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.
Also, I think Baltimore can stand to be more vibrant in more areas. Areas like the Harbor, are very busy, but the deeper you go into the CBD, the lease foot traffic you see especially during non business hours. As far as activities downtown, it is certainly a top 9 possibly eclipsing a few of the top 8 cities.
Considering people are mentioning Miami as a contender, I can definitely see Tampa being close in the very near future. I've always said that it had one of the most ideal locations and layouts, and that its potential was severely wasted. Now, finally, they are pushing forward with some MASSIVE projects that are turning into quite an impressive place. Time will tell, but it's looking pretty good. I believe downtown Tampa will soon overtake Downtown Miami/Brickell as the "best downtown" in Florida.
Maybe at some point in the future, but I don't think currently or in the near future. Miami's a much smaller city by land area than Tampa and it's added about 10,000 more people and a larger percentage of current population than Tampa has from the 2010 census to the 2017 estimate. A lot of the 63K or so people that moved to Miami since 2017 is likely to have been in the greater downtown Miami area as that's where the bulk of housing units has been built. Miami's downtown has also seen some major changes in the opening of two museums downtown and the construction of MiamiCentral which is a massive mixed-use complex downtown that now serves a regional rail line (Brightline) and is slated to also serve as a downtown station for South Florida commuter rail. These are quite massive projects aside from simply high-rise apartments and condos, though there has been plenty of that as well.
I don't see that as folks putting Baltimore on the same level as DC though. I don't see anything wrong with making it clear that Baltimore is still its own thing even with DC just down the road.
I agree, they both stand alone as they are distinct/unique enough but I think the issue is that when combined as one large metro area people see DC as the principle/primary city of the greater area and a few folks don't like that. I don't understand why since DC is larger, stronger economically and probably the more famous city and will easily be seen as the primary i.e. "SF" Bay Area even though SJ is a larger city.
I agree, they both stand alone as they are distinct/unique enough but I think the issue is that when combined as one large metro area people see DC as the principle/primary city of the greater area and a few folks don't like that. I don't understand why since DC is larger, stronger economically and probably the more famous city and will easily be seen as the primary i.e. "SF" Bay Area even though SJ is a larger city.
I think if you're referring to the CSA, especially for population comparison purposes, it should be referenced as DC/Baltimore and it's a bit misleading to exclude Baltimore when it contributes another 3M to the region. In the same way, I usually see people reference the Bay Area, and not just SF, when talking about the entire region. I know some people are prone to just mention Dallas when referencing the entire Metroplex; personally I say DFW when talking about the overall region.
Exactly. From the outside, it's not as majestic-looking as Miami with all of the highrises and whatnot, but at street level, it looks like it's going to be quite something. Kind of reminds me of Toronto vs Montreal, with Toronto's majestic skyline (Miami) and Montreal's street-level vibe (Tampa), although on much smaller scales.
I think if you're referring to the CSA, especially for population comparison purposes, it should be referenced as DC/Baltimore and it's a bit misleading to exclude Baltimore when it contributes another 3M to the region. In the same way, I usually see people reference the Bay Area, and not just SF, when talking about the entire region. I know some people are prone to just mention Dallas when referencing the entire Metroplex; personally I say DFW when talking about the overall region.
You know that you're not the norm though right? Also, even though people say Bay area they still think of SF as the primary city of the "area" and plenty of people reference SF area or just SF when they actually mean the SJ area especially silicon valley.
I agree, they both stand alone as they are distinct/unique enough but I think the issue is that when combined as one large metro area people see DC as the principle/primary city of the greater area and a few folks don't like that. I don't understand why since DC is larger, stronger economically and probably the more famous city and will easily be seen as the primary i.e. "SF" Bay Area even though SJ is a larger city.
Bad example. San Jose is the larger and technically more powerful city. Plus, Baltimore is a more distinct city/region away from the DC area than SJ is with SF.
Bad example. San Jose is the larger and technically more powerful city.
Correct but SF is the referenced main city for the area... which is my point regarding the more famous city being seen as the primary.
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.
