Why is Baltimore lagging behind the other 4 Northeast cities?

[EspressoDude666]

Since 2000 we've seen in the last 2 censuses that 4 of the 5 major BosWash cities (Boston, NYC, Philly, DC) post some decent growth and revitalized downtowns and some inner city areas while Baltimore seems to be left behind. Baltimore is still losing population, the metro region is less prosperous, it's less developed in transit infrastructure or transit use, and some of the city's features are more similar to Rust Belt cities like Cleveland or Detroit rather than its Northeast siblings. Even though Baltimore has just as much history as the others and conveniently located midway between Philly and DC, why hasn't it been able to turn things around and take advantages of its urban fabric and setting to revive itself into an attractive destination?

[Crawford]

Baltimore isn't really on the same tier as the other four metros. Also, it's very heavily African American, which is unfortunately correlated with a myriad of challenges. And comparatively little immigration. Also, I'd argue that its generally tiny, utilitarian rowhouses aren't natural candidates for gentrification.

Baltimore region is rather prosperous and educated, however. It's certainly an above-average metro in terms of prosperity and education levels.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Baltimore isn't really on the same tier as the other four metros. Also, it's very heavily African American, which is unfortunately correlated with a myriad of challenges. And comparatively little immigration. Also, I'd argue that its generally tiny, utilitarian rowhouses aren't natural candidates for gentrification.

Baltimore region is rather prosperous and educated, however. It's certainly an above-average metro in terms of prosperity and education levels.

Some of those same arguments, such as heavily African American could have been said about other cities in the region. For example, DC was nicknamed Chocolate City. It is a quandary and wonder if it has more to do with how Baltimore is organized - there is the city of Baltimore and also the county of Baltimore, which has continued to grow even though the city has declined. One difference is that the other cities have many highly ranked universities, creating a cluster of students who then stay in the area. Baltimore really has only 1 or 2, with John Hopkins obviously being one of them. Even the flagship Maryland state university is located closer to the DC area than Baltimore. Newark seems to be in a similar predicament - you can't really say it is due to NYC, although that may be so, but Jersey City has thrived being close to NYC and other smaller NJ cities have been revived. Same with the cities in CT - Hartford was once much more vibrant.

[SIGSEGV]

I think Baltimore suffers from being too close to DC and not really clearing its orbit.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Some of those same arguments, such as heavily African American could have been said about other cities in the region. For example, DC was nicknamed Chocolate City.

DC is the political nexus of the most powerful empire in the history of humanity. So not exactly comparable.

Originally Posted by DCReid

It is a quandary and wonder if it has more to do with how Baltimore is Newark seems to be in a similar predicament - you can't really say it is due to NYC, although that may be so, but Jersey City has thrived being close to NYC and other smaller NJ cities have been revived. Same with the cities in CT - Hartford was once much more vibrant.

Newark and Jersey City are immigrant cities, and not really similar to Baltimore. And they certainly aren't wealthy. They're also on the PATH subway to NYC.

Hartford is one of the wealthiest and best educated U.S. metros.

[eschaton]

If you're talking about population growth, established cities have more or less four buckets in the modern era:

1. Black residents - tend to leave due to a combination of "black flight" and gentrification.

2. Working-class whites - declining population in urban cores due to falling birth rates, rising age, relocation to the Sun Belt with retirement, etc.

3. "Creative class" (mostly, but not entirely, white) - move into desirable urban neighborhoods. Don't have many kids however, so population growth is driven entirely by migration (from the suburbs or from other metros).

4. "New immigrants" (mostly Latino, some Asians) - move into less desirable neighborhoods formerly occupied by working-class whites or blacks. Fairly high birth rates.

Baltimore's problem is basically that it's around 2/3rds black, and doesn't have enough of the other three buckets. Like urban cores everywhere, it's still losing working-class whites. Creative class demand is low enough that it's really just slowly pushing the boundaries of the "white L" outward. And outside of a handful of neighborhoods in southeast Baltimore, there's just not a lot of Latinos - who would help to stabilize a lot of the declining outer neighborhoods.

[jd3189]

Maybe as DC continues to gentrify, some of those creatives will consider Baltimore as a good alternative.

[Pedestrian]

Baltimore's governance is terrible with several recent mayoralties ending badly and it has awful crime stats as well as a totally demoralized police force.

It IS like rust belt cities right down to having abandoned steel mills (Bethlehem) and car factories (Chevrolet). What it has that most of them don't is a port but that port is ¾ up the Chesapeake Bay and thus less convenient than other East Coast options.

Baltimore once had a thriving blue collar culture, both black and white. The blue collar whites mostly lost their jobs and the black neighborhoods were gutted by 1960s "urban renewal", then decimated by drugs and black family deterioration. The whites moved to the suburbs because they could. Discrimination left a lot of the blacks to stew in urban poverty made worse by corrupt big city politicians.

I grew up in the inner ring Maryland suburbs of Washington DC but my Dad did a lot of business in Baltimore and my family went there for excellent dining (not just seafood). It also had thriving ethnic marketplaces like the North Avenue Market that were fascinating places. I'm not sure if any of that survives. The city's toniest neighborhoods in a wedge centered on the Johns Hopkins undergrad campus in "Charles Village" and spreading out northward, bounded on the east by N. Charles St. and on the west by Jones Falls Expressway, to the county line (Towson) have, I think, survived but not a lot else seems to have. There's also been an effort to renew the Inner Harbor that most people know about but I'm not sure how that's doing in the age of covid.

[jtown,man]

Why would anyone want to live there? Very little trees, horrible crime, and worse "leadership."

Look at a crime map, besides a tiny sliver in the central area, and outer regions of the city are spared from the insane crime. This isn't a welcoming sight. Normal people will move to a dangerous city if they know they can live somewhere relatively safe (i.e. Chicago). Balitmore doesn't have this.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I grew up in the inner ring Maryland suburbs of Washington DC but my Dad did a lot of business in Baltimore and my family went there for excellent dining (not just seafood). It also had thriving ethnic marketplaces like the North Avenue Market that were fascinating places. I'm not sure if any of that survives. The city's toniest neighborhoods in a wedge centered on the Johns Hopkins undergrad campus in "Charles Village" and spreading out northward, bounded on the east by N. Charles St. and on the west by Jones Falls Expressway, to the county line (Towson) have, I think, survived but not a lot else seems to have. There's also been an effort to renew the Inner Harbor that most people know about but I'm not sure how that's doing in the age of covid.

There's a bit more of "nice Baltimore" than that wedge. There's almost a continual line of neighborhoods from the South of there to Downtown, with Midtown, Bolton Hill, and Mt. Vernon all pretty much gentrified. South of Downtown/the Inner Harbor, everything is also pretty much gentrified on the peninsula. Then if you head east of Downtown, Fells Point is very wealthy, and Canton is also pretty much gentrified now (though it's mostly Latino once you get any further east than there).

The thing is, if you add up all of these areas, plus adjoining transitional zones, you get maybe 150,000 people out of a city of 585,000. And most of what's left is very economically depressed 80%-90% black neighborhoods, with a handful of more stable mixed, working-class white, or Latino neighborhoods.

Basically, the "nice" part of Baltimore is almost the exact same size as the "nice" part of Pittsburgh - even though the city is nearly twice the size.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by eschaton

There's a bit more of "nice Baltimore" than that wedge. There's almost a continual line of neighborhoods from the South of there to Downtown, with Midtown, Bolton Hill, and Mt. Vernon all pretty much gentrified. South of Downtown/the Inner Harbor, everything is also pretty much gentrified on the peninsula. Then if you head east of Downtown, Fells Point is very wealthy, and Canton is also pretty much gentrified now (though it's mostly Latino once you get any further east than there).

The thing is, if you add up all of these areas, plus adjoining transitional zones, you get maybe 150,000 people out of a city of 585,000. And most of what's left is very economically depressed 80%-90% black neighborhoods, with a handful of more stable mixed, working-class white, or Latino neighborhoods.

Basically, the "nice" part of Baltimore is almost the exact same size as the "nice" part of Pittsburgh - even though the city is nearly twice the size.

I will take your last point as truth. But the issue here? That area isn't some large area that is contiguous. Its very skinny and for the most part surrounded on all sides by bad areas. It isn't a welcoming situation.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

Why would anyone want to live there? Very little trees, horrible crime, and worse "leadership."

Baltimore seems kind of nondescript, despite being old. The area between downtown and Penn Station is similar to the nicer old areas of Boston and Philadelphia, but it doesn't seem like it's that big of an area.

[iheartthed]

Well, it wasn't that long ago that Philadelphia was also still considered to be in decline. It was 2010 when Philly posted its first population growth since 1950. So yes, Baltimore is lagging, but it's not severely lagging when put into context.

[photoLith]

I’ve been to Baltimore many times to photograph the cities amazing architecture. But man, most of the neighborhoods I wouldn’t even walk around in and I rarely ever feel sketched out in any neighborhood.

Some nights when I would drive around, and you don’t even dare stop at the stop signs in some of the hoods as your car might get smashed up. Had my windows smashed in my car downtown and someone stole my tripod out of my car when it was parked on a busy street.

Not exactly a nice place to want to consider to move to. And it’s a such as the city has some of America’s most awesome architecture. Most of the neighborhoods are intact urban wise, even though the majority of row houses are abandoned in many of the neighborhoods. Would be ripe for gentrification. But I sure as hell wouldn’t want to be one of the first people to live in any of those places.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Well, it wasn't that long ago that Philadelphia was also still considered to be in decline. It was 2010 when Philly posted its first population growth since 1950. So yes, Baltimore is lagging, but it's not severely lagging when put into context.

And it wasn't too much before then when DC was considered one of the main poster-children for American urban dystopianism back during the crack wars of the 80s/90s.

And look at DC now. It just posted a +14.6% population gain last decade. If it grows again like that this decade, it'll be very close to climbing back up to its 1950 population peak of 802,178.

[summersm343]

Philadelphia and Baltimore could arguably be considered a part of the "Rust Belt" even if they're solidly within the Northeast Corridor. Philadelphia and Baltimore were MUCH MORE centered on industry and manufacturing than Boston and DC at the time.

With that said, the same way that Philadelphia is hurt somewhat by being so close to NYC, I feel Baltimore is hurt even more by being so close to DC.

Philadelphia still lags NYC, DC and Boston in it's comeback, but is MUCH MORE it's own region, and is significantly larger. Baltimore is much closer to DC, is technically within the same region as DC, and because of that, definitely feels the negative side effects of that.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

And it wasn't too much before then when DC was considered one of the main poster-children for American urban dystopianism back during the crack wars of the 80s/90s.

And look at DC now. It just posted a +14.6% population gain last decade. If it grows again like that this decade, it'll be very close to climbing back up to its 1950 population peak of 802,178.

Yeah, the term "murder capital" was popularized by the media for D.C. in the 90s, when it led the nation in murders per capita.

[EastSideHBG]

I am very fond of Baltimore and spent a lot of my time there over the years but crime and the size of the city are the main issues. And it's independent and that has always brought on some issues, as there is no county for it to be able to rely on somewhat.

DC residents are still discovering what their money can buy there, though, and if working from home sticks around it could become a DC exurb in some ways.

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Well, it wasn't that long ago that Philadelphia was also still considered to be in decline. It was 2010 when Philly posted its first population growth since 1950. So yes, Baltimore is lagging, but it's not severely lagging when put into context.

Philly is interesting because chunks of it are a mess but it's big enough to offer diverse housing and neighborhoods. Add in the state and local political stuff found in PA (jumping across the city line into the 'burbs can sometimes save one thousands in costs for example) and there's always an underlying push/pull dynamic...it will be fun to watch long-term.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

And it wasn't too much before then when DC was considered one of the main poster-children for American urban dystopianism back during the crack wars of the 80s/90s.

And look at DC now. It just posted a +14.6% population gain last decade. If it grows again like that this decade, it'll be very close to climbing back up to its 1950 population peak of 802,178.

But DC was bound to become successful being the nation's capital and all of the jobs that come with that and I could never imagine our country allowing it to remain an embarrassment on the world's stage. Local DC district politics are interesting to watch as well and I find it to be a fascinating place all the way around.

[Obadno]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Some of those same arguments, such as heavily African American could have been said about other cities in the region. For example, DC was nicknamed Chocolate City. It is a quandary and wonder if it has more to do with how Baltimore is organized - there is the city of Baltimore and also the county of Baltimore, which has continued to grow even though the city has declined. One difference is that the other cities have many highly ranked universities, creating a cluster of students who then stay in the area. Baltimore really has only 1 or 2, with John Hopkins obviously being one of them. Even the flagship Maryland state university is located closer to the DC area than Baltimore. Newark seems to be in a similar predicament - you can't really say it is due to NYC, although that may be so, but Jersey City has thrived being close to NYC and other smaller NJ cities have been revived. Same with the cities in CT - Hartford was once much more vibrant.

As Crawford said, without the Capitol DC would be a tiny college town called Georgetown, or absolutely nothing at all and still just be a swampy river junction near some small towns.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Some of those same arguments, such as heavily African American could have been said about other cities in the region. For example, DC was nicknamed Chocolate City.

Maryland is also the fourth blackest state in the country. It's just slightly behind Georgia in terms of black share of the population.

I think Baltimore's issues are the same issues that other major U.S. cities went through, and it's just slower in recovery than its closest neighbors. Looking more broadly at Industrial Era urban powerhouses, Baltimore is probably middle of the road.