Do you think New Orleans CAN become a larger city than it is now? (Metairie: airport, estimate)

[NativeSon504]

Originally Posted by Jimbo_1

Only about 70-80 square miles are developed. The rest is swamps, marshes, and wetlands.



I guess it's not too late, even though New Orleans' growth would be in a slightly different time period (since those other cities grew a little earlier). But I'm saying I would not want New Orleans to grow like those cities.

Still bigger than San Fran with the 70-80 square miles developed. Imagine if New Orleans didn't have so much swamps,marshes and wetlands then the entire 180csqaure miles could be developed which would mean NOLA could probably hold over a million in the city alone.



I'm only talking Economically growing like those cities. Nothing else.

[Jimbo_1]

Originally Posted by NativeSon504

Still bigger than San Fran with the 70-80 square miles developed. Imagine if New Orleans didn't have so much swamps,marshes and wetlands then the entire 180csqaure miles could be developed which would mean NOLA could probably hold over a million in the city alone and still is pretty high up there on the list.

I'm only talking Economically growing like those cities. Nothing else.

That would be interesting but it is not really possible for that land to be developed. Before Katrina the New Orleans urban area (Orleans Parish and surrounding areas with continuous development) was about 1 million people in 200 square miles and that includes a bunch of suburbs. Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed It was one of the densest urban areas in the country and is still pretty high up on the list.

I thought you were talking about growing economically to be the size of those cities which would mean a drastic increase in population as well. Though I guess you could mean having percentage gains in the economy similar to the percentage gains those cities experience but still being a smaller city. But New Orleans is currently experiencing a growing economy and in certain measurements is doing better than some of those cities.

[linicx]

New Orleans is a very unique city, just such as San Franciso is a unique city. With planning it can be a great, unique and vibrant city with planning and investment. It never was a rust belt city. Much of it was in the Midwest in smaller towns. The towns that survived were paying attention when industry began to wane. They diversified, survived and grew during the housing melt down. These STEM and business cities will never be a destination or a playground that New Orleans can be primarily because they are surrounded by corn and beans whereas NOLA has the Gulf at her feet and the Atlantic a few short miles to the East.

Chicago, NYC and LA survive for a number of reasons. LA is novel and driven by movie studios. NYC is the powerhouse financial equivalent of London. Chicago is the gateway to the Great Lakes and the eastern seaboard. Chicago Board of Trade, NASDAQ, an airport that lands and launches domestic and international planes every 10 seconds 24/7, and over 30 Fortune 500 companies. Its county is the second largest in America with 1000 or more square miles. It has a Chinatown, the 4th largest mall in America, and the world's largest collection of Frank Lloyd Wright buildings. It is also home to quirky venues such as the Church of Beethoven. It is a melting pot of heritage and culture. If you can't eat it, buy it, wear it, or find it in Chicago "IT" probably does not exit. It has only taken Chicago 100 years after the World's Fair in 1900 to get where it is today.

[NativeSon504]

Originally Posted by linicx

New Orleans is a very unique city, just such as San Franciso is a unique city. With planning it can be a great, unique and vibrant city with planning and investment. It never was a rust belt city. Much of it was in the Midwest in smaller towns. The towns that survived were paying attention when industry began to wane. They diversified, survived and grew during the housing melt down. These STEM and business cities will never be a destination or a playground that New Orleans can be primarily because they are surrounded by corn and beans whereas NOLA has the Gulf at her feet and the Atlantic a few short miles to the East.

Chicago, NYC and LA survive for a number of reasons. LA is novel and driven by movie studios. NYC is the powerhouse financial equivalent of London. Chicago is the gateway to the Great Lakes and the eastern seaboard. Chicago Board of Trade, NASDAQ, an airport that lands and launches domestic and international planes every 10 seconds 24/7, and over 30 Fortune 500 companies. Its county is the second largest in America with 1000 or more square miles. It has a Chinatown, the 4th largest mall in America, and the world's largest collection of Frank Lloyd Wright buildings. It is also home to quirky venues such as the Church of Beethoven. It is a melting pot of heritage and culture. If you can't eat it, buy it, wear it, or find it in Chicago "IT" probably does not exit. It has only taken Chicago 100 years after the World's Fair in 1900 to get where it is today.

That's an amazing feet by the Chi.

[ColdAilment]

Originally Posted by WestbankNOLA

Given that everthing remains the same no. By the time New Orleans would get to the size of the cities they would be significantly larger. Now there's always the chance that New Orleans could grow to the size of Houston or Atlanta, but it would require a ton of investment as well as a ton of concessions. Personally, I'd love to see some of the none/less historical areas "Manhattanized".

This seems highly unlikely since Houston is currently 5 times the size of New Orleans and is growing at a rapid rate where the growth of New Orleans is marginal.

[annie_himself]

Originally Posted by Jimbo_1

They grew very differently since they saw their major growth in different time periods. That and the fact they are more mature, is the point I am trying to make.

Yes but New Orleans would grow like New Orleans. Not like Houston or Atlanta. New Orleans would be denser. They grew when we didn't feel the negative effects of sprawling suburbia. The metro area is also limited by water, growth cannot sprawl nearly like the others. The northshore can sprawl all it wants but it's not physically possible in the south.

[Jimbo_1]

Originally Posted by annie_himself

Yes but New Orleans would grow like New Orleans. Not like Houston or Atlanta. New Orleans would be denser. They grew when we didn't feel the negative effects of sprawling suburbia. The metro area is also limited by water, growth cannot sprawl nearly like the others. The northshore can sprawl all it wants but it's not physically possible in the south.

I understand that it won't sprawl to that extent but we also have no idea how it actually will work out. Sprawl is only a small part of the reasons I mentioned earlier.

[Huckleberry3911948]

new orleans is a small town smaller since katrina.
major white flight after katrina.
i would not count on it getting large. has mega safety issues, flooding being only one of them.

[bigstick]

Originally Posted by NativeSon504

I just want New Orleans to bounce back economically more than anything, its a shame all the businesses we lost. We are supposed to be up there with the other Southern Economic Powers Dallas, Houston, Atlanta etc..

That will NEVER happen..Just not enough land, too much marsh.

[sconley9922]

Originally Posted by bigstick

That will NEVER happen..Just not enough land, too much marsh.

False statement. Boston and san fran are small geographically but they have plenty people and businesses within city limits. Even with the marsh ( which some can be converted to liveable land) new orleans is still bigger than those two cities, landwise.