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.
Suburban DC has way more in common with Atlanta, because they have many of the the same transplants from the northeast. Central DC does have more desnisty than Atlanta, so in that regard it would be more like NYC, in that both are equally more walkable than compared to Atlanta. Though downtown and midtown Atlanta are more walkable now than they used to be. You can walk most of midtown Atlanta and with the new streetcar in downtown Atlanta it fills in many of the holes where it would be otherwise impractical to walk.
DC has some qualities of both cities and only remind of Atlanta in terms of the suburbs and certain demographics. Native DC people seem to have more in common with New Yorkers than people from Atlanta. DC accent is closer to NYC than the drawl that native Atlantans have. DC in city architect is more like NYC than Atlanta IMHO. Other than suburbs and a large AA community I see little in common with Atlanta.
NYC is a bad comparison, but so is Atlanta. DC does not share much with EITHER of these cities. Again suburban northern Virginia outside of Arlington and Alexandria is somewhat similar to Atlanta, but Arlington and Alexandria existance itself seperates it from most other US cities. DC itself has very little in common with Atlanta, and the Maryland suburbs are closer to New England Suburbs (especially places like Takoma Park, Chevy Chase, etc).
Either way, neither are really the best refrence point. DC (the city) itself should not be compared to Atlanta, it is far more dense, walkable, and transit friendly. Atlanta is in comparison is much more sprawling. Example twice as many people live in a downtown area which is much smaller than atlanta. Much closer in design to a northeastern city than anything else.
For example
DC 68.3 square miles, 658,000 people
Atlanta 132 square miles, 440,000 people
Boston 89.3, 645,000 people
It becomes pretty clear where the similarities actually fall based on this alone...Atlanta shares nothing in terms of density with the BosWash corridor cities. It is by all definitions a sprawling southern city. DC on the other hand is as dense as other Northeastern cities.
Essentially that alone should end the DC - Atlanta comparisons, the cities are nothing alike. The Virginia suburbs are somewhat comparible, but sprawling suburbs are the same almost everywhere. I can compare the Virginia suburbs outside the beltway to the Chicago suburbs. What is unique about DC is the fact it has dense urban inner suburbs close to it's borders (Arlington, Silver Spring, Alexandria, and Bethesda). A trait Atlanta does not share with it, but Boston does. You don't find this in Atlanta at all, because Atlanta, once again is low density and sprawling, something DC is not.
A few things to add the DC area is FAR LESS religious than the Atlanta region. Atlanta is well within the bible belt of conservative christianity, while DC is one of the least religous cities in the US, and is far more diverse in that regard.
I can go on and on, but DC is not like Atlanta. The cities are not even closely comparible. Atlanta is not even close enough on the density front to be comparible. The virginia suburbs are not the city itself. Try again.
NYC comparisons are not right either though. NYC is a megacity. So you are comparing a city much smaller than DC, and a City much larger. Lets compare DC to cities in it's same class in terms of educational attainment, size, and density. Boston, Seattle, etc.
NYC is a bad comparison, but so is Atlanta. DC does not share much with EITHER of these cities. Again suburban northern Virginia outside of Arlington and Alexandria is somewhat similar to Atlanta, but Arlington and Alexandria existance itself seperates it from most other US cities. DC itself has very little in common with Atlanta, and the Maryland suburbs are closer to New England Suburbs (especially places like Takoma Park, Chevy Chase, etc).
Either way, neither are really the best refrence point. DC (the city) itself should not be compared to Atlanta, it is far more dense, walkable, and transit friendly. Atlanta is in comparison is much more sprawling. Example twice as many people live in a downtown area which is much smaller than atlanta. Much closer in design to a northeastern city than anything else.
For example
DC 68.3 square miles, 658,000 people
Atlanta 132 square miles, 440,000 people
Boston 89.3, 645,000 people
It becomes pretty clear where the similarities actually fall based on this alone...Atlanta shares nothing in terms of density with the BosWash corridor cities. It is by all definitions a sprawling southern city. DC on the other hand is as dense as other Northeastern cities.
Essentially that alone should end the DC - Atlanta comparisons, the cities are nothing alike. The Virginia suburbs are somewhat comparible, but sprawling suburbs are the same almost everywhere. I can compare the Virginia suburbs outside the beltway to the Chicago suburbs. What is unique about DC is the fact it has dense urban inner suburbs close to it's borders (Arlington, Silver Spring, Alexandria, and Bethesda). A trait Atlanta does not share with it, but Boston does. You don't find this in Atlanta at all, because Atlanta, once again is low density and sprawling, something DC is not.
A few things to add the DC area is FAR LESS religious than the Atlanta region. Atlanta is well within the bible belt of conservative christianity, while DC is one of the least religous cities in the US, and is far more diverse in that regard.
I can go on and on, but DC is not like Atlanta. The cities are not even closely comparible. Atlanta is not even close enough on the density front to be comparible. The virginia suburbs are not the city itself. Try again.
NYC comparisons are not right either though. NYC is a megacity. So you are comparing a city much smaller than DC, and a City much larger. Lets compare DC to cities in it's same class in terms of educational attainment, size, and density. Boston, Seattle, etc.
NYC is a bad comparison, but so is Atlanta. DC does not share much with EITHER of these cities. Again suburban northern Virginia outside of Arlington and Alexandria is somewhat similar to Atlanta, but Arlington and Alexandria existance itself seperates it from most other US cities. DC itself has very little in common with Atlanta, and the Maryland suburbs are closer to New England Suburbs (especially places like Takoma Park, Chevy Chase, etc).
Either way, neither are really the best refrence point. DC (the city) itself should not be compared to Atlanta, it is far more dense, walkable, and transit friendly. Atlanta is in comparison is much more sprawling. Example twice as many people live in a downtown area which is much smaller than atlanta. Much closer in design to a northeastern city than anything else.
For example
DC 68.3 square miles, 658,000 people
Atlanta 132 square miles, 440,000 people
Boston 89.3, 645,000 people
It becomes pretty clear where the similarities actually fall based on this alone...Atlanta shares nothing in terms of density with the BosWash corridor cities. It is by all definitions a sprawling southern city. DC on the other hand is as dense as other Northeastern cities.
Essentially that alone should end the DC - Atlanta comparisons, the cities are nothing alike. The Virginia suburbs are somewhat comparible, but sprawling suburbs are the same almost everywhere. I can compare the Virginia suburbs outside the beltway to the Chicago suburbs. What is unique about DC is the fact it has dense urban inner suburbs close to it's borders (Arlington, Silver Spring, Alexandria, and Bethesda). A trait Atlanta does not share with it, but Boston does. You don't find this in Atlanta at all, because Atlanta, once again is low density and sprawling, something DC is not.
A few things to add the DC area is FAR LESS religious than the Atlanta region. Atlanta is well within the bible belt of conservative christianity, while DC is one of the least religous cities in the US, and is far more diverse in that regard.
I can go on and on, but DC is not like Atlanta. The cities are not even closely comparible. Atlanta is not even close enough on the density front to be comparible. The virginia suburbs are not the city itself. Try again.
NYC comparisons are not right either though. NYC is a megacity. So you are comparing a city much smaller than DC, and a City much larger. Lets compare DC to cities in it's same class in terms of educational attainment, size, and density. Boston, Seattle, etc.
Metro Atlanta is about the same size as DC Metro.
DC Metro 5.9M
Atlanta 5.5 M
I agree with some points made but don't think that Boston or Seattle as being a tier above Atlanta. What is so great about Boston or Seattle that puts them in this so-called elite class. The question was which of the two cities has more in common with DC. This thread was not intended to be a direct comparison but which city has more characteristics of DC. For all the reasons you stated DC is different from Atlanta is all the reason I would say it has more in common with NYC.
Metro Atlanta is about the same size as DC Metro.
DC Metro 5.9M
Atlanta 5.5 M
I agree with some points made but don't think that Boston or Seattle as being a tier above Atlanta. What is so great about Boston or Seattle that puts them in this so-called elite class. The question was which of the two cities has more in common with DC. This thread was not intended to be a direct comparison but which city has more characteristics of DC. For all the reasons you stated DC is different from Atlanta is all the reason I would say it has more in common with NYC.
Boston is a major academic power but I know ATL is definitely not a slacker on that front.
Boston is a major academic power but I know ATL is definitely not a slacker on that front.
I understand what Boston brings to the table but still wouldn't put it in a tier above Atlanta. DistricSonic acts as if density is the on metric to judge a city. ATL can hold it own against Boston, DC, and Seattle in terms of amenities. But again this thread isn't about direct comparisons. DC has things in common with both NYC and Atlanta but you have to be opened minded enough to see it.
In its core it is more like a stumpy Midtown Manhattan. Outside of its core it certainly resembles Atlanta more. They have similar suburban development styles although DC has clearly invested much more heavily in urban TOD centers.
I think the comparison to Boston is good. Small high density core with very low density suburbs that (at least to these West Coast eyes) look almost rural. You feel like you have left the city almost right away, a pretty stark contrast to NYC which has high density suburbs radiating out in all directions.
There's nothing remotely similar about those two cities . As in feel ,size , architecture , weather , you name it .
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.
