Night City in the '90s: What if someone had built a city halfway between San Francisco and Los Angeles?

[Strategos' Risk]

So this will be a less fanciful version of "what if they had built Night City from the Cyberpunk series IRL?" Let's just strip the origin of Night City of all its futuristic trappings and get to the basics:

In the '90s, a billionaire industrialist founds a new city in the middle of the distance between SF and LA, at Morro Bay. Call it Coronado City if necessary. Suppose it was built initially with the most fantastical of cutting-edge '90s and '00s architectural and technological developments. Possibly on top of the Rock itself-

• According to Mike Pondsmith: "Night City was created on the "bones" of Morro Bay, a town I often drove through on my various road trips. I liked the place and in one of those flights of fancy young designers have, I wondered what it would take to buy the whole thing. The basic structure is still there in the Night City map, if one allows for an impressive amount of fill required to build out the upper area around the "Rock." (this is not unthinkable--a large amount of downtown Seattle and San Francisco were both built on fill). I actually have a map that shows how the whole thing goes together geologically; one day I'll have to post it."[10]

What would it mean for there to be a metropolis alongside California's Central Coast?

 

[kmmontandon]

Populated by what people working what jobs?

And using what land? Development on coastal California is more than just a matter of money (and it would take more of that than a simple billionaire has). It probably simply won't be allowed, due to environmental concerns.

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

There's also the issue of water supply: the only nearby source is the Salinas River, which would have to be piped over the mountains, plus the farmers are already using it all.

 

[djf64360]

I lived in Morro Bay for years. There's a Coastal Commission that blocks most development for environmental reasons in the region. Also, there are issues getting enough water for drinking. I worked at a motel in San Simeon nearby and the water always tasted weird from being desalinized from the Pacific. The economy is mostly beach tourism and agriculture. Its really isolated too. Its like an island. Its 200 miles from LA or SF, and people have a weird isolated small town mentality. It took years for them to accept me as an outsider. So I just don't see it really happening.

 

[Thisisnotausername]

Your best bet if you want an actual metropolis rather than California City with beaches is move the POD before the 90s and have the region develop as an alternate Silicon Valley--have Shockley Semiconductor Lab or TTL's equivalent be set up in San Luis Obispo instead of Mountain View, maybe have Vandenberg AFB built further north to help build an aerospace/tech sector in the area, that sort of thing. There's a tech boom as IOTL, more people flock to the area, you get some big planned development on fill in Morro Bay in the 90s masterminded by one of the newly minted tech billionaires, there you go.

What would it mean for there to be a metropolis alongside California's Central Coast?

As others have noted, it'll produce water and environmental problems for the region due to the increased urbanization and industrial development. If it becomes TTL's Silicon Valley, then the Bay Area doesn't develop as much and the Santa Clara Valley probably remains much more rural and agricultural than IOTL, although the Bay Area is likely to still be a fairly important tech hub, in much the same way that Seattle and Silicon Valley coexist IOTL. Additional urban development might mean California turns blue a little earlier than IOTL, but I don't know how much it would affect the state, especially if most of Night City's development is just development that would've gone to the Bay Area instead.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

I suppose my main impetus for this premise is less to make Cyberpunk 2020/2077 real, and more to explore what if there had been more coastal development in California beyond the Bay Area, LA, and San Diego. Would be interesting if the area around SLO had become a major city, or if Monterey Bay had become as developed as SF Bay. The drive from SF to LA, whether along SR-1 or I-5, is just so sleepy.

 

[djf64360]

Monterey becoming more developed seems more likely to me. Monterey is bigger as it is than SLO, was the state capitol once and has a port and fishing and the military and Santa Cruz is big and on Monterey Bay. One way to do it would have Monterey remain California's capitol, or Capitola a town next to Santa Cruz with a mall that was intended to be California's capitol, as evidenced by the name, as state capitol. Then the area would definitely be more developed. Sacramento would just be more central valley farms if it didn't have the state offices.

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

If Night City does get built, Morro Rock should have a T-shaped watchtower build on top of it (so that when there's trouble, you know who to call)

 

[GrandMaster]

It would be in either Monterey or San Luis Obispo counties in California.

 

[Strategos' Risk]

Yeah, I've always wondered why Monterey isn't a bigger deal, as a harbor wouldn't it be a natural place for logistical and economic development? Is it because it's surrounded by the Santa Cruz Mountains and so is more remote? I assume its water issues might be less dire than SLO's.

Funnily enough, to go back to the game for a second, one of the maps from one of the sourcebooks from the original Cyberpunk 2020 pen and paper game did place Night City in Watsonville, though Mike Pondsmith's intent was always Morro Bay. But Night City: Monterey Bay would be pretty neat.

Fuckin' Watsonville is the heart of Night City. Salinas is the southside, Monterey is one of the burbs, and Santa Cruz is probably either a run-down and seedy "historical neighborhood", or bulldozed. No, it has to be run-down and seedy, because setting a meet underneath the Big Dipper is just too cool a scene and being able to look across the Bay at the City over the arcade and the ferris wheel is too perfect a camera shot. Moss Landing no doubt bigger and scarier, and visible at all hours except when the fog rolls in. Castroville and all that farmland, gone. The forested hills, possibly less forested, possibly infested with trendy bungalows with large swimming pools. Traffic on 17 would be horrifyingly worse. The Marine Sanctuary ignored. Scotts Valley really would be just a giant strip mall, though the parks up the valley are probably still there; my home town of Felton, probably much the same, just everybody commutes Down To The City instead of Over The Hill. And there'd be a really nasty rivalry with Silicon Valley.

Okay, CP2020 just jumped up a few slots on my "wanna run someday" list. It's right fuckin' there and I never realized.

Back from Cyberpunk- what would've happened if Monterey Bay had been more heavily developed?

 

[RanulfC]

Yeah, I've always wondered why Monterey isn't a bigger deal, as a harbor wouldn't it be a natural place for logistical and economic development? Is it because it's surrounded by the Santa Cruz Mountains and so is more remote? I assume its water issues might be less dire than SLO's.

It WAS a 'bigger deal' till the late '20s when the fishing crashed due to over-fishing and pollution/run-off. The natural up-welling zone, (for those in the 'know' the reason why the locals all try and get 'new people' to dive right on into the water... Never mind the coats and dry-suits WE wear ) of the Humbolt current being run up Monterey (undersea) Canyon made it a huge fishing, processing and canning industry center. (Cannery Row don't you know) Then it all came crashing down and the Great Depression piled on-top and frankly it wasn't till the mid-70s there was 'some' recovery and rebuilding and it re-invented itself as a tourism and high-end shopping destination. The fish processing and canning operations tended to drive away anyone that COULD move due to the smell and mess and Monterey ended up being a 'one-industry' town that almost went belly up when the industry did.

Funnily enough, to go back to the game for a second, one of the maps from one of the sourcebooks from the original Cyberpunk 2020 pen and paper game did place Night City in Watsonville, though Mike Pondsmith's intent was always Morro Bay. But Night City: Monterey Bay would be pretty neat.

Yes that was an 'inside' joke as locally Watsonville was well known as the Artichoke Capital of the World I loved that version as it had my home town a nomad 'squat' when dealing with Night City as we were then known for only two things; Farming, (which crashed in the background story) and a Prison which isn't even NEAR the town but still got named for it anyway IIRC it had a medium sized prison still on that particular site but it was considered part of Night City.. Could be mis-remembering though. The problem with Watsonville is you didn't have access that well to Monterey Bay and that was supposed to be a big part of Night City as an industrial water-front and Monterey was no longer seen a 'industrial' by the time the sourcebooks came out. For those that don't know Moss Landing refers to the power plant that's located there and the idea was that it might be a nuclear power plant in that context

Back from Cyberpunk- what would've happened if Monterey Bay had been more heavily developed?

Monterey was built around fishing and that income which limited the amount of industrialization it could handle. Once that goes by the wayside as noted have it re-invent itself more aimed towards tech, maybe have the Navy actually follow through on plans to develop the harbor and shore installations for military and heavy repair use. The problem though is that the locals never really gave up on the dream that things would 'come-back' to normal till the late 60s when the actual causes and reasons for the crash had become clear. And by that time the area was becoming more 'high-end' and less heavily developed a trend which would continue to this day. Have "Night Industries" move in in the mid-to-late 80s and turn it into TTL's Silicon Valley and have it turned into the heart of "Night City" in the 90s with a gradual move towards being turned into the 'waterfront/industrial' area in the late-90s to early 2000s and the 'main' population and shopping moving towards what was 'suburban' Watsonville in the early 2010s.

Watsonville · California

California

www.google.com

Randy

 

[NorCalifornio]

Sacramento would just be more central valley farms if it didn't have the state offices.

No it wouldn't. Sacramento has been one of California's larger cities since the 1850s. Its location makes for a good transportation hub, and the fact that it served as such during the Gold Rush would get the ball rolling for further development of transportation infrastructure whether the government was there or not. Without the capital it'd be smaller, but you're still gonna have something the size of OTL Fresno.

 

[Monk78]

is this thread about Bakersfield the ultra modern sprawling metropolis which is a real jewel of the desert ?

 

[Strategos' Risk]

No, because first Fresno is the canonical Central Valley midpoint between NorCal and SoCal, Bakersfield is too far south. Second, I'm looking for something coastal because that's how you get cosmopolitanism and shipping wealth.

 

[kmmontandon]

No, because first Fresno is the canonical Central Valley midpoint between NorCal and SoCal,

It'll be a cold day in Fresno Hell before I recognize anything that far south as NorCal.

 

[RanulfC]

It'll be a cold day in Fresno Hell before I recognize anything that far south as NorCal.

Well "technically" everything North of LA is "NorCal" ... Unless you're from San Diego, in which case LA is NorCal...

Randy

 

[Ultima Ratio]

This might be a (huge) stretch in terms of the PoD, but what is Baja California or at least part of it goes to the US or Mexico kind of falls apart in the 30s. Would there be a more suitable location? Maybe Mexico gets in such a tight spot that they sell territory to some corporate interests and they get a certain level of extraterritoriality.

 

[phx1138]

It looks to me like you can't do it with anything near OTL demographics, so you'd have to go back into the 1800s & change the growth of L.A. & San Francisco, & make either (maybe both, certainly L.A. IMO) smaller.

L.A. seems water limited; if you can prevent diversion from the north, say by breaking OTL California in two states, it looks like L.A. would be quite a bit smaller. IDK how you'd get at San Francisco, unless the '49 Gold Rush never happens. (Even the Fraser Rush in the 1850s-60s would seem to lead to big growth of San Francisco.) Preventing the collapse of the fishing industry might be the best way; without awareness of the need to prevent overfishing, IDK you you manage it (& how you get that before the 1970s, I have no clue).

My $0.05, FWIW.

 

[RanulfC]

It looks to me like you can't do it with anything near OTL demographics, so you'd have to go back into the 1800s & change the growth of L.A. & San Francisco, & make either (maybe both, certainly L.A. IMO) smaller.

L. A. had a natural harbor, water and good farm land all right there so it's going to get growth no matter what. Watsonville/et-al was all 'rural' and big ranches so didn't have the incentive or need for any large urban growth till the early 20th Century when the fishing industry took off and the juncture of a large, not already crowded bay, a congregation of rail lines and transport connected to the bigger ports of LA and SF began to ramp things up. Then the fisheries collapsed due to over-fishing and agricultural run-off and it all stalled and faded.

Find a way to stave off the collapse and you'd have likely had a significantly larger urban expansion that would eventually have run into water issues, but keep in mind the idea is that "Night" essentially pours money and resources into his 'dream' city which means he's going to find a way to get it all done despite the 'reality' of the situation. (To be honest, I suspect he's very much the kind of guy who would have jumped on the "towed-iceberg" concept of the late 70s and had one towed off-shore near Moss Landing and made bank selling 'cheap' fresh water to the rest of California and the Western US)

L.A. seems water limited; if you can prevent diversion from the north, say by breaking OTL California in two states, it looks like L.A. would be quite a bit smaller. IDK how you'd get at San Francisco, unless the '49 Gold Rush never happens. (Even the Fraser Rush in the 1850s-60s would seem to lead to big growth of San Francisco.) Preventing the collapse of the fishing industry might be the best way; without awareness of the need to prevent overfishing, IDK you you manage it (& how you get that before the 1970s, I have no clue).

My $0.05, FWIW.

Breaking California into two states actually benefits the North and means SF is bigger, and more influential and the LA area will end up being more rural with less heavy industry. You're exactly right in that LA has always been water limited and therefore the main LA (and by extension California state) policy has been keeping the water flowing to Southern California and LA specifically. (There's a saying in my home state that the Capital is in Sacramento but the decisions are made in LA )

The collapse was in fact something that many were aware of and predicting given the amount of expansion taking place but like most places in the US, (hello Dust-Bowl...) at the time while there was some effort to mitigate and/or try and prevent what was coming the simple fact was that those that knew and understood were few and far between and the majority involved either didn't know, didn't care or more specifically were just trying to make as much as possible before things went south. Sustainability was the last thing on most peoples minds if they thought about it at all but unlike the Dust Bowl the 'comeback' was never going to happen given how badly the system had been abused.

I wonder if having the 1910 earthquake hitting the area worse would have enough effect to slow the degradation enough to allow a bounce-back? IIRC there had already been a drop in the catch prior to that but the full collapse was still about a decade away at that point.

Randy

 

[phx1138]

L. A. had a natural harbor, water and good farm land all right there so it's going to get growth no matter what.

I get that, & I don't mean L.A. would remain the village it was in 1850 or so, just not the megalopolis it is OTL.

There's a saying in my home state that the Capital is in Sacramento but the decisions are made in LA

I'd agree with that, based on what I know.

The collapse was in fact something that many were aware of and predicting given the amount of expansion taking place but like most places in the US, (hello Dust-Bowl...) at the time while there was some effort to mitigate and/or try and prevent what was coming the simple fact was that those that knew and understood were few and far between and the majority involved either didn't know, didn't care or more specifically were just trying to make as much as possible before things went south. Sustainability was the last thing on most peoples minds if they thought about it at all but unlike the Dust Bowl the 'comeback' was never going to happen given how badly the system had been abused.

That last bit is the hardest part to overcome, if we're going to press for less-destructive practise. (I just refuse to call it "sustainable", since nobody ever defines it: how much, for how many, & for how long?) You're absolutely right.

I wonder if having the 1910 earthquake hitting the area worse would have enough effect to slow the degradation enough to allow a bounce-back? IIRC there had already been a drop in the catch prior to that but the full collapse was still about a decade away at that point.

That might do it, but it smacks of ASB. Hitting the area with a typhoon that didn't OTL, I'm fine with, because that might reasonably arise from it being an ATL; tampering with the geology...you're getting into dinosaurs & Mayans in the same film territory.