U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-16-2017, 11:54 PM
_OT
 
Location: Miami
2,142 posts, read 1,517,587 times
Reputation: 1845

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
And here we have it. THIS is what you wish were true, but nothing could be farther from it.

For you to even suggest that Birmingham has 'superior' urban housing than anyplace else in the South is beyond laughable, and your links proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Once again, I'm not wishing it's true, I'm telling you that it's fact, and giving you facts to back it up. On the other hand, you're not allowing yourself to explain to me why you think otherwise, other than misinterpreting my posts.

When I stated that "Which is fact that Birmingham is more of a Rust Belt city, than it is a typical Southeast city." I didn't make this statement just to make it, I made it because there's facts and examples to back it up.

Regenerating America's Legacy Cities | Greater Ohio Policy Center
http://ti.org/pdfs/LegacyCities.pdf
http://americanassembly.org/sites/de...tionagenda.pdf

Quote:
HISTORY IS BEING REMADE in the Rust Belt, and historic preservation can play an indispensable role. From Cleveland to Birmingham, St. Louis to Buffalo, Detroit to Newark, legacy cities face unprecedented challenges in pervasive disinvestment, widespread abandonment, demolition by neglect, and extraordinarily limited resources. Yet they offer diversity, affordability, and irreplaceable urban character. To be effective here, preservationists must present new strategies for protecting cultural heritage when traditional growth-driven approaches fall short.
It's interesting, whenever conversations about the Southeast spark up, there's always this initiative to focus on the "New South/Sunbelt" cities, rather than to also include the older, grittier cities, which in this case Birmingham often gets casts off to the side. But when we start to recognize these certain Rust Belt/Urban traits within Birmingham, when it relates to the rest of the Southeast, then it becomes something that's not feasible because that puts Birmingham in a position where it's branded outside of the typical Southeastern characteristics. I never once stated that Birmingham had the "superior" Urban Housing, I said it had a Diverse Housing Market. Which of course, has yet to be refuted with proper examples...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2017, 12:34 AM
 
Location: Near L.A.
4,114 posts, read 9,224,113 times
Reputation: 3346
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
What would you consider the prototypical Northeastern, Southeastern, Gulf Coast, Great Lakes, Great Plains, Southwestern, and West Coast cities?

Northeast: NYC (a good argument could also be made for Philly)

Southeast: I'm leaning towards Atlanta, here

Gulf Coast: I've only been to New Orleans, Houston (I think it counts) and Corpus Christi. I suspect that none are good choices

Great Lakes: I'm thinking Cleveland, though I've never visited Detroit.

Great Plains: not a clue

Southwest: very limited experience here. I recuse myself.

West Coast: LA
Northeast: Philadelphia and Baltimore. Both are quintessential, blue-collar cities that still have strong influences from the time of English colonization, and continue to have strong influences because of their great local universities and immigration from around the world as driven by those universities. However, they're still very "local," parochial cities who are proud of who they are and what they are, and fully embrace their regional quirks. By contrast, NYC, DC, and Boston, while feeling very Northeastern, are also very transient (especially DC) and international (especially NYC) in nature. Honorable mentions: Providence, Syracuse, Pittsburgh.

Southeast: Birmingham. It is what Atlanta would be if Georgia had not become aggressive with its economic development efforts beginning in the 1950s; likewise, Charlotte would still be Birmingham if it didn't begin emerging in the 1980s as a competitive international banking center. Birmingham just screams, "Old South," while still retaining a distinctly urban fabric and character. Honorable mentions: Savannah, Charleston (SC), Greenville (SC), Jackson (MS).

Gulf Coast: Mobile. Yes, Mobile. Mardi Gras started here, not Mobile. It's the only city of any substantial size in the U.S. that fully embraces the Gulf of Mexico, has built its economy based on it, and yet still retains a strong regional identity by not becoming cosmopolitan or transient. Tampa-St. Petersburg, Naples, Ft. Myers, and South Padre are transient, but certainly not cosmopolitan; Houston and New Orleans are both cosmopolitan and transient, but they're also just in the Gulf region and not on the actual GofM itself. Honorable mentions: Pensacola, Biloxi, Gulfport, Galveston.

Great Lakes: Milwaukee. Its more central location to Chicago, Madison, and Minneapolis-St. Paul, as well as its obviously existence because of Lake Michigan, make it the obvious contender. It just screams, "Midwestern," "brats," "snow," and "blue-collar." It has a regional identity that is unmistakable, yet almost entirely overlooked nationally. Chicago is transient and cosmopolitan (though its suburbs are still very Midwestern in attitude and identity), Minneapolis-St. Paul is like Chicago but with 2/5 the population and no lakefront, Detroit is a deeply troubled city that also borders Canada, and Cleveland is in that odd transitional zone from Great Lakes to Northeast. Honorable mentions: Green Bay, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Toledo.

Great Plains: Sioux Falls. Omaha is in the Great Plains, yet still prototypically lower Midwestern. Kansas City is flat, but not quite Great Plains geographically. Fargo and Bismarck are just too damn cold. Honorable mentions: Fargo, Bismarck, Lincoln (NE).

Southwest: Albuquerque. It's still its own thing, out in the high desert, but it hasn't been impacted yet by the rapid development and growth that has impacted places like Las Vegas, Tucson, Phoenix, or even El Paso. Also, Vegas is only representative of itself. Tucson is fine, and still feels very Southwestern, but Californians have been trickling in for years. Phoenix has become a drier, smaller L.A. El Paso is in Texas, which is kind of its own thing, and across the river from Juarez. Honorable mentions: Flagstaff, St. George (UT).

West Coast: Sacramento. The West Coast is very predicated on being a sort of ongoing frontier of ideas, dreamers, concepts, education, cultural rejects, etc., etc. So, it's hard for a West Coast city to be "its own thing" by maintaining a profoundly regional identity driven and coaxed by parochialism and regional tradition, in the way that places like Philadelphia, Baltimore, Birmingham, Mobile, and Milwaukee are. With that understanding established, I choose Sacramento. Cosmopolitan and transient though it may still be, it also feels--and is--strangely more "local" and "established" in nature than San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area, Portland, Seattle, or even L.A. Sacramento is the closest thing to a "homey" city on the West Coast, IMO, and is the last major city in California that is all semi-affordable, middle class-friendly, and not dumpy. San Francisco natives are adamant about their city, incredibly adamant, but they're also being priced out by the techies to Sacramento. Los Angeles natives love to stick around L.A., but it is still the home of entertainment, tech, and a lot of finance. San Diego is one of the most strangely transient cities I've ever been to or lived in. Seattle and Portland are full of overeducated, snobby transplants looking to live in a "progressive, environmentally-friendly," blah, blah, blah. Honorable mentions: Orange County, Eugene, Tacoma.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 12:59 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,286 posts, read 3,501,481 times
Reputation: 4463
Quote:
Originally Posted by _OT View Post
It's interesting, whenever conversations about the Southeast spark up, there's always this initiative to focus on the "New South/Sunbelt" cities, rather than to also include the older, grittier cities, which in this case Birmingham often gets casts off to the side.
That's because you continue to ignore the fact that Atlanta is older than Birmingham, and has an older industrial legacy as well. You dismiss us as a "New South/Sunbelt" city along with a lot of other people, yet that is only part of the relatively recent picture. We have every single example of your pictures here and more, in spades. If you really were as familiar with Atlanta as you claim to be, you wouldn't even be questioning this very simple fact.

Yes, we only had one steel mill - now the site of Atlantic Station. But we had many other rail-centered industrial enterprises - including Ford's first Model T factory, now the repurposed Ford Factory Lofts.

Birmingham was born of natural resources and had many steel mills, along with their with their absentee Pittsburgh owners. Atlanta was born of rails and associated commerce, and it's wealth was more organic and home-based.

By the time Birmingham grew up and reached the size of Atlanta in the early 20th Century it was very much industrial, and Atlanta was much more diversified. Birmingham experienced massive industrial and wealth loss, Atlanta never did. A lot of the area has never recovered. Birmingham fought civil rights tooth and nail, Atlanta was the cradle of the movement. Birmingham didn't embrace a regional hub Airport, Atlanta did.

Get it yet?

The differences are night and day now. Atlanta is seen as a New Sunbelt City, but it really isn't. We just took advantage of our situation, and were not afraid to embrace change.

The bottom line is that Birmingham has nothing unique to it's housing stock in regards to the Southeast at all, and there is absolutely nothing you can say or link to that is able to prove otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 01:16 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,286 posts, read 3,501,481 times
Reputation: 4463
Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticEars View Post
Southeast: Birmingham. It is what Atlanta would be if Georgia had not become aggressive with its economic development efforts beginning in the 1950s.
Correction. Atlanta and Georgia became aggressive with economic development in the 1880's, before Birmingham was hardly a blip on the map.

It started with Atlanta Constitution Editor Henry Grady's editorials and speeches around the country, and culminated with the 1895 Worlds Fair and Booker T. Washington's famous speech. This is nothing new here, and the rest is history.

Flashback: The 1895 Cotton States Exposition and the Negro Building - Atlanta Magazine
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 02:03 AM
 
Location: The Heart of Dixie
7,814 posts, read 12,319,426 times
Reputation: 4765
How are Las Vegas and Phoenix not prototypical Southwest cities? Both have the mostly suburban layout and suburbs dominated by the stucco and Southwest-style architecture. Most of the Southwest is desert but its few major cities do physically resemble Las Vegas and Phoenix. Besides these two, the only other places in the Southwest I would consider major cities at all would be Albuquerque, El Paso, Flagstaff, Tucson, and El Paso. Reno is marginally Southwest since Nevada is a Southwest state BUT it physically looks more like Northern California and the Pacific Northwest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 10:12 AM
_OT
 
Location: Miami
2,142 posts, read 1,517,587 times
Reputation: 1845
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
That's because you continue to ignore the fact that Atlanta is older than Birmingham, and has an older industrial legacy as well. You dismiss us as a "New South/Sunbelt" city along with a lot of other people, yet that is only part of the relatively recent picture. We have every single example of your pictures here and more, in spades. If you really were as familiar with Atlanta as you claim to be, you wouldn't even be questioning this very simple fact.

Yes, we only had one steel mill - now the site of Atlantic Station. But we had many other rail-centered industrial enterprises - including Ford's first Model T factory, now the repurposed Ford Factory Lofts.

Birmingham was born of natural resources and had many steel mills, along with their with their absentee Pittsburgh owners. Atlanta was born of rails and associated commerce, and it's wealth was more organic and home-based.

By the time Birmingham grew up and reached the size of Atlanta in the early 20th Century it was very much industrial, and Atlanta was much more diversified. Birmingham experienced massive industrial and wealth loss, Atlanta never did. A lot of the area has never recovered. Birmingham fought civil rights tooth and nail, Atlanta was the cradle of the movement. Birmingham didn't embrace a regional hub Airport, Atlanta did.

Get it yet?

The differences are night and day now. Atlanta is seen as a New Sunbelt City, but it really isn't. We just took advantage of our situation, and were not afraid to embrace change.

The bottom line is that Birmingham has nothing unique to it's housing stock in regards to the Southeast at all, and there is absolutely nothing you can say or link to that is able to prove otherwise.
Huntsville is older than Birmingham too, so is Charlotte, Nashville, and etc. Still doesn't change the fact that Birmingham is more of a Rust Belt city than Atlanta, and the rest of the Southeast; I mean the city is named after one of the UK's major industrial cities for crying out loud. Atlanta's niche, or claim to fame was always it's transportation hub, and that's that. On the other hand, Birmingham was full of Iron Mills, Steel Mills, and Blast Furnaces, that rivaled other cities throughout the Midwest and Northeast. Many of those Mills/Furnaces stand today, even the most noticeable one called Sloss Furnaces; not to mention Vulcan, the large cast iron statue, is a symbol of Birmingham's roots in the Iron and Steel industry. You're still having a hard time trying to fathom that there's cities outside of the South that Birmingham shares similarities with moreso than Atlanta.



I mean you even said it yourself, "By the time Birmingham grew up and reached the size of Atlanta in the early 20th Century it was very much industrial, and Atlanta was much more diversified." Which proves my point that Birmingham's industrial background never allowed it's self to succumb to the Southeastern type of development that early, but rather it focus on it's various Urban cores that helped support it's Industrial nature become more cohesive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
The bottom line is that Birmingham has nothing unique to it's housing stock in regards to the Southeast at all, and there is absolutely nothing you can say or link to that is able to prove otherwise.
You're just becoming stubborn here, I gave you links, proof, facts, and etc. that supported my claims. I'm starting to believe that there's not many cities within the Southeast that showcases such housing diversity and you know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 11:01 AM
 
Location: South Beach and DT Raleigh
11,810 posts, read 18,790,027 times
Reputation: 11136
Quote:
Originally Posted by _OT View Post
It's interesting, whenever conversations about the Southeast spark up, there's always this initiative to focus on the "New South/Sunbelt" cities, rather than to also include the older, grittier cities, which in this case Birmingham often gets casts off to the side. But when we start to recognize these certain Rust Belt/Urban traits within Birmingham, when it relates to the rest of the Southeast, then it becomes something that's not feasible because that puts Birmingham in a position where it's branded outside of the typical Southeastern characteristics. I never once stated that Birmingham had the "superior" Urban Housing, I said it had a Diverse Housing Market. Which of course, has yet to be refuted with proper examples...
I think that geographical location is only one of the attributes that differentiates cities from one another. Cities are influenced by the times that shaped or continue to shape them. They are influenced by access to money/wealth. They are influenced by access to natural resources (especially water). They have been, and are, influenced by visionary leadership. They are influenced by ethnicity. They are influenced by weather. They are influenced religion. They are influenced by transportation networks, etc.

Inasmuch as cities have many common influences, they are perceived as being grouped together. Clearly there will be cities that have attributes that tie them to others outside their geographical region, (Pittsburgh/Birmingham) and it's in these cases that cities may be thought to be grouped outside their geographical region because these cities have more similarity of experience than differences.

Last edited by rnc2mbfl; 06-17-2017 at 11:24 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,286 posts, read 3,501,481 times
Reputation: 4463
Quote:
Originally Posted by _OT View Post
You're just becoming stubborn here, I gave you links, proof, facts, and etc. that supported my claims. I'm starting to believe that there's not many cities within the Southeast that showcases such housing diversity and you know it.
And you've just become obtuse. I'm beginning to think you know nothing of Atlanta at all, and have never been anywhere but Birmingham and Miami.

Yet again, you have shown nothing of Birmingham's housing stock that is unique in any way at all for this region.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 04:35 PM
_OT
 
Location: Miami
2,142 posts, read 1,517,587 times
Reputation: 1845
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMatl View Post
And you've just become obtuse. I'm beginning to think you know nothing of Atlanta at all, and have never been anywhere but Birmingham and Miami.

Yet again, you have shown nothing of Birmingham's housing stock that is unique in any way at all for this region.
I'm literally an hour and a half from Atlanta, hit I-20, straight shot then I'm in the city, that's nothing. I grew up in NYC, and moved to Miami; I've been to every region East of San Antonio. I've recently just visited Toronto for the first time a few months ago and plan on going back for Caribana to meet up with a couple of friends. I grew up in a very diverse family, we're all over.

Point is, you're seriously going to tell that housing developments and neighborhoods such as...

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5039...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5146...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5016...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4958...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5018...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5029...7i13312!8i6656

Are common throughout the Southeast? even though those neighborhoods and housing developments were built by developers outside of the Southeast? I have not seen one neighborhood in Atlanta or the Southeast, that's similar. I keep asking for examples of said similar housing developments, and of course, you've yet to find any. You'd think that someone from Atlanta would have no problem finding an example.

Last edited by _OT; 06-17-2017 at 04:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2017, 05:33 PM
Status: "RIP Solomon Tekah" (set 4 days ago)
 
1,223 posts, read 578,430 times
Reputation: 1183
_OT, I never knew Birmingham had architecture like that, props. I'm a native Atlantan and I see the point that you're making. To me, Birmingham isn't really "Old South" in the Savannah/Charleston sense but it isn't New South like Charlotte, ATL, or Tampa...not sure what term to use for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top