By The Tim on November 15, 2009
Please vote in this poll using the sidebar.
Is Seattle a world-class city, comparable to New York, Tokyo, London, etc.?
- Yes (5%, 8 Votes)
- No (94%, 165 Votes)
- Don't Know (1%, 2 Votes)
Total Voters: 175
This poll will be active and displayed on the sidebar through 11.22.2009.
Posted in Polls | Tagged Polls, world_class_cities
Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market.
I’m visiting New York for my first time this weekend, so this discussion came up in my mind again.
No.
I like Seattle, but it’s a small city. It’s more comparable to smaller cities like Atlanta or Dallas. It isn’t a cosmopolitan city like San Francisco, New York, Sydney, Paris, Tokyo, etc. I don’t think it’s even quite as cosmopolitan as Vancouver BC. My $0.02.
Seattle has a long history of hypesters and hucksters, so maybe Seattle has ” World Class” PR and marketing folks, but PR and marketing folks have rendered the term ” World Class” meaningless.
NYC is one of the world’s great centers of commerce, London and Tokyo are obviously among the great cities of the world. When the football stadium was on the ballot here, it was being proposed as a “World Class” stadium. When the tunnel was being proposed as a viaduct alternative, it was being called a ‘World Class Transportation solution”.
Seattle is not a World Class city. I don’t think I want to live in a world class city. We’re not world class, but we have world class housing prices?
RE: Greg Glockner @ 2 – I think people have a natural tendency to think that where ever they live is the best. Sometimes, that’s the result of complete denial, such as for those living in El Paso. But most places have something going for them, so it gets to be subjective.
Personally, if world class means extremely large, I really don’t want to live anywhere near there. Although that would depend on how it’s laid out. Phoenix is much larger than Seattle, but it’s hard to tell, in part because you can get out of the populated area rather quickly by going in just about any direction. Unfortunately there’s nothing there when you get there, and the heat and lack of water would quickly kill you if you’re not prepared, but at least it gives you the sense of not living in such a populated city.
As to the Seattle/Vancouver comparison, I’d give the nod to Vancouver for a vibrant downtown area, and much better architecture of their buildings. Their freeway infrastructure, however, is even worse than ours, but perhaps that’s what helps the downtown?
Who in their right mind would say Seattle is currently comparable to New York or Tokyo? Not even Mayor Nickels, I’m guessing.
Seems like it’s more of a question: Does Seattle want to be more like a “world class” city like a San Francisco or Vancouver? Or more like Detroit or Cleveland? What would the city need to do to move in that direction?
It just depends on what you want the future to look like. Better mass transit? Bigger highways? Better for business? More density and better restaurants? More affordable housing? More (ugly) condos?
Seattle had a chance in the 1980s to become a world class city and attract development in th down town core. The Growth Management Act grew out of this grass roots desire.
Our City Council has done everything it can to discourage far reaching, large scale development, in favor of bringing in smaller track house builders around the area.
Large developers want concessions, smaller builders pay campaign contributions.
It’s laughable to see so many missteps in city politics, but what we have is really a desire to be a small town. Tacoma has been more progressive than we have in attracting larger business interests.
Where we would go from here I have no idea. There seems to be kind of a tourist trap feel to the city. We spend tons of money on the Pike Place Market, Pioneer Square, the stadiums, and our little shopping mall of down town businesses. This viaduct thing is just crazy, like we need to have more waterfront attractions for the cruise ship trade.
We are a small town like a Roslyn, or Long Beach Washington; Leavensworth at least has a theme, as does LaConner.
Thats a laughable question. Anyone who answers yes is kidding themselves.
Seattle just really really really wants to be San Francisco from what I can tell, the world class status is just a byproduct of this desire. I don’t know why though, as a former resident the city is quite a “piece of "chocolate"” overall despite its world-class, cosmopolitan status. Personally I wish Seattle would stop trying to emulate SF and go back to developing its own character instead. I don’t really want to live in yet another place that is 50% homeless, 50% obnoxious yuppies and everyone believing their city is infallible.
RE: Greg Glockner @ 2 – Uhhh, I don’t think it’s even comparable to Dallas or Atlanta. As big as the metroplex is, it’s not even close.
Maybe….maybe Atlanta.
I forgot to mention the Paul Allen vision for his amusement. The Seattle Center, Vulcan development cutting a swath in front of the International District, the Stadiums, and the disaster that South Lake Union has become.
Tim, I have to say, this came across as bait to me.
It would astonish me if somebody really thought that there was even a comparison. The only people who would think so seriously would not have been to these bigger cities. I have been to Paris and New York, and until you are there you cannot appreciate what these world cities are like.
The big question to me is – why would somebody both to make this comparison?
RE: b @ 8 – I would agree with this, almost entirely. I’m not sure why a city would want to be like another city. You lose your appeal when you do that.
World Class??………Oh no no no…..but let me tell you we got some really great Thai food. Not to mention Dick’s and Pagliacci. Now those are WORLD CLASS!
Not even close; but as many have mentioned, quite a few “world cities” are awful.
Yesterday, I met my third WA license plate here in Tampa in one week. Walmart parking lot, this time; and again I got to talk to the driver. Here since January (yeah, still has not change the plate), and loving Tampa (yesterday was sunny and 68°). But my approach is getting sloppy; I am concern the next Seattleite I approach will pepper spray me.
Why should any city want to be a “world class city?” I don’t want to live in such a city. The “world class city” meme is silly, overdone, and the most crass kind of urban marketing. I want to live in a city that’s livable, friendly, community-oriented, and has a diverse collection of people and atractions.
Certainly not world class, but viable in a niche sort of way. Seattle could easily be described as interesting, diverse, and somewhat self contained. We don’t put enough emphasis on our heritage and history, preferring instead to aspire to something we may never be. Losh has it right in #6 when he says we’re closer in many ways to LaConner, just a lot bigger.
For me, world class means – comprehensive, diverse, complex, refined, vibrant, with a rich history and a unique personality, and don’t forget traditions! I don’t think any city can be considered world class unless it has a few hundred years of solid, established existence. Usually world class cities are exemplary in some aspects that make them best in the world. Applying these descriptions to aspects of a city such as – It’s people, infrastructure, business/trade, architecture, arts, educational institutions, global influence, entertainment, design & fashion, etc. exposes the depth & breadth (or lack of) in any given place.
I have not lived here that long, but I can imagine how this place was 50 years ago, and I can imagine how it might be without Boeing or Microsoft today. I have the option of being able to live most anywhere in this country, and chose this place about 2 years ago, knowing very well the strengths and weaknesses. I have been fortunate (as well as curious and motivated enough) to visit the following cities : Vancouver, Toronto, Chicago, Philadelphia, New York, D.C., SF, LA, Seoul, Beijing, Shanghai, Dublin, London, Antwerp, Paris, Berlin, Milan, Florence, Rome, Madrid, Barcelona, Budapest, and many other minor locations. In comparison, Seattle is nowhere near a world class city. This does not mean it is without merit. The wilderness and outdoors of the Puget Sound, Cascades, Olympics, and surrounding area puts the cities I mention to shame – and I am talking about all of them combined! (dropping out Vancouver of course!)
Tim, I appreciate the effort and work you do here on the Seattle Bubble, but shame on you for being an adult in this country and not getting out to some of the world class cities here in the US. Jeez, even my 11 year old niece has been to Paris, London, and Chicago. Oh gotta run, were going to San Francisco for a few days – Time to get a dose! Oh, and where is the respectable Thai food? I am willing to drive, seriously!
RE: David McManus @ 9 – Atlanta metro is about 2x the population of Seattle metro, or a little less if you are inclined to consider Tacoma and surrounds as part of “Seattle metro”. The “downtown” is more like LA though, with several different high rise clusters, which gives Seattle a smaller but more unified city feel.
Somewhere, there is a “Globalization and World Cities Study Group ” that tries to rank cities based on several factors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city
They see Seattle as a Gamma+ World City, about 100th on the list of “World Cities.” Our peers in the US are Denver and Minneapolis.
Nevertheless, I’d much rather live in Seattle than in other cities above us on the list…. for example, Houston.
Large is not the same thing as “world class”. I was thinking about Los Angeles. It’s huge. Great weather. Plenty to do. The home of the world movie industry – and much of the TV and music industry, too. But world class? That’s debatable.
RE: Dan @ 19 –
An interesting comparison- I’ve been to both and understand Minneapolis, but Denver seems like it has more potential going forward what with its emphasis on energy and such. But maybe not- at heart it’s a cow town, but so is Omaha. And WB lives there.
By Ira Sacharoff @ 3:
I second all these thoughts. When I was in Tokyo on business I learned that many of the office workers had 1.5+ hour one-way train commutes, sardine-style. No thanks.
RE: Ben @ 11 –
Yes, I agree, it is the periodic bait that The Tim puts out to engage and to bemoan the housing prices in Seattle area compared to the world class cities.
I am assuming people on this blog have reasons why they choose to live in Seattle, world class or not and the majority of the people here can’t use the excuse of not being able to sell a house as the reason they are locked into this area.
Whether or not Seattle is a world class city doesn’t seem relevant as to why people live here. I live here because I love the summer and fall, the bike trail system, the 1 hour drive to decent regional skiing, the 4 hour drive to world class skiing, and the abundance of water front parks on lakes, rivers, and the sound. I like the marine climate and can’t stand heat and humidity for 4 months out of the year.
I couldn’t get all of those in San Francisco or New York and I would pay 2x on a per square foot basis to live in those cities.
Seattle is one of the greatest cities in the world. The summer is unreal. Close to great hiking and skiing. Civility – great urban culture without the nastiness of NY. Progressive, college town feel. Gorgeous mountains and water.
Cities, like Dallas, Atlanta, Charlotte & Indianapolis, are suburban sprawl cornholes compared to Seattle. SF, Portland, Vancouver, Denver, Boston, NY, maybe SD are great, but it drops off in a hurry from there.
I guess I could understand someone not being thrilled with Seattle if they 1) had never lived anywhere else, 2) live on the east side and rarely leave, 3) melt in the rain.
RE: mydquin @ 24 – Are you kidding me — “Seattle is one of the greatest cities in the world.” I think you need to do a little travelling :-)
By what goes up must come down @ 25:
RE: what goes up must come down @ 25 – Oh really?
How much traveling have you done?
I grew up in Europe, and I have to concur with mydquin. Perhaps you are confusing ‘greatest’ with ‘largest’? Or perhaps you’ve been to Paris, and you can’t imagine anyone comparing it to Seattle? Despite the fact that Paris has been around for a vastly longer period of time, I do actually believe that in many ways (geography, economy, lack of Parisians) Seattle comes out better in the comparison. Maybe I’m just biased against Paris because my laptop was stolen within hours of getting into the city. Who knows?
Even Berlin, a city that I love dearly, isn’t perfect. What good is living in a world-class city if you can’t get work? Yes, yes, the beautiful women… the beer… the music. I know. Still, the economy is a mess.
I haven’t been to Tokyo, but I have been to London, and I’m sorry, I hold a British passport and I’d rather live here. Spending $12 on a pint is wrong, even if it’s Fuller’s fresh from the Thames. And you think our weather here is bad?
No, this is a great city. Really. I’d rather live here than anywhere in the United States, and now that I think about it, Europe as well. Sure, it could use a few hundred years to build up a really nice patina, but what we have already is pretty decent. Not perfect, but I think we’re progressing.
All that said, I DO NOT think the housing prices here are reasonable or sane, despite how I feel about the city. It’s good, but it’s not that good.
If I could live anywhere in the world, it would be Tahiti, but I’m pretty certain there are not any world class cities there.
If I could live anywhere in the U.S. it would probably be the Oregon coast. Again though, no world class cities.
If I had to live in another large U.S. city, it would probably be San Francisco. But then I’d have to put up with a really messed up state government, so I don’t think it would be worth it (unless perhaps I needed easy access to medical marijuana). ;-)
Simply put, living in a world class city isn’t that important to me.
The closer to ‘world class’ a city becomes, the further the average citizen/dweller is removed from the possibility of having a life that allows the full use of the area’s ‘world class’ facilities.
In Seattle, ‘World Class’ is a phrase devised by elitist poseurs who try to space themselves from the average, yet lack the abilities to actually compete in the real ‘world class’ cities.
Silk purse/sows ears, world class, it’s all pig related.
By gum, Zenith’s got just as much zip and zowie as any of them high-falutin’ burgs back east!
Seattle is actually pretty close to being a “world-class” city.
But if there is one thing that Seattle needs, and by that I mean DESPERATELY NEEDS … It is a mass transit system. The city is built around an array of bodies of water, and is rather “hilly”, thus it does not lend itself well to having a large amount of non-freeway arterials, like say Vancouver BC. Essentially all traffic relies on the freeways and as a result they are extremely funnelled and congested. Rather than simply adding more lanes (which seems to be a constant ongoing process) the city NEEDS to invest in a proper transit system.
An above ground light rail transit, similar to say Vancouver’s “Skytrain”, would do absolute wonders for the city. A system linking Seatac – Seattle – Bellevue – Redmond is absolutely essential, and additions to include Everett – Tacoma would be great to have too. A long-term approach to the congestion and pollution problems are what is needed. In addittion we’d be able to put people to work doing something truly useful in building this system. Perhaps the workers would be able to take pride in their work.
The government needs to start taking a long approach rather than running extremely costly short-sighted lane-adding programs. What happens when the mass-transit system is running near capacity, or even above capacity during rush hours ? YOU ADD ANOTHER TRAIN TO THE SYSTEM. Easy!
The time to act is now. We are living like such savages today, with people living out in Everett and Tacoma and driving for HOURS in congested freeay to work in Seattle, only to do the same thing at the end of the day all over again, 5 days a week, all year long.
We need mass transit. We need communities built to not rely soley on commuting, to have viable employment centers based closer to housing. We need to have non-automobile transport routes (bike paths, etc). We need to provide incentives to people to live closer to work ! Tax incentives for people that live within certain area of work. We need increased gas taxes, just over a year ago people were HAPPY to find a place that sold gas for as low as $4 per gallon. Now we are paying less than $3 and still complaining ?? We should tax gas at minimum $4 per gallon, and take the BILLIONS in extra revenue to build our much needed transit system, while simultaneously providing people with encouragement (in many cases the ONLY encouragement, financial) to stop driving so far, to stop relying on their cars for everything, and to carpool and take transit. We’ll encourage people to start thinking about more than just how big of a house they have, and how nice and new it is, and how much crap they have.
Then we’ll be World Class.
Seems like we’ve had this poll two or three times already.
It seems that Seattle has really regressed in the time that I’ve been here. I’m from Indianapolis but I’ve also lived in San Francisco and Chicago. I’ve been to New York dozens of times for work. I would say that it is further from a world class city now than it was fifteen years ago. I think the combination of nature, community, money and architecture was what made Seattle unique. The city had opportunity, the architecture (wood and brick) was wonderful and the culture was thriving. Now cultural events like Bumpershoot cost more than Disney World, it is insanely expensive to buy anything and almost every new building in the city looks like it was designed in Reno. I can’t believe how ugly Bell Town has become. I challenge you to find any neighborhood in London or New York that is built with corrugated metal, glue and synthetic crap. The short term gains of the real estate industry have done tremendous damage.
World class cities have world class public transportation. Seattle has quite some way to go in that department.
By old timer @ 28:
I would have to agree with this.
NY, London, Paris, Tokyo are world-class, and incredibly expensive.
Vancouver real estate is very expensive as well, but all residents have easy access, via public transport, to all the great amenities like Stanley Park, ocean beaches, vibrant downtown, great variety of food, breath-taking beauty and ski, etc. This is what Seattle should try to achieve.
RE: deprogram @ 26 – well currently I live in Munich and have done quite a bit :-) If you are trying to compare Paris and Seattle think again. Yes you mentioned some theft how about violent crime how do you think per capita Paris and Seattle compare?
The murder rate in the US is higher because of guns, but the overall crime rate in Paris is significantly higher.
RE: mydquin @ 36 – Okay so the point is you have a greater chance of being killed in the US but you have a greater chance of having your wallet stolen in Paris — hmmm, let me think which would I prefer. Hey I like Seattle it is great town ( I actually prefer the natural areas that are easy to get to over the city itself ) but come on you are comparing Seattle to Paris, I think you are reaching.
I’ve lived in London and spent a lot of time in SF. World class cities are great if you’re rich, but they are a total hassle to rent, commute and do your daily errands in. They cost a fortune and for not much reward unless you’ve got big goals, and the means to pursue them. Big cities are for big goals. Seattle used to be a lot cheaper than it is, and the weather makes it a questionable option, but it is far less scary and far less demanding than most mega-cities.
Bottom line is that quality of life matters as much on who you know, how much money you have, where your family is, and whether you can do what you want as it does on where you are. These discussions of world-class are stupid.
Seattle is not the place to be if you want to be a movie star, sell art, or be a fashion photographer, but you can launch in music or theater from here. You can do whatever you want in medicine or high-tech here. Seattle has plenty of world-class possibilities without the nightmares of most large rotten US metropoli (?). Plus the proximity to the outdoors is very real here. CA is full of gangs and fake people, NY is full of aggressive morons, Chicago is full of nowhere drunks, Miami is full of criminals, etc etc. South of France is a good pick, but then people are pricks there, too, and money is mandatory. Clout, money, friends and romance matter as much as where you are, although Spokane would get old quick.
“World Class?” London, Paris, New York, Tokyo? Well, they certainly have a lot of pluses but also many minuses. What about Los Angeles, Mexico City, Beijing? Well, if that is world class, leave me out please.
How about a “First Class City” instead – something along the lines of San Francisco, Vancouver – not too big, lots of diverse culture, great recreation, great education, high standard of living.
Give me First Class over World Class anytime. I think Seattle is pretty close!
RE: Jackson Wallace @ 38 – “CA is full of gangs and fake people, NY is full of aggressive morons, Chicago is full of nowhere drunks, Miami is full of criminals, etc etc. South of France is a good pick, but then people are pricks there, too, and money is mandatory. Clout, money, friends and romance matter as much as where you are, although Spokane would get old quick. ”
Okay so what is Seattle full of? Where is money not mandatory? I agree somewhat with people who said this is a loaded question, because people for the most part like where they live — that is why they live there for the most part. If you go to New York and ask a guy if he wants to live in Seattle most likely he will say NO and then mention what he thinks are Seattle’s down sides, same for all the other places you named — even Spokane.
RE: what goes up must come down @ 40 – I think most people would say no to Seattle due to the rain, just like I’d say no to most the SE and eastern US because of the heat/humidity.
By what goes up must come down @ 37:
http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html
Dig around on that page, and you’ll find per capita murder rates for both cities.
Paris: 3.3 per 100,000
Seattle: 4.5 per 100,000
Compare this to Washington, DC at 45.8 per 100,000. The difference is pretty minimal, especially if you consider the vastly greater percentage of gun owners here.
Once again, generalizations about the States. Seattle is actually pretty safe.
By Jackson Wallace @ 38:
Please….
By your reasoning I guess Seattle is full of snobs who actually believe in stereotypes that “CA is full of gangs and fake people, NY is full of aggressive morons, Chicago is full of nowhere drunks, Miami is full of criminals”.
RE: mydquin @ 36 –
There is a big flaw with that statement. Go look up crime statistics, you will notice that the murder rate has dropped significantly in the past 30 years or so. You should also look up conceal carry states, which have increased since the 80’s to include most of the union. Do the two correlate? Maybe, but it is far more likely that the murder rate is affected more by social factors and the ability of the police to prevent crime. Look at Switzerland, higher gun ownership, far lower murder rate.
Ah, in Vancouver we have EA and soon Pixar, mining headquarters, and tourism – but we have no Boeing or Microsoft. Our average FAMILY household income is 70K or so, our median family household income is 60K or so, (Census Canada) and our benchmarked SFHs are pushing well over three quarters of a million dollars. The single person in Vancouver is looking at an average income in the 25K range.
Head offices are fleeing: we’re more glitz than substance, these days.
I’ve been to Seattle a bunch, and it’s a great city. It’s true, transit is better in Vancouver. But I would say as a tourist to Seattle that the ’stuff to do’ – including the different foods available, etc. – are comparable between our cities.
Alarmingly, I’d say Portland kicks Vancouver’s ass for that sort of thing.
I did not see as much park space in Seattle; that much is true. However, I also didn’t comb Seattle looking for parks.
I would say the architecture is on par, although I suppose that’s in the eye of the beholder (I prefer the architecture of Chicago and Toronto more than both of our young cities.) But I’m not fond of all Vancouver’s glass. Mainly because it leaks.
Of course, I love Vancouver — but the bubble here is wicked, and that’s partly because we like to pretend we’re New York. Only we *don’t have any bloomin’ money*.
(( Actually, all the wood and brick and Craftsman architecture in Seattle means that I’m going to have to give Seattle the “better architecture” nod when compared to Vancouver – but it’s personal taste, of course. ))
For those who complained about this poll being “bait,” allow me a moment to explain why I bring up the comparison to New York again. Let’s compare two fairly generic family neighborhoods, a little ways outside their respective city centers.
Consider Seattle’s 98103 (Green Lake, Fremont).
Redfin search for 3-4 bed, 2+ bath homes under $1M shows 34 homes, average list price ~$600,000 for 2,312 sqft.
According to the 2000 Census, 28.5% of households in 98103 have incomes of $75,000 or higher.
Now consider a relatively comparable zip in New York: Long Island’s 11001 (Floral Park, Bellerose).
Redfin search for 3-4 bed, 2+ bath homes under $1M shows 34 homes, average list price ~$500,000 for 1,964 sqft.
According to the 2000 Census, 47.4% of households in 11001 have incomes of $75,000 or higher.
If Seattle’s not comparable to New York (a statement 94% of poll voters seem to agree with), why are home prices higher here in neighborhoods where people are making less money?
Also, if you include homes over $1M, the Seattle mean goes up to $645k (3 homes over $1M), while the NY mean stays the same at $500k (none over $1M), so the two are even more skewed.