in Mississippi. Some sectors like medicine, law, and energy are not exclusively setting up in the South because they can pollute and because of worker's comp.

And while some of this is a southern thing, let's not ignore the fact that places outside of the South are able to attract jobs in these ways. Lots of businesses that were in California have left for surrounding states for some of the same reasons that the South has been gaining jobs in certain industries. Places like Utah and Colorado rank pretty well for business-friendliness.

We've been more of a service-oriented economy so jobs are going to go where the people are and the people are going to go where the jobs are, so the South and West were actually underserved for a long time. All markets need retail, construction, and other service jobs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #208  
Old Posted Aug 11, 2014, 7:36 PM
mhays mhays is online now
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Sometimes being close to a major airport, med school(s), supply network, etc., is also key. Maybe those are prerequisites, and then you narrow down your choices from there.

Also you have to be able to attract workers. Apparently you can attract people to Dallas.

As for public incentives, I wouldn't rely on them too much. A company attracted to that sort of thing seems (a) less likely to be a good corporate citizen, and (b) not a secure bet to stick around after the initial period.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #209  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2014, 11:23 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
THE DEATH OF THE AMERICAN SOUTH

Read More: http://sustainableatlantaga.com/2014...merican-south/

Quote:
Over the next 45 years rapid urban sprawl will dramatically affect the American Southeast, possibly altering the very essence of what the South represents both socially and environmentally.

- The South, for many years now, has served as a refuge from the blunt, fast-paced Northeast, offering all the charms of the city at a much more leisurely pace. Instead of a house next to an abandoned factory in Rhode Island, the South offered a house under the canopy of some of the most diverse forests in the world. Unfortunately, the South is about to become a victim of its own success.

- The massive urban sprawl predicted for the Southeast could eviscerate that leisurely lifestyle, that southern hospitality, and that beautiful forestry that has come to define the region. The entire area stretching from Atlanta to Raleigh will likely become one huge paved suburb, unrecognizable from any other generic suburb within the next 40 to 50 years.

- The South is well on its way to recreated the entire Northeast megalopolis that stretches from DC to Boston, except with even more inefficient land use patterns. This will likely create pollution, traffic, and stress much worse than what people were escaping when they first came to the South.

- A joint study between the US Geological Survey and North Carolina State University released last month shows urban sprawl increasing throughout the Southeast by between 110 and 190 percent by 2060. This sprawl is largely at the expense of agricultural and forested lands as farms and forests make way for cul-de-sacs and tract housing.

- More roads and houses equals less natural environment. Not only does the road or house actually displace the natural environment, but it then goes and affirmatively harms the environment with runoff from lawns and roads. While this is sad wherever it happens, it’s particularly sad in the Southeast since our forests are some of the most diverse in the world. Ninety-two percent of all bird species in the United States reside in the South.

- That goes along with 69 percent of reptiles and 57% of mammals. Recently researchers discovered a group of synchronous fireflies in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. This is significant because prior to this discovery only one other population of fireflies (in Siam/Thailand) exhibited coordinated flash behaviors. Since then a number of other firefly populations throughout the Southeast have shown this behavior. Perhaps one of the most magically diverse forests in the world is more important than comforting ourselves by making sure we can safely see another Waffle House while sitting inside a Waffle House.

- While the authors’ note that their predictions do not take into account the various ways in which land could be developed into urbanized areas, the likelihood is that most of the development will be low-density and auto-centric. Typical suburban development, characterized by leafy suburban development where everyone pretty much has one or two roads as their only options for commuting in any way, has already proved to cause more traffic than denser areas and to contribute to less-healthy lifestyles.

- The laid-back lifestyle, hospitality, and abundant environment has come to define the South. People grow up here proud to know that this is what their region represents. People move here seeking refuge from stressful environments; hoping to discover the many beautiful things those who grew up here already know and love. Our connection to the environment must account for something.

- Our cities and towns have grown up as an extension of nature, seamlessly intertwining the built and natural environments into one living unit. Our largest and most cosmopolitan urban environment is the City in the Forest. Nature most certainly created this relationship from the very beginning with its incessant need to strangle any human development, but we’ve grown with it. Perhaps this relationship with nature is the South. Our constant connection to the environment has allowed us to enjoy the simple, important things in life and not stress about the complications of human society.

- While we want to grow as a region, we want to grow in a smart manner. We need to use our land wisely and not waste it on endless parking lots and cul-de-sacs. The region should grow, but it should take into account smart growth principles such as alternative transportation choices, green spaces, natural spaces, mixed-use, and denser development. Let’s not simply repeat the same mistakes others have made in a way that will destroy almost everything we love about this region.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #210  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2014, 1:35 AM
jd3189 jd3189 is offline
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,571
^^^ Great article. I really hope that the South eventually limits sprawl and go for dense developments that still capitalize on the natural aspect of the region.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #211  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2014, 4:11 AM
kcexpress69's Avatar
kcexpress69 kcexpress69 is offline
Beer Stampede
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Metro KCMO
Posts: 2,283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Centropolis View Post
I've always thought that Springfield, MO would grow faster than it has now, and the area maybe has about 450,000, but the downtown has (arguably) better nightlife bustle than Tulsa and OKC. It's on the ozark plateau and is actually cooler than St. Louis in the summer. the 1960s suburban strips (when the area had it's boom) reeks of midcentury Texas style sprawl, though. The area at one time competed with Austin and Nashville as a country music mecca when broadcasts first became televised, but the scene regressed into the Branson "thing" south of town and was eclipsed by the other two in the obvious ways. It is sort of the upper southern city that didn't quite boom, but might.



source: www.itsalldowntown.com
Springfield has come a long way since I went to school there in the early 90s, but to me, they suffered the same problems as Kansas City and St. Louis. They might not have lost population, but much of the growth has shifted to the south towards Branson. When I was living there, towns like Ozark, Nixa, and Republic were just small tows of just a few thousand people each. Both Nixa and Ozark are over the 20,000 mark and Republic isn't too far behind. People are moving into the area, but stay away from the urban core. Since highways encircle the city, the traffic was murder there... although it's better accommodating to bicycles and pedestrian traffic. Downtown was all but dead when I was down there, so it's good to see more nightlife and loft's going into the older buildings. Springfield will continue to grow, but I don't expect it to grow any faster than it has been in the past
__________________
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." Kurt Vonnegut
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #212  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2014, 4:25 AM
hauntedheadnc's Avatar
hauntedheadnc hauntedheadnc is online now
A gruff individual.
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Greenville, SC - "Birthplace of the light switch rave"
Posts: 13,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
While we want to grow as a region, we want to grow in a smart manner. We need to use our land wisely and not waste it on endless parking lots and cul-de-sacs. The region should grow, but it should take into account smart growth principles such as alternative transportation choices, green spaces, natural spaces, mixed-use, and denser development. Let’s not simply repeat the same mistakes others have made in a way that will destroy almost everything we love about this region.
No we don't. We talk a good game about it, but we trip over ourselves to copy the very worst mistakes made by the cities that were growing fast in the first wave of real suburbanization after WWII. Charlotte, the Triad, the Triangle, Greenville-Spartanburg... They all say they don't want to be another Atlanta, while following Atlanta's sprawling example to a tee -- and without, I might add, following the movement toward urban density that the actual City of Atlanta is showing now.

It also does not help that North Carolina is in the grip of the most urban-hostile state government in history. Cities in North Carolina, which trend more liberal than their surrounding areas -- as cities everywhere tend to do -- are being actively punished by the state for that tendency. Because they don't vote for the Tea Party, urbanites in North Carolina are watching as the state strips their cities of their airports, expo centers, and water systems in retaliation. The state has also made it effectively illegal for a city to annex land, reversing what were some of the most urban-friendly annexation policies in the nation.

In short, suburban Atlanta is already a mess that will only keep spreading like fungus across North Georgia. That will be helped along by the fact that the suburbs of Atlanta comprise literally hundreds of different governmental entities who would rather die than cooperate with each other. South Carolina is and always has been beyond hope, although the city centers of places like Columbia, Greenville, and Spartanburg, will remain gems embedded in the shitpiles of those cities' sprawl. North Carolina has a government utterly dedicated to reversing every gain this state ever made since the Civil War, and which is out for the blood of every voter and every community that dares to disagree with their backward march.

So yeah... The South, as defined in this article, will bounce merrily along in that handbasket to hell. What we love, we'll kill. And one glorious day, we might even link up, via Richmond, to the sprawling megalopolis that already runs from Boston to Washington.
__________________
"To sustain the life of a large, modern city in this cloying, clinging heat is an amazing achievement. It is no wonder that the white men and women in Greenville walk with a slow, dragging pride, as if they had taken up a challenge and intended to defy it without end." -- Rebecca West for The New Yorker, 1947
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #213  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2014, 1:58 PM
WilliamTheArtist's Avatar
WilliamTheArtist WilliamTheArtist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Posts: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcexpress69 View Post
Springfield has come a long way since I went to school there in the early 90s, but to me, they suffered the same problems as Kansas City and St. Louis. They might not have lost population, but much of the growth has shifted to the south towards Branson. When I was living there, towns like Ozark, Nixa, and Republic were just small tows of just a few thousand people each. Both Nixa and Ozark are over the 20,000 mark and Republic isn't too far behind. People are moving into the area, but stay away from the urban core. Since highways encircle the city, the traffic was murder there... although it's better accommodating to bicycles and pedestrian traffic. Downtown was all but dead when I was down there, so it's good to see more nightlife and loft's going into the older buildings. Springfield will continue to grow, but I don't expect it to grow any faster than it has been in the past
I was in Springfield about a year or so ago and was quite surprised by their downtown area. They still had a large stock of old, pedestrian friendly streetscape left and you could see that more and more of those building were having new shops and hip restaurants moving into them. There were still some "parking lot" gaps here and there in the urban fabric, but nothing that was "insurmountably difficult" to overcome.

Tulsa on the other hand tore down most of it's smaller buildings, the ones that in cities like Springfield and others, often act as the "seed stock" for urban revival and new growth. What we have been faced with is a lot of very large buildings in the central core that are very costly to rehab, and the smaller buildings surrounding the core so sparsely spread out and surrounded by parking that creating a cohesive district of any critical mass, has been quite difficult as well.

But, we are finally crossing the threshold on both accounts. There is beginning to be enough new infill and larger older buildings being rehabbed that you can almost feel the collective sigh of relief that finally downtown is coming into it's own again. There are 6 new hotels in the works right now along with numerous residential projects, many of them with ground floor retail, thank goodness.

Another trick with Tulsa and urban "nightlife"/shopping/dining is that several of the best areas are outside of downtown. Brookside, Cherry Street, The Pearl District, etc. are all outside of downtown and not connected to downtown via any efficient transit.

Downtown Tulsa is already a completely different animal than it was 2 or 3 years ago. And with all that is in the works, in 2 or 3 years more time will again be far ahead of where it is now.

I look at a lot of other cities that are growing faster and sometimes may get a little envious. But when I see that so much of that growth is crappy growth, am ok with how we are progressing (though I do have my share of "we can do better" gripes lol)
__________________
Tulsa
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #214  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2014, 3:10 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,123
Miami Dade County's Urban Development Boundary

After reading the article posted above by M II A II R II K , I wonder how many cities or metros in the Southeast have a Urban Development Boundary line like Miami does? The UDB line was adopted in 1975 to control development & sprawl for decades.
Although Miami-Dade county sprawls it is limited in comparison to other metros in the Southeast.

The following quotes in this post will be in italics and comes from a EPA study entitled :

Growing for a Sustainable Future: Miami-Dade County Urban Development Boundary Assessment

that was published in December 2012. A link to this study will be posted at the bottom.

First a map of the current UDB map :



Source: http://www.transitmiami.com/wp-conte...-1024x1024.jpg

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY :

"Miami-Dade County, Florida, like many communities around the country, faces development
pressures and struggles to manage its growth. Unlike many other communities, Miami-Dade
County is bounded by an ocean and two national parks—places that the community wishes to
preserve. Decades ago, to address unchecked growth and development, county officials decided
to institute growth management strategies. Now that these policies have been in place for many
years, Miami-Dade County requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)
assistance in reviewing the policies and guidelines of its Urban Development Boundary (UDB), a
key tool in the county’s growth management strategy.

The UDB dates from the 1970s and was incorporated into the county’s Comprehensive
Development Master Plan in 1983. The UDB should contain a 10 plus 5-year supply of land for
residential development. Proposed changes to the UDB require a two-thirds vote from the County
Commissioners. In 2008, the UDB contained 269,000 acres (420 square miles), of which
approximately six percent was undeveloped. Very little land has been added to the UDB in the
last 20 years."


*What I bolded above is to highlight that Miami Dade county has a land area of 1,898 square miles|4,916 km2 of which only 22.1% (420 sq. miles) of it is suitable for development within the UDB boundary with a 2013 population estimate of 2,617,176.*

"Miami-Dade County is projected to gain 700,000 residents by 2030.2 Where these people will live
is a critical consideration that drives decisions about growth management, provision of affordable
housing, and transportation investments."


" The ideas discussed in this report draw from growth management strategies in
communities such as Boulder, Colorado; Portland, Oregon; San Diego, California; and Sarasota, Florida."


OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE MIAMI-DADE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
BOUNDARY :


"The UDB is an important tool in Miami-Dade County’s overall growth management system.
Although it places geographical limits on certain types of urban development, it does not dictate
the density or amount of development permitted either inside or outside the boundary. These
issues are addressed through other policies in the county’s Comprehensive Development Master
Plan (CDMP), primarily the future land use element and future land use map.
The CDMP establishes the UDB as a central element of the county’s growth management system.

The CDMP describes goals that the UDB is intended to achieve, including the efficient use of
infrastructure and the promotion of compact development. The UDB’s purpose, according to the
CDMP, is to protect and preserve wetlands, prevent low density development away from transit
and neighborhood amenities and unconnected development patterns, and plan for efficient
expansion and improvement in infrastructure and public services."


"The team’s discussions with a wide variety of stakeholders, including planning staff, elected
officials, development industry interests, and self-identified “slow-growth” advocates, suggested
that they see the Miami-Dade UDB as having several different purposes including:
 To direct the efficient and cost-effective delivery of public services;
 To promote compact development and encourage transit ridership; and
 To preserve agricultural land and wetlands."


"When it was first created in 1975, the UDB contained approximately 233,000 acres (364 square
miles). Since then, it has been increased by approximately 15 percent to 269,000 acres (420
square miles). (By contrast, approximately one million acres in Miami-Dade County lie outside
the UDB, much of which is permanently preserved.) Currently, about six percent of the land
inside the boundary is undeveloped."


"Six percent of the land inside the boundary is now undeveloped.
It is likely that this land will
accommodate more development than it might have in the past. The county has aggressively
pursued infill opportunities through its Urban Center Districts along current or future transit lines.

The CDMP promotes urban centers in places where mass transit, roadways, and highways are
highly accessible. These centers are planned to be compact, mixed-use, and pedestrian-friendly
areas. For example, Urban Center Districts have been successfully pursued in Kendall, the current
terminus of the Metrorail line, and are underway in Naranja along the 20 mile South Dade bus-rapid transit line that connects with Metrorail in Kendall.
Nevertheless, the remaining land inside the boundary may not yield a 10- to 15-year supply
unless the county, in cooperation with the 35 cities, promotes infill development on vacant and underused land."


Comparison to Miami-Dade County

"Miami-Dade County and Portland take a similar approach to growth management. They encourage a separation of rural lands and urban development and are guided by their desires to
efficiently provide public services and protect the natural environment. Yet while the approaches Miami-Dade County and Portland take are similar, their growth management strategies are
implemented differently."


Read more here regarding UDBs about Miami, Portland & Boulder :http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/Miami-Da...t_12-12-12.pdf



Source: http://southfloridaforbeginners.file.../sat_miami.jpg



http://florida.sierraclub.org/miami/images/836xway.jpg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry for the long post! Miami's Urban Development Boundary is now 39 years old so why haven't any other Southern cities/metros attempted the same? thing?
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 14 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #215  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2014, 4:00 AM
Reverberation's Avatar
Reverberation Reverberation is offline
disorient yourself?
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Diaspora
Posts: 4,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post


Sorry for the long post! Miami's Urban Development Boundary is now 39 years old so why haven't any other Southern cities/metros attempted the same? thing?
I would think in the case of Atlanta it comes down to outlying municipalities wanting the growth to reach them in order to increase tax revenues. Dallas and Houston are both large distribution centers for the central US. Houston, in particular has a large manufacturing /industrial base. Unlike in older cities industry now is horizontally oriented, meaning it needs large parcels of land which also need to be cheap. One of the first questions asked of an industrial user when planning a new facility is "Where do you want to be and why?" The answer usually has to do with access for employees and a relatively inexpensive land base with room for future growth. The city has the access but not the cheap land. So it usually ends up at the edge of town along a ring road which attracts new homes and restaurants and shopping to support it. It's not sexy but would you turn down the opportunity to make money from it?

Houston would probably be the best candidate for a UGB in the future. There are few outlying incorporated suburbs that would fight it and the regulatory climate enables developers to get buildings up in as little as a year where elsewhere it can take up to 10 just to get approved plans.
__________________
RT60
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #216  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2014, 4:59 AM
bobdreamz's Avatar
bobdreamz bobdreamz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Miami/Orlando, FL.
Posts: 8,123
^ I would think Houston & Dallas would be good candidates for a UGB since the respective counties are rather large but like you said it has to consider outlying incorporated suburbs as well. I don't know how strong the county Government is in Harris county trying to pass something like this.
In Miami the county is the upper tier of Government while the other 35 incorporated cities are considered the lower tier.
Atlanta/Fulton county is probably too small and if the suburban counties were asked to be part of a UGB they would probably fight it tooth & nail.
__________________
Miami : 62 Skyscrapers over 500+ Ft.|150+ Meters | 14 Under Construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #217  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2014, 3:15 PM
atlantaguy's Avatar
atlantaguy atlantaguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Area code 404
Posts: 3,333
A couple of things re: an UGB for Atlanta. First of all, with a couple of exceptions our Counties are tiny compared to most states. As mentioned previously, they do not always act in the best interest of the region but act more like individual fiefdoms. This doesn't make it easy. Bottom line, the State would have to take the lead. Sadly, that will never happen with the current Republican administration.

We do have the Atlanta Regional Commission, which has some teeth regarding approving/rejecting large developments. 'Home Rule' also comes into play here. Counties are as powerful as cities in the metro area, and act as such. Private property rights are almost considered sacred here, which doesn't help matters either.

It would be very tough to pull this off here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #218  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2014, 12:23 AM
rellott rellott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Houstonia
Posts: 106
Houston, Dallas, and many other cities in the South, but particularly those two, are PRIMED to become mega global cities in the coming century. They have a multitude of business/entertainment/retail centers outside of their respective CBD's. They only need to connect them all together and the spots in between. I can't remember the name of the graph, but it starts from the largest main circles, branches onto smaller ones, then smaller ones. They're all connected
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #219  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2014, 12:24 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by rellott View Post
Houston, Dallas, and many other cities in the South, but particularly those two, are PRIMED to become mega global cities in the coming century. They have a multitude of business/entertainment/retail centers outside of their respective CBD's. They only need to connect them all together and the spots in between. I can't remember the name of the graph, but it starts from the largest main circles, branches onto smaller ones, then smaller ones. They're all connected
Dallas and Houston definitely. It is just beginning too of a very long boom. Are they investing in high speed rail/ bullet trains?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #220  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2014, 2:00 AM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by rellott View Post
Houston, Dallas, and many other cities in the South, but particularly those two, are PRIMED to become mega global cities in the coming century. They have a multitude of business/entertainment/retail centers outside of their respective CBD's. They only need to connect them all together and the spots in between. I can't remember the name of the graph, but it starts from the largest main circles, branches onto smaller ones, then smaller ones. They're all connected
One of those cities is at sea level and could be underwater before any of that stuff happens.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.