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.
No, what Baltimore has a blocks and blocks of structural design density, now only downtown, but outside of it. DC is urban, this we both agree, but Baltimore wins out in structural density. Baltimore is an older city built well before the automobile, and has the built form to prove that. Find me some residental streets that don't have sidewalks because the bottom step on the stoop literally is the street in DC. I can find plenty in Baltimore.
Structural density includes the actual structures such as buildings in addition to the streets. DC having so many neighborhoods of mid-rise construction is likely structurally denser than Baltimore is at this point even with the tight street grid that Baltimore has.
DC has streets in the neighborhoods that are way more intense than any neighborhood in Baltimore. Baltimore’s tight neighborhood streets are filled with row-houses. These streets in DC away from downtown is an example of that. Where is the equivalent in Baltimore away from the greater downtown core?
Looking at these three images and the fourth one from Wylie Street, it appears that the difference between Baltimore (and Philly) and DC is that where in the other two cities, you will find nothing but vast stretches of blocks with nothing but rowhouses on them, in Washington, even many of the rowhouse blocks are punctuated by the occasional mid-rise or five-over-one.
I can think of a few DC thoroughfares that, much like the Grand Concourse in the Bronx, are lined with seven- to 12-story apartment buildings. No such streets exist in either Baltimore or Philly that I know of.
What this means is that while the land may be as densely built upon, or even more so, in Baltimore than in the District, the buildings sitting on the land hold more people because they are larger.
Looking at these three images and the fourth one from Wylie Street, it appears that the difference between Baltimore (and Philly) and DC is that where in the other two cities, you will find nothing but vast stretches of blocks with nothing but rowhouses on them, in Washington, even many of the rowhouse blocks are punctuated by the occasional mid-rise or five-over-one.
I can think of a few DC thoroughfares that, much like the Grand Concourse in the Bronx, are lined with seven- to 12-story apartment buildings. No such streets exist in either Baltimore or Philly that I know of.
What this means is that while the land may be as densely built upon, or even more so, in Baltimore than in the District, the buildings sitting on the land hold more people because they are larger.
Right, and those buildings are structures so the size of them in the number of square footage and households they hold should factor into structural density. Certainly a block of two or three story rowhouses along a four lane street is structurally less dense than the same with a one or two lane street. However, a block of seven to 12 story apartments along a four lane street is structurally denser than a two or three story rowhouse along a two lane street and DC has greatly increased its stock of such buildings in recent years to the point it's arguably not denser in regards to population or jobs, but also structurally denser. Along with this is Baltimore having some pretty large surface parking lots and a scattering of empty brownfield sites where there are no buildings which are pretty rare in DC save for lots that are being cleared that are likely to soon have a mid-rise building plopped down.
In 2012, there was a much stronger argument for Baltimore being structurally denser than DC, but that's not so powerful an argument seven years later as the building boom and population growth in DC has been immense. DC has added something like 100K residential population in this time period and it's also a 100K residential population difference between the two cities. However, that influx of new residents is not the only thing you'd need to build more for as there's also a much larger commuter population along with all the supporting businesses that comes with those people. At this point, it would be pretty wild if Baltimore overall is structurally denser than DC.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 04-27-2019 at 12:42 PM..
DC has streets in the neighborhoods that are way more intense than any neighborhood in Baltimore. Baltimore’s tight neighborhood streets are filled with row-houses. These streets in DC away from downtown is an example of that. Where is the equivalent in Baltimore away from the greater downtown core?
Right, and those buildings are structures so the size of them in the number of square footage and households they hold should factor into structural density. Certainly a block of two or three story rowhouses along a four lane street is structurally less dense than the same with a one or two lane street. However, a block of seven to 12 story apartments along a four lane street is structurally denser than a two or three story rowhouse along a two lane street and DC has greatly increased its stock of such buildings in recent years to the point it's arguably not denser in regards to population or jobs, but also structurally denser. Along with this is Baltimore having some pretty large surface parking lots and a scattering of empty brownfield sites where there are no buildings which are pretty rare in DC save for lots that are being cleared that are likely to soon have a mid-rise building plopped down.
In 2012, there was a much stronger argument for Baltimore being structurally denser than DC, but that's not so powerful an argument seven years later as the building boom and population growth in DC has been immense. DC has added something like 100K residential population in this time period and it's also a 100K residential population difference between the two cities. However, that influx of new residents is not the only thing you'd need to build more for as there's also a much larger commuter population along with all the supporting businesses that comes with those people. At this point, it would be pretty wild if Baltimore overall is structurally denser than DC.
Ironically, it us the much older buildings and neighborhoods that makes a city feel more urban.
Ironically, it us the much older buildings and neighborhoods that makes a city feel more urban.
That depends on them actually being maintained and preserved. The risk for places like Baltimore that have a large number of vacant properties is that they can very quickly disappear from a combination of water / fire / vandals or actual demolitions.
That depends on them actually being maintained and preserved. The risk for places like Baltimore that have a large number of vacant properties is that they can very quickly disappear from a combination of water / fire / vandals or actual demolitions.
Most are better off being torn down, which is currently happening around the city.
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.
