Again, why would we want our tax base to go to Iowa, instead of contributing to Nebraska and the Omaha side? The city as whole benefits better if the taxbase remains in Nebraska, which means more high scale projects in the core to fund. If we somehow start pushing developers too much to Council Bluffs, than those taxpayers will not benefit the core. If Council Bluffs was actually in Nebraska, than there would be no issue, but CB is in Iowa. There is more red tape and bureaucracy when dealing with a city in another state.TitosBuritoBarn wrote: Thu Dec 26, 2024 10:45 pm A more evenly distributed population makes the urban core more convenient to more people, potentially contributing to its vibrancy. When I visit my parents in Millard, it is hard to rationalize doing certain things downtown sometimes because it's too far away; too much of a time commitment. Concentrating growth to the east could equal more balanced commutes, rather than focusing all the traffic to the west. It also creates the opportunity for a centralized transportation hub, which is not easy when the core is not centered.
To the rest of your post, I don't really know what you're getting at. Council Bluffs' relation to Des Moines is negligible and unimportant, as is Iowa's population relative to Nebraska's. The State of Iowa does not have explicit "needs" for Council Bluffs, nor do they emphasize Des Moines as a city relatively higher than their other cities. Doing so would be a great way for elected officials to get voted out office, seeing that the Des Moines area represents only 20% of the state's population.
Furthermore, nobody has ever moved to Gretna hoping that someday it will be a tertiary core city for eastern Nebraska. People move to Gretna to escape urbanity. Gretna's future is more Plano than Hoboken. Besides, a rail system could likely exist today between Omaha and Lincoln with appropriate first mile/last mile accommodations.
St. Louis is just like Omaha in having their population in Missouri and not having an even distribution of population to East St. Louis, why would St. Louis devote their resources to serve East St. Louis which is in Illinois?
Chicago is also more linear like Omaha, due to lake Michigan acting as a major barrier and their city is doing just fine with transportation, even if Chicago is not a circular city with their downtown in the middle.
The drive within Omaha is nowhere near what other larger cities have. Even if these cities have distribution of population around their downtown. It's always been a complaint by those that live in the suburbs, that their downtown is far away. Unfortunately, there is not much that can be done about a person that chooses to live in the suburbs. They have their valid reason for living where they want to live, but if they want to experience downtown frequently; then they can move and live closer to downtown.
My perception of Gretna was like yours, however after I looked at Gretna's long term plans. I was impressed and my perceptions changed. They do indicate they don't want to become just another sprawling suburb, their plans include walkability, density, bike trails, plenty of mixed used developments and green spaces. Gretna will become its own hub and shows much more promise than Elkhorn.
