Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those were actually pretty large cities at the time, being among the largest in the country (Cleveland was #5 and Cincinnati was #16). Richmond was around 170K in 1920, 38th largest. No slouch by any means, but there would have been a lot of larger cities ahead of it more deserving of subway systems at the time, including Atlanta, Birmingham, Omaha, Akron, Rochester, etc. and they were nowhere on the radar for subways as far as I know.
Good point. I'll have to concede this one; I'm outnumbered, plus I'm running out of material.
Hills have nothing to do with subway vs. light rail, ridership does. DC is both flat on its east side, and hilly on its west side, which anyone who has taken the escalator out of some of the Red Line Metro stations could tell you. But we have a subway because we have 800,000 daily riders in a roughly 300 sq mile area. Light rail can't support that.
Correct. It also gets hilly again east of the river too and a few of the stations there are underground also.
Would areas with occasional flooding, like NYC, be better off in the long term with elevated rail or it doesn't matter as long as the rail is elevated in those neighborhoods where flooding is a bigger issue?
Rochester etc. and they were nowhere on the radar for subways as far as I know.
Wrong! Don't know about the other cities of that time, but I used to live near there, the Rochester Subway is common knowledge there. There is always talk of trying to reestablish it as light rail...
And Rochester's population in 1930 was around 328,000, density 9,595. Richmond's population was about 183,000, density 7,622. So although it really wasn't feasible for Richmond to have HRT, a one-line system could have succeeded had it been built. Hell, it's succeeded in Buffalo lol...
Wrong! Don't know about the other cities of that time, but I used to live near there, the Rochester Subway is common knowledge there. There is always talk of trying to reestablish it as light rail...
And Rochester's population in 1930 was around 328,000, density 9,595. Richmond's population was about 183,000, density 7,622. So although it really wasn't feasible for Richmond to have HRT, a one-line system could have succeeded had it been built. Hell, it's succeeded in Buffalo lol...
Calm down; I said "as far as I know." I obviously didn't know about Rochester.
You are right about Baltimore. But I will like to add that being so close to DC put it a disadvantaged when it comes to federal funding. That's why it didn't the kind of rail system that DC got. Had it got a similar size rail system, it would be a better place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328
Norfolk is okay. I often compare it to cities back home. I wish that the buildings were taller and that the downtown spread further, sort of like Cleveland. It does have a lot more going on for it than the smaller cities in Ohio. I guess my state is weird because you have three cities that all start with the same letter of the alphabet that are the three largest, and the number three is the position of the letter of the alphabet in question. Whoever masterminded that f*ckery deserves an award. Then there's Canton, which is about the smallest city anyone pays any attention to. Then there's everything else.
Newport News is industrial, or post-industrial, whatever, with the shipyards and what not. I think there is a lot of lost potential there. Parts of it feel like Detroit back in the day. I'm still conflicted, this is arguably the most urban city on the Peninsula but it has so many problems. This is the conundrum of Virginia; you have urban cities, "real" urban cities that people would rather forget, so then cities like those in Northern Virginia get all of the love for being a successful version of what a city should be. Vancouverism. But then we hate those cities for being synthetic.
If downtown Norfolk/Portsmouth were bigger and more urban I think the combination would turmp anything else in Virginia. But I doubt that will ever happen; but then again I feel the same way about Town Center in Virginia Beach.
It is true that Northern Virginia, despite its urbanity, might always be regarded as too gentrified, synthetic, whatever. But I'm not sure what else people would expect. Given most of the growth of Virginia as of the 70s going forward that is going to be the reality for a lot of the state. Purists might like Maryland for that reason, but on the other hand a similar phenomenon could be said about Southern Maryland. It reminds me of how a lot of Ohioans feel about Columbus (with all of its annexation of the surrounding suburbs), particularly anyone from Cleveland and Cincinnati.
Far as Baltimore, urban purists will always love it for the concrete jungle. But the city has some serious problems that other similarly sized cities do not necessarily have. Someone mentioned Philadelphia, which had a great turnaround downtown, just like Cleveland and parts of other cities like Chicago. Even Pittsburgh seems to be on the up and up. Is this happening in Baltimore? Why aren't more people talking about it (if it is)? A lot of things don't seem to add up; we rarely hear anything good about Baltimore. Perhaps you get a better perspective of it in the DMV but outside of that there is little good news I hear about it.
Its an interesting thread; differentiating the suburban areas of both States, which are DC suburbs under a different name from the "real" cities, often comparing Baltimore, as a real city, to the cities of HR, and Richmond. At the same time, HR is in a similar situation because everything here feels like a suburb of Norfolk or Newport News. And no one has mentioned Suffolk.
Baltimore benefits from it location. DC, Philly, NYC and 95.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KodeBlue
Baltimore is on the up and up aside from crime, which is major issue. Baltimore is converting and building condos, apartments, businesses all over the city; also building a completely new neighborhood called Harbor Point-- condos, businesses, you know, the usual. Baltimore is also gaining population, even if ever so slightly. Also, Baltimore is NOT part of the DMV, that is exclusively the DC area.
I'm from NYC and it can be overwhelming. NOVA felt a little like NYC and RICHMOND was just TOO SLOW for me. Norfolk is comfortable. It is laid back, but has good transportation. It has sidewalks and many of the buildings are well maintain. Richmond is TERRIBLE and Baltimore is worse than Richmond.
Quote:
Originally Posted by murksiderock
I had to rep you! ^^^^^ Great analysis!
Hampton Roads is the slowest-growing of the big 3 metro areas in Virginia, for no discernible reason. To me, the lost potential can be recovered to a degree, but the Commonwealth/local municipalities blew this big time back in the 50s and 60s. That was when Princess Anne was consolidated to create Virginia Beach, and when Norfolk/South Norfolk created Chesapeake. In that same era, someone should have had the foresight of the ever-growing importance of large cities globally, and this is when the entire Southside (minus Suffolk) and Peninsula (only Hampton and Newport News) should have been annexed into one city. They should have been a lot faster, and a lot louder, on bringing mass transportation to a region where all the cities are linked through business and recreation. Given the city one official name, either "Hampton" or "Hampton Roads" for historical significance, or called the entire city "Norfolk". It wouldn't change the physical characteristics of each area except jurisdictional boundary, and maybe as one major city, the region benefits exponentially from growth in commerce and population, because as it is, while Norfolk is the assumed top city, in many visits to each, it neither feels larger than Virginia Beach, nor is altogether the alpha city in terms of tourist draw. Neither would be as significant without the other. However, Norfolk does have the airport, the main center of urban environment and events...
hampton roads satellite images
new york city satellite images
Look at the similarities between Hampton Roads and New York City on satellite. Not to say HR would ever have grown as large or prosperous as NY, but the region under one unification could have only brought good...
Suffolk is a suburb in the largest sense of the word, and is detached from what I generally consider Hampton Roads (although it is "Tidewater"). Suffolk has a country, down home element not available in the other six cities. Heck, HRT doesn't even service Suffolk...
The same way that Norfolk/Virginia Beach and Norfolk/Chesapeake and Chesapeake/Portsmouth blend seamlessly into each other at their borders, is the same way that Newport News/Hampton blend together. The Seven Cities are definitely unique to Virginia in their makeup...
In comparison to Maryland, obviously Virginia has no city as large or prominent as Baltimore. However, Richmond is most similarly built like Baltimore, and shares more in common, and Richmond is the consensus alpha city in the Commonwealth...
There is no comparison. VB is a suburb of Norfolk. VB is built around it coast line and norfolk is built around it downtown. Tourist flock to one of the best beaches in the region. Norfolk does not have this, but it does have a business community around it many bank buildings. And can't forget the malls, which brings people to the downtown area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328
HR should be our NYC, I agree. And you could not do that now, and the state of NY had the foresight to do that back in the 1800s, and it was an entirely different country then. Can't do those things as easily now.
But there are things that we can do to make the area work better as one region. I do agree about Suffolk. I assumed that Suffolk was just another one of the seven cities, until I went there for the first time. Suffolk is that exurb everyone has that they have to drive through 5 or 10 miles of country to get too; only to find out that you were there all along!
As long as HR does not start to lose people I think the region will be okay. The days of rapid growth may be over, but sometimes slow, steady, growth is the only way to maintain relevance. When that growth occurs over time people get used to it easier than they do when it happens over a short 10, 20, or 50 year period.
I actually like Norfolk and Virginia Beach pitted against each other. If one did not have something to prove to the other, I doubt that anything would ever get done around here. There are times when collaboration could help, like with our efforts to bring a professional sports franchise to the region, or transportation, but on the little things like Class A office space, hotels, residential projects, retail etc I have no problem when Norfolk and Virginia Beach go at it; always entertaining to see egos get in the way and people getting in their feelings over the little details. A lot of those projects do not last, and Norfolk seems to suffer more damage because their economy is not as resilient as Virginia Beach, but its all good. It is not the worst thing in the world, and it is no different than what happens in any other city with the tenuous relationship between a city and its suburbs.
You are right about Baltimore. But I will like to add that being so close to DC put it a disadvantaged when it comes to federal funding. That's why it didn't the kind of rail system that DC got. Had it got a similar size rail system, it would be a better place.
Federal funding is the elephant in the bedroom. I mentioned Cleveland, but they had a ton of funding. I'm not sure what percentage of it was federal though. But I know that when it comes to transportation, without federal funding, it usually doesn't happen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Baltimore
Location
