Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt
That's probably true for a city like New York with very little available land.
|
The NYC area has tons of land. The issue is NIMBYism and environmental protection, mostly. There is no will to plow over hilly forests and New Englandy looking towns for sprawl. Those who live on the fringe have chosen to pay higher taxes to prevent growth, and most undeveloped land is off-limits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt
I was referring to urban politician's post about 'throwaway growth', which was in the context of DFW passing Chicago someday in the future. Even if most of the growth [or 90%] is 'throwaway' suburban sprawl, the cores of these cities will continue to grow and develop into dense urban hubs.
|
The thing is, even though Dallas is growing like wildfire, and Chicago stagnant, core Chicago has like 10x as much traditional urban growth. So it isn't clear that just adding regional population does anything for urbanity. LA has 19 million in its CSA yet doesn't have the traditional urbanity of a Spanish metro of 1 million.
Threaded Mode