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.
I don't think urban necessarily means vibrant. For a long time many of our cities were relatively depressed and dominated by the working class or lower class urban culture. There were still urban. It is indeed a tough comparison though.
I don't think urban necessarily means vibrant. For a long time many of our cities were relatively depressed and dominated by the working class or lower class urban culture. There were still urban. It is indeed a tough comparison though.
I think that is a good point. And it really comes down to income, like it or not. Density/urbanity can be poor or rich, with the latter generally more vibrant, but not in all cases.
Tough comparison. Seattle is definitely the more vibrant city. It's hard to compare to Baltimore since so much of the city is depressed and underpopulated.
*Some of the city, but I see your point. Seattle is more vibrant overall and has been growing faster than Baltimore for years.
Baltimore hasn't been growing at all except for the 1k we gained in 2014. We've lost that 1k and then some.
You’re right, I should’ve worded that last part better. Overall, Baltimore’s population has been decreasing for decades. Not to steer off topic, but I wonder how many people have moved into the city since the pandemic.
You’re right, I should’ve worded that last part better. Overall, Baltimore’s population has been decreasing for decades. Not to steer off topic, but I wonder how many people have moved into the city since the pandemic.
I'd venture to say that Downtown's population may have actually grown.
Baltimore still, is a more urban city proper than Seattle pound for pound. It simply was created to be more of a classically urban center, and housed almost 1 million people in 80 sq miles at its peak.
It simply isn't. It was 70 years ago at its peak but those days are long gone. Gone are many of the grocery stores, department stores, movie theaters, auto plants, flower shops, streetcars, and most of all over 400,000 of its residents since it's peak. Saying Baltimore is more urban because of its structures just doesn't make it more urban imo.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,552,695 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwright1
It simply isn't. It was 70 years ago at its peak but those days are long gone. Gone are many of the grocery stores, department stores, movie theaters, auto plants, flower shops, streetcars, and most of all over 400,000 of its residents since it's peak. Saying Baltimore is more urban because of its structures just doesn't make it more urban imo.
None of this equals Seattle being more urban as a city, nor has to do with being more urban than Baltimore on the ground. You've picked criteria that make Seattle more vibrant than Baltimore. Flower shops and auto plants? Lol.
Seattle's bigger than Baltimore, and it's downtown is "more urban" than Baltimore and larger. That's where Seattle beats Baltimore in urbanity, but (city wide) they are not built in the same urban tier to be honest. Because Baltimore has classic urbanity bones in it's DNA city wide, so it's kind of hard to even compare. You guys are going to have a fit if Baltimore ever hits it's stride again.
None of this equals Seattle being more urban as a city, nor has to do with being more urban than Baltimore on the ground. You've picked criteria that make Seattle more vibrant than Baltimore. Flower shops and auto plants? Lol.
Seattle's bigger than Baltimore, and it's downtown is "more urban" than Baltimore and larger. That's where Seattle beats Baltimore in urbanity, but (city wide) they are not built in the same urban tier to be honest. Because Baltimore has classic urbanity bones in it's DNA city wide, so it's kind of hard to even compare. You guys are going to have a fit if Baltimore ever hits it's stride again.
So if you already knew this, then why did you create this post?
BTW- I think Seattle is the more urban city overall.
I feel like maybe it doesn't matter that much if Baltimore lost a lot of residents. It's not Detroit or St Louis where it's not densely populated and is a shell-yet. It is still occupied in all areas except for a tiny area just north of Middle East.
The population doesn't necessarily tell the full story. Seattle has fewer people than Columbus, it's still more urban. Now I'm not picking a dog in this fight... I just think the urban DNA of Bmore is very very strong. Many streetviews I see of Seattle (most) are extremely suburban-looking. Granted- Baltimore has suburban parts too but they're very much on the periphery.
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.
