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 made the comparison because a) both are more isolated cities in the north, b) bad weather, c) popular in the 90's (Seattle - Grunge, Newcastle - Football/Shearer)
The architecture of Seattle is somewhat different to Newcastle and the trees and climate is actually different, too.
Atlantic City - Blackpool
Buffalo - Sunderland
Boston - Liverpool
Chicago - Manchester
Cleveland - Burnley
Detroit - Nottingham
Kansas City - Norwich
Leicester - Indianapolis
Los Angeles - Plymouth
Miami - Bournemouth
Miami Beach - Poole
New York City - London
Philadelphia - Birmingham
Pittsburgh - Sheffield
Richmond - Winchester
San Francisco - Brighton
Seattle - Newcastle
St. Louis - Ipswich
I made the comparison because a) both are more isolated cities in the north, b) bad weather, c) popular in the 90's (Seattle - Grunge, Newcastle - Football/Shearer)
That doesn't really seem to be a strong case for comparison. Seattle is a young, very educated, wealthy, booming, tech-heavy city, in the shadow of snow-capped mountains and Pacific Northwest rainforests. Microsoft, Starbucks, Nordstrom, Amazon, Boeing, Zillow, Costco, Nintendo are some of the resident corporations.
The architecture is mostly typical American West Coast bungalow-type housing, which is essentially nonexistent in the UK. Brick is rarely used. The city center is mostly typical modern highrise North American style.
I would agree that NYC and London are the most obvious and best comparison.
I still think in terms of street-level feel, they are not that similar (NYC is more dense, congested, fast-paced and dirty, more like a faster-paced Paris than a London in terms of pedestrian feel), but in terms of economy and type of person these cities attract, they are quite similar.
I made the comparison because a) both are more isolated cities in the north, b) bad weather, c) popular in the 90's (Seattle - Grunge, Newcastle - Football/Shearer)
That's your criteria?
Personalities are different. At the extreme for demonstration purposes Newcastle is aggressive, people let you know what they think. Seattle is passive aggressive, they'll let everyone else know what they think, but not the subject of what they're thinking it about.
Geography is completely different. Regardless of personal opinions of what the boundaries are Newcastle only exists north of the Tyne, and has no other constraints other than the North Sea. Seattle is built on a north/south isthmus between Puget Sound and Lake Washington, most of Newcastle is built on naturally occurring land, much of Seattle is built on landfill and regrade.
Architecture totally different, even in back streets. You cannot mistake anywhere in Seattle for anywhere in Newcastle. Newcastle is predominantly Brick, with some streets Neoclassical, and around the riverside it's moving into modern (alongside Bessie Surtees house and the cooperage which are Elizabethan). Seattle is mostly concrete, and modern, much of the early brick is being replaced due to earthquake concerns.
Demographics are different too, Newcastle is 82% White English, and 7% Pakistani/Indian/Bangladeshi and surprisingly for a city with a famed Chinatown only 2% Chinese and 2% Black. Seattle is 70% White, 14% asian (Chinese, Japanese, Philippino, and the P/I/B collective) and 8% Black/African-American.
Economies are based on totally different things too. Historically Newcastle was coal mining and heavy engineering (ship building, armaments, turbines) and now is service and retail, Seattle was logging, the Klondike Gold Rush, then aerospace and now dominated by internet and technology.
Sports, Newcastle has one famous professional sports team, Seattle has the Seahawks, Mariners, and Sounders, and the WNBA Storm. Support of these is different too, but aligns with British vs. American professional sports support. That said, most people from Newcastle support in some way Newcastle United, the same cannot be said about the Seahawks and Mariners who are the two biggest teams in Seattle.
Finally History is the other major differentiator, Seattle's oldest parts are around 160 years old. My Newcastle high school is older than that (admittedly also older than the United States), Newcastles history dates back to 2AD, its not something that you can forget when you have a big honking castle in the middle of the city and fragments of the city walls dotted around.
I'm no expert on either American cities or UK cities. Mostly I can see the resemblance between NYC and London although NYC is dirty and kind of grubby. It used to be a place to people all dressed up in the latest most expensive styles, not any more. London is cleaner but both are rush-rush-rush and extremely expensive.
I don't see how you can compare the feeling you get in a city like York or Leeds to anything in the USA. Boston is beautiful (if you like cities) but still it only goes back about 400 years at the most. It does have sites that are old and quaint and historic and a nice park, beautiful bridges, but it is a compact and somewhat small city. It feels very American to me.
Baltimore is the most horrible place I have ever seen but I was only there once and it was at night, being lost. Quite a scary place and I can't compare it to anything else. Different cities have different vibes.
Just had a look at Liverpool and Manchester on streetview. Their building style looks remarkably similar to the rustbelt cities in the US like Buffalo, Chicago, Baltimore or Detroit but for the most part not quite as run down. You can really tell that the British owned the US once, so many similarities everywhere.
Yup I think the same, especially when you see old brownstones in NY, they look exactly like terraces in London.
East coast cities are comparable to those in the UK, the city structure with a distinctive core is similar, as a lot were founded before the rise of the automobile.
Can't say any British cities are comparable to the West Coast, especially when you look at the structure of say LA and the people who live there.. Also England just doesn't have anywhere that warm..
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.
. For some reason cities in Spain and Italy look much nicer.
