# What cities will merge in the future?



## Robert Stark (Dec 8, 2005)

Possibilities
-LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield
-SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
-Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Chicago, Milwaukee


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

Robert Stark said:


> Possibilities
> -*LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield*
> -SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
> -Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore


Kill me if that happened in this century.


----------



## UrbanSophist (Aug 4, 2005)

Robert Stark said:


> Possibilities
> -LA, SD, Vegas, Pheonix, bakersfield
> -SF bay, Sacremento, Fresno, stockton, modesto
> -Boston, NY, Philly, DC, Baltimore


Hmm. The more likely of those three sets is the second one.


----------



## emutiny (Dec 29, 2005)

Raleigh annex Knightdale PLZ PLZ PLZ


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

Unfortunatly, the San Francisco Bay Area is spreading out to Sacramento, Stockton & even Modesto. Hopefully though, not to Fresno!


----------



## ROCguy (Aug 15, 2005)

emutiny said:


> Raleigh annex Knightdale PLZ PLZ PLZ


What would that do? lol, raise Knightdale's taxes? I'm sure they'll want that.


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

None in England, we have Green Belts to prevent this


----------



## _00_deathscar (Mar 16, 2005)

HK and Shenzen...perhaps?


----------



## Macca-GC (May 20, 2004)

Gold Coast and Brisbane definately. That'll happen before 2050.

Newcastle-Sydney-Penrith-Campbeltown-Wollongong-Goulborn?-Yass?-Jervis Bay?

Bellarine Peninsula-Geelong-Melbourne-Ballarat?-Seymour-Mornington Peninsula


----------



## Wssps (Mar 22, 2005)

Den Haag, Delft & Rotterdam in the Netherlands. There are green belts, but those are just to small


----------



## Robert Stark (Dec 8, 2005)

Is SF spreading nortward into Marin and Sonoma?


----------



## rocky (Apr 20, 2005)

lille-lens-douai-bethune 

marseille- toulon


nice-monaco-cannes


cairo alexandria?


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

NY and Philly already are one contiguos area. There is no separation of empty land whatsoever in the 80 miles between them.


----------



## Hecago (Dec 1, 2005)

RP1 said:


> Chicago, Milwaukee


Imagine if the skyline stretched all the way up the lakefront and through Milwaukee. :drool:


----------



## bayviews (Mar 3, 2006)

Actually, Marin & Sonoma are already included in consolidated SF Bay metro area. Marin has lots of protected areas, such as Point Reyes National Seashore, and has discouraged development, so that county has seen little population growth. Most of the growth has leapfrogged further north, to Sonoma, which has jumped way ahead of Marin populationwise. Real key to smart growth of Bay Area is building up, not out, which devours open space & agricultural land.


----------



## emutiny (Dec 29, 2005)

yea but then id live in raleigh!


----------



## Guest (Mar 4, 2006)

HongKong-Macao-Guangzhou-Shenzehn

Kraków-Katowice-Bielsko Biała-Ostrava

Seattle-Vancouver


----------



## hudkina (Oct 28, 2003)

LOL. San Diego will merge with Los Angeles, but there's no way in hell Phoenix and Las Vegas would.

The most likely mergers are Milwaukee-Chicago, San Diego-Los Angeles, Boston-Providence, Detroit-Toledo, Cincinnati-Dayton, et al. In the future we may see Tampa-Orlando, San Antonio-Austin, New York-Philadelpha, etc.


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

hudkina said:


> LOL. San Diego will merge with Los Angeles, but there's no way in hell Phoenix and Las Vegas would.
> 
> The most likely mergers are Milwaukee-Chicago, San Diego-Los Angeles, Boston-Providence, Detroit-Toledo, Cincinnati-Dayton, et al. In the future we may see Tampa-Orlando, San Antonio-Austin, New York-Philadelpha, etc.


NY-Philly is one contiguous area now. It doesn't have to wait for the future.
Also, the train ride from Manhattan to Center City Philadelphia is 1 hr., 6 mins on Amtrak's Acela Express.


----------



## ReddAlert (Nov 4, 2004)

Hecago said:


> Imagine if the skyline stretched all the way up the lakefront and through Milwaukee. :drool:


I could dig it!


----------



## invincible (Sep 13, 2002)

Toadman said:


> Gold Coast and Brisbane definately. That'll happen before 2050.
> 
> Newcastle-Sydney-Penrith-Campbeltown-Wollongong-Goulborn?-Yass?-Jervis Bay?
> 
> Bellarine Peninsula-Geelong-Melbourne-Ballarat?-Seymour-Mornington Peninsula


Goulburn and Yass? Is this a plan just to make Sydney become the capital of Australia by eventually reaching Canberra? 

The Mornington Peninsula has been considered a part of Melbourne's metropolitan area for quite some time now. But the Melbourne 2030 plan has set an urban growth boundary.


----------



## Macca-GC (May 20, 2004)

Oh, and with the SEQ conurbation, I think it'll be Ballina-Byron Bay-Tweed Coast-Tweed Heads-Gold Coast-Brisbane-Beaudesert-Boonah-Warick-Ipswich-Rosewood-Caboolture-Sunshine Coast(filling in the gaps between Nambour, Maleny, Caloundra, Maroochydore, Noosa ect)-Gympie-Maryborough?


----------



## Guest (Mar 5, 2006)

The NY - Philly merge?

Okay, well I can say NY and Jersey City because those two skylines are so close to each other, when driving on the NJ Turnpike, both skylines seem to merge and become one huge dense area of sky towers.

On the other hand, you can't see the Philly skyline from NY or vise versa.

Now, I do manage to pick up radio stations from both NY and Philly, so you could technically say so.


----------



## j4893k (Sep 30, 2005)

I wish Seattle & Vancouver but there's a border and some mountains preventing it from happening.


----------



## hudkina (Oct 28, 2003)

LLoydGeorge said:


> NY-Philly is one contiguous area now. It doesn't have to wait for the future.
> Also, the train ride from Manhattan to Center City Philadelphia is 1 hr., 6 mins on Amtrak's Acela Express.


It's not quite contiguous, though the urban areas are so close that they almost touch. In fact, why the census bureau kept Trenton NJ as a separate UA is beyond me. It is and should be included in Philadelphia's UA. In the next two or so decades the New York-Philadelphia area will probably be on contiguous area, but it's possible the census bureau may change its standards by then.


----------



## JDRS (Feb 8, 2004)

In the very distant future, Manchester and Liverpool and possibly Leeds


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

hudkina said:


> It's not quite contiguous, though the urban areas are so close that they almost touch. In fact, why the census bureau kept Trenton NJ as a separate UA is beyond me. It is and should be included in Philadelphia's UA.  In the next two or so decades the New York-Philadelphia area will probably be on contiguous area, but it's possible the census bureau may change its standards by then.


It is contiguous. I live in NY and go to Philly a lot. There is no break between the N.J. suburbs of NY and those in Philly, and there is no undeveloped, empty land in the 80 miles between the two cities.

In all due respect, if you're from Detroit, what's the basis of your claim? I'm curious.


----------



## OtAkAw (Aug 5, 2004)

Perhaps LA and SF in a million years since the San Andreas fault is moving LA to the direction of SF right?


----------



## Cherguevara (Apr 13, 2005)

Isn't merged cities something of a bad idea?


----------



## DUBAI (Aug 24, 2004)

The entire Gulf Coast o the UAE is rapidly approaching a situation where all the cities will 'merge'


----------



## dhuwman (Oct 6, 2005)

I hope one day in my life time, Belligham-Everette-Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia-Centralia-Kelso-Portland-Salem-Eugene could be a long urban chain.


----------



## Barragon (Dec 26, 2004)

Porto-Gaia


----------



## XCRunner (Nov 19, 2005)

Chicago-Milwaukee
Los Angeles-San Diego
New York-Philadelphia

These are the most likely, I think, and for each of them you could argue that they already are connected to a certain degree.


----------



## chicagogeorge (Nov 30, 2004)

LLoydGeorge said:


> NY and Philly already are one contiguos area. There is no separation of empty land whatsoever in the 80 miles between them.


I would say, almost touch. Definetely by 2020 they two metros will be one combined metro. However, New Jersey did pass several conservation/anti-sprawl laws recently, which would keep some land in central New Jersey reserved for agricultural use.


----------



## chicagogeorge (Nov 30, 2004)

XCRunner said:


> Chicago-Milwaukee
> Los Angeles-San Diego
> New York-Philadelphia
> 
> These are the most likely, I think, and for each of them you could argue that they already are connected to a certain degree.


Yes, I would also add the Bay Area with Sacramento to that list as well.

By 2020-30 Chicago, Milwaukee, Rockford, Madison, and South Bend should be one continous metro of about 15-16 million people.









Los Angeles and San Diego will also be one combined metro.

















Bay Area and Sacramento:


----------



## ROCguy (Aug 15, 2005)

emutiny said:


> yea but then id live in raleigh!



lol. how old are you? What at all would be exciting about Knightdale being annexed to Raleigh? It's not going to make any difference at all. Raleigh isn't a dense city, living in the city of Raleigh is not going to make you an urban dweller. At least not if it's just because Knightdale gets annexed by it.


----------



## blink55184 (Nov 30, 2005)

Boston and Providence are 45 minutes driving apart, and have frequent commuter rail between them- there is some open land south of boston however.


Hartford/Springfield? 
Share an Airport- I 91 connects them, about 20 miles.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

michal-skoczen said:


> HongKong-Macao-Guangzhou-Shenzehn


If you look at it, these cities are sort of merged forming the Pearl River Delta metro area. Also, Dongguan as well.

Except Hong Kong and Macau are still SAR.


----------



## Bartolo (Sep 20, 2004)

Toronto-Hamilton-Niagria Peninsula-Buffalo NY


----------



## jacobboyer (Jul 14, 2005)

new york- los angeles- chicago- miami- hong kong


----------



## JBOB (Aug 26, 2005)

Big Cities I would have to say Chicago/Milwaukee. Too much competition on the N.E. corridor to merge they are already connected with migration between the cities. For census sake I serious doubt it one city being belittled by the other too many egos for that to happen. With the exception of a special case like D.C. and Baltimore.


----------

