From Metropolitans to Megapolitans

[babybackribs2314]

Originally Posted by Young Gun

actually Harrisburg, York, Lancaster are very gradually growing into a single metropolitan area. The Harrisburg MSA includes Carlisle

York is being absorbed by Balti-Wash... there are a fair number of commuters who come into both main cities from York County. It's only an hour or so away.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by 10023

The problem is that the U.S. is completely fucked when it comes to urban or even metro/megapolitan policy because of the design of our legislature.

Simply put, as long as every state gets 2 senators, we will be behind Europe on that stuff, because of a stupid part of our Constitution that says Wyoming gets the same Senate reprsentation as California or Texas.

You can't get anything related to infrastructure through Congress without loading it down with enough pork to get the less populated states on board, which is why Amtrak still runs trains it shouldn't and will never be profitable (or even close), no matter how expensive and uncompetitive it makes its trains in the Northeast Corridor.

Sorry to ask, but what the hell does that have to do with anything? If infrastructure needs to be approved by Congress, just ask your senator or representative to support it. What really needs to happen to help the U.S. become more urban is that Americans need to see why living in a densely populated area is better than cruising through suburbs. Or better yet, urbanize suburbs, like this article is trying to say. America is a country that is larger than the western part of Europe but has a lower population. We are kinda lucky to still have the majority of our land not developed.

[M II A II R II K]

Not so much about increasing urbanization but better connecting already existing surrounding urban areas in more ways than one. Transport, economy, business, etc.

[M II A II R II K]

Megaregions – A Review by Aaron M. Renn


April 29th, 2012

Read More: http://www.urbanophile.com/2012/04/2...-aaron-m-renn/

This review of the book Megaregions, edited by Georgia Institute of Technology Professor Catherine L. Ross, is the second in my three part series on megaregions. I put my cards on the table in my post with initial skepticism about the usefulness of the concept. I will follow this up with a look at potential applications of megaregionalism in the Midwest.

- One of the key questions to answer is, just what the heck is a megaregion? There are a few definitions, but the one I thought was best came from America 2050, a project of New York’s Regional Plan Association. They describe it as “a large, connected network of metropolitan areas that are joined together by environmental, cultural, infrastructural, and functional characteristics.” In short, it is a collection of linked metro areas in a given region. There is an entire chapter in the book devoted to ways to identify and delineate megaregions. And, of course, map them.

- First, the megaregion is really an eastern US concept. West of Texas, most of these regions have one main dominant metro, possibility with a satellite or two. The exception the Pacific Northwest “Cascadia” region. Second, the megaregion concept relies heavily on intuitive eyeball appeal. That is, we look at the map and see these clusters of regions and it just seems to make sense that they are related, apart from any academic methodology of boundary delineation. That’s not to say there isn’t logic behind the map, but I believe a lot of the popular appeal comes from its intuitive plausibility.

- We think of, for example, the Midwest and Northeast as having distinct regional history, culture, values, and economic structures. This powerfully reinforces the intuitive appeal of megaregions. The idea is that we have cities in close proximity, with a lot of common culture and problems, so wouldn’t it be great if they figured out how to work together to solve them? America 2050 doesn’t have the only map going. Richard Florida, a leading popular exponent of megaregions who wrote a paper on the subject with Tim Gulden and Charlotta Mellander called “The Rise of the Mega-Region“, used images of light emissions from the space to draw boundaries of areas that seemed continuously developed.

- It would be extremely difficult. But it is certainly feasible think about 10-12 megaregions. I think that’s one reason why people so much want there to be validity to the megaregion concept. It provides a very convenient intermediate level of abstraction between the large scale United States (or Europe) and the fine grained detail of individual metro areas. Brookings did this by positing a “Great Lakes” region to help organize a portion of its thinking. And I did too. As someone who has expressed skepticism on megaregions, I’ve got to admit that my own blog is to some extent a product of that thinking. One of the keys to its success was to pick a topic scope greater than the individual city (and thus to have more than purely parochial interest) but smaller than the nation (where I likely would never have been able to gain traction amongst long established big names).

.....

[MolsonExport]

I never realized that I lived in Tor-Buff-chester. Absurdity to the Nth degree.

[novawolverine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I never realized that I lived in Tor-Buff-chester. Absurdity to the Nth degree.

MontTorBuffQuebOttchester

[10023]

Originally Posted by jd3189

Sorry to ask, but what the hell does that have to do with anything? If infrastructure needs to be approved by Congress, just ask your senator or representative to support it. What really needs to happen to help the U.S. become more urban is that Americans need to see why living in a densely populated area is better than cruising through suburbs. Or better yet, urbanize suburbs, like this article is trying to say. America is a country that is larger than the western part of Europe but has a lower population. We are kinda lucky to still have the majority of our land not developed.

How is this not abundantly apparent?

Yes, infrastructure needs to be approved by Congress. In the House that's reasonably possible, because the majority of Americans do live in large metroplitan areas (the "median American" lives in Columbus, OH, population about 1.5 million) and House representation is based on population. In the Senate though, it's totally hopeless without tons of pork and earmarks.

The ten most populous states contain 54% of the U.S. population but get only 20% of the vote in the Senate. How are you ever going to get the senators from Wyoming, Idaho, Maine, the Dakotas, etc. to vote for funding any infrastructure other than roads, when none of that infrastructure is needed in their states? As a result, policies that would benefit the majority of the country, living in these more populous, generally more urbanized states, cannot get passed unless they are part of a larger bill that gives some kind of kickbacks to other senators (which invariably make it a bad bill).

[Standpoor]

Originally Posted by 10023

How is this not abundantly apparent?

Yes, infrastructure needs to be approved by Congress. In the House that's reasonably possible, because the majority of Americans do live in large metroplitan areas (the "median American" lives in Columbus, OH, population about 1.5 million) and House representation is based on population. In the Senate though, it's totally hopeless without tons of pork and earmarks.

The ten most populous states contain 54% of the U.S. population but get only 20% of the vote in the Senate. How are you ever going to get the senators from Wyoming, Idaho, Maine, the Dakotas, etc. to vote for funding any infrastructure other than roads, when none of that infrastructure is needed in their states? As a result, policies that would benefit the majority of the country, living in these more populous, generally more urbanized states, cannot get passed unless they are part of a larger bill that gives some kind of kickbacks to other senators (which invariably make it a bad bill).

Add in the fact that a minority of Senators can block legislation and you get a system where the representatives of 30 million Americans or 9.9% of the United States can block all legislation.

[M II A II R II K]

U.S. metro regions on the rise


04/29/2012

By Neal Peirce

Read More: http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci...o-regions-rise

"America's Metro Regions Take Center Stage." That's the title of a new report I've been working on with colleagues. And we know that some people will immediately retort: "Metros? You can't be serious. How about Obama, Romney, congressional stalemate, the Tea Party, states in budget crisis — and all the other news flavors of the moment?" And our reply: Flying almost undetected under the news radar, America's metropolitan regions are becoming central to today's American story — and future.

.....

1. Economics now reigns. Leaders in the regional pack — New York, Seattle, Atlanta, Dallas, the San Francisco Bay Area and others — recognized early that the entire globe was their market. They moved ahead of the pack on trade; they attracted entrepreneurial immigrants; they focused on quality universities and attracting knowledge-based populations. As America's consumer economy sputters, smart export-oriented regions are now poised to prosper for the long run.

2. "Smart growth — regions' new dollars and sense." The sprawl development patterns of recent decades now look like disasters, both for developers and buyers. Environmental conservation and compact growth have become top goals for smart regions.

3. Lead regions are "getting it" — grasping that with weakened state and federal governments, they have to figure out their own futures. Symbolic: dozens of mayors are forming coalitions for collaboration in such cities and regions as Chicago, Denver, Philadelphia and Minneapolis-St. Paul. Denver prospers with an enhanced reputation from its courage in adopting — and largely paying locally for — an ambitious regional rapid rail system. Ditto the Los Angeles area for the Alameda transit corridor, enhancing the regional economy, reducing congestion and cleaning up the air.

4. Regions are getting down to business, actually adopting full-scale business plans to place themselves in the world series of job competition. Northeast Ohio and Minneapolis-St. Paul are top examples. On a parallel track, the Climate Prosperity Project has worked with such regions as St. Louis, Denver, Portland and the Silicon Valley to help corporations create "green prints" to save money, increase efficiency and gain a competitive edge.

5. But regions' business success must go beyond mere "business." Smart strategies encompass equity — for example, infrastructure to connect workers to jobs, increase business efficiency and revitalize distressed neighborhoods. They recognize that clean air and water are key to competitiveness. Cultivating quality of place — inviting streets, well-kept parks, enticing cultural facilities — are all key to drawing, retaining talent.

6. Some states are moving from paternalism to partnership with their regions. Historically, governors and legislatures have more often preferred to micromanage local governance rather than recognize that metros are their true "cash cows," the chief contributors to state coffers. They've encouraged cities and suburbs to compete, not collaborate, and actually incentivized greenfield development over smart reuse of urban space.

.....

7. There's a new federal role, symbolized by the Obama administration's Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a remarkable collaboration of government departments (Housing, Transportation, Environmental Protection). They're challenging local areas (through competitive grants) to overcome traditional "silos" and work together on land use, transportation, workforce economic development and infrastructure investments.

8. It's all about outcomes. Whether the issue is a major infrastructure project, stimulating exports or improving workforce readiness, smart regions form networks that find ways to strategize without being tripped up by their areas' familiar thicket of separate cities, towns and governments. They understand the entire region is the "real" city of an urbanized century, and must act that way or falter. They insist on defining clear outcomes, then mobilizing broad resources to achieve them.

.....

[MolsonExport]

America's Metro Regions Take Center Stage." That's the title of a new report I've been working on with colleagues. And we know that some people will immediately retort: "Metros? You can't be serious. How about Obama, Romney, congressional stalemate, the Tea Party, states in budget crisis — and all the other news flavors of the moment?" And our reply: Flying almost undetected under the news radar, America's metropolitan regions are becoming central to today's American story — and future.

Didn't you notice that when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?

[pesto]

A few stray comments.

Metros have been important to America for 150 years.

Phoenix and Tucson and separated by miles of uninhabited desert. You could be lost and not found for a week if you wander 1/4 mile off the highway.

SF has almost no urban connection the the Central Valley south of Merced. Stringing an "urban" area along a mostly empty state highway for 200 miles is ridiculous.

At least the map above has detached STL from Chicago and LV from LA, which was on an earlier version. And they include SD and Tijuana in LA, which has been a fact for a couple of decades now.

[M II A II R II K]

Emerging Alliance will Bolster Chicago, Milwaukee, Gary


Aug 03 2012

By MarySue Barrett

Read More: http://citiwire.net/columns/emerging...ilwaukee-gary/

If you want to understand the global economy, look at an aerial photo of the world at night. It is, quite literally, enlightening: Unlike typical maps, delineated by so many politically drawn boundaries and pastel tones, the world after dark sheds light on what unites us, beyond the city or suburb or state in which we live.

- Along the western and southern shores of Lake Michigan, you’ll see a band of light connecting Milwaukee, Wis., Chicago, and Gary, Ind. In March 2012, the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development released a competitiveness analysis of the regional economy encompassing these three cities and their 21 surrounding counties, 470-plus suburbs and 11 million people. Their scope was informed by global investment decision-makers who view this mega-region — our region — as an economic whole.

- Curiously, that’s not how we’ve traditionally seen ourselves. For many public and private sector leaders in the tri-state area this perspective — and OECD’s 300-page, tri-state review, the first analysis of its kind they’ve published on a U.S. mega-region — was a revelation, almost like seeing our region lit up, at 3,000-feet, for the first time. Historically, we’ve bickered over stolen slices of the pie — a headquarters that moves from Milwaukee to Chicago for a tax break or a company wooed from Chicago to Indiana for similar reasons. What’s promising is that our mega-region’s leaders are starting to realize it’s not only counterproductive to snitch from a shared pie, but that we could be spending our economic development energy to bake a bigger pie to feed us all.

- In July, Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, Mayor Tom Barrett of Milwaukee and Mayor Karen Freeman-Wilson of Gary each committed to take part actively in a Tri-State Alliance being formed by the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce to pursue strategies the OECD’s analysis recommended. The three mayors also have begun to identify natural early wins, starting with leveraging our enviable access to Lake Michigan as our mega-region’s calling card to attract private investment in water-intensive industries. The Milwaukee Water Council — a partnership among universities, water-reliant industries such as MillerCoors, and firms like Sloan Valve Co. that provide technology and services for managing water — is actively incubating new ideas and businesses, and recruiting industries.

Across the country, other mega-regions are modeling smart approaches:

• The New Haven-Hartford-Springfield Rail project will connect Hartford, Conn., and Springfield, Mass., to new business, educational and cultural opportunities along the Knowledge Corridor and in New York.

• In Georgia, the proposed Atlanta Beltline would bring new parks, trails and transit to connect 45 neighborhoods in the city.

• Simultaneously, the Port of Savannah is being deepened to allow larger cargo ships to reach the expanded Panama Canal, and improvements are being made at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, all to forge a competitive logistics network that will put people back to work.

.....