The Next Nashville? Billions In New Investment Could Put Baltimore Back On The Map

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

It seems like that's a little "chicken or the egg".

It's concurrently possible that those cities also have more preserved older housing stock because they had more immigrants to backfill housing vacated by the white and black flighters, whereas in Detroit, a lot more of it (% wise) was simply abandoned and left to crumble without nearly as many immigrant back-fillers.

Maybe some of both, but I think Detroit's habit of discarding older buildings and housing stock was a major factor in the city's struggle to attract new population after the 1950s peak. Detroit tore down a LOT of its late 19th and early 20th century housing stock in the 1950s when there was still an extreme housing shortage. Inexplicably, the city was tearing down more housing units in the 1950s than were being created. That is the same decade that Detroit's population peaked. All of these demolitions targeted the dense areas in the interior of the city. I suspect that Chicago and east coast cities didn't engage in slum clearing to the same degree as Detroit.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Ocean-going vessel access is not the barometer for “is the city a port?”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._...Port_Authority

St. Louis is a major river port. Period.

Ocean-going ships can reach the Great Lakes cities. They can't reach St. Louis. Everything in the Mississippi network north of Baton Rouge must be transferred to a barge, with the exception of inland waterways barges that can travel on the Gulf Intracoastal. For example, a flat-bottom river towboat can take a group of barges from Pittsburgh to the Texas coast or to the Florida Panhandle.

The transfer activity in Louisiana only works for bulk cargo. It doesn't work for shipping containers because most containers come from Asia. There is no reason to ship a container from Los Angeles to the Mississippi River, then throw it on a barge, then take it back off a barge on the Ohio River. That's why almost zero shipping containers are shipped on the inland waterways, and a big reason why the character of inland waterways shipping has remained relatively static since the canalization was modernized in the 1960s.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Ocean-going ships can reach the Great Lakes cities. They can't reach St. Louis. Everything in the Mississippi network north of Baton Rouge must be transferred to a barge, with the exception of inland waterways barges that can travel on the Gulf Intracoastal. For example, a flat-bottom river towboat can take a group of barges from Pittsburgh to the Texas coast or to the Florida Panhandle.

The transfer activity in Louisiana only works for bulk cargo. It doesn't work for shipping containers because most containers come from Asia. There is no reason to ship a container from Los Angeles to the Mississippi River, then throw it on a barge, then take it back off a barge on the Ohio River. That's why almost zero shipping containers are shipped on the inland waterways, and a big reason why the character of inland waterways shipping has remained relatively static since the canalization was modernized in the 1960s.

Are you going to respond to what I said or misdirect some more?

The St. Louis port authority handles 8 million tonnes of goods each year, and over 90% of the entire country’s agricultural exports pass thru river barges in the Mississippi system alone.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Ocean-going ships can reach the Great Lakes cities.

Only smaller ocean going ships can into the lakes because of the lock limitations of the st. Lawrence seaway.

Today's panamax and neo-panamax ships are WAY too big to get into the lakes.

The vast majority of trade on the great lakes via ocean-going vessels is on smaller bulk carriers that primarily carry grain out to the world, though I remember reading about Cleveland trying to get an intermodal container port facility going utilizing smaller containers ships, though I have no idea how that's going.

In any event, just because St. Louis is a river port facility that trades in bulk goods via tug n' barges does not negate the fact that it is an actual bonafide "port city". It's just not a "SEAport city".

[craigs]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

over 90% of the entire country’s agricultural exports pass thru river barges in the Mississippi system alone.

Do you have a source for that?

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by wwmiv

Ocean-going vessel access is not the barometer for “is the city a port?”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._...Port_Authority

St. Louis is a major river port. Period.

I think, at least colloquially, maritime shipping is the barometer for what is considered a port city. There is a reason that Portland and New Orleans (both river cities) are considered port cities while St. Louis is not.

[Prahaboheme]

Originally Posted by badrunner

I think, at least colloquially, maritime shipping is the barometer for what is considered a port city. There is a reason that Portland and New Orleans (both river cities) are considered port cities while St. Louis is not.

Or Savannah for that matter.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by badrunner

I think, at least colloquially, maritime shipping is the barometer for what is considered a port city. There is a reason that Portland and New Orleans (both river cities) are considered port cities while St. Louis is not.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

A "river port" is still a port.

[Prahaboheme]

This article is a bit dated but this all seems logical in terms of major port cities (not suggesting there aren’t others but it’s quite telling where they are located and not):

https://nowthatslogistics.com/top-15...-the-americas/

[Nouvellecosse]

Hmm, what is a port. As someone from a major port that's not a question I've ever given much thought to. Just looking at wiki, there seems to be some contradiction. At the very beginning of the article titled "port" it states (underline by me):

A port is a maritime facility comprising one or more wharves or loading areas, where ships load and discharge cargo and passengers. Although usually situated on a sea coast or estuary, ports can also be found far inland, such as Hamburg, Manchester and Duluth; these access the sea via rivers or canals. Because of their roles as ports of entry for immigrants as well as soldiers in wartime, many port cities have experienced dramatic multi-ethnic and multicultural changes throughout their histories.[1][2]

But then further down there's a "types" section which states,

The terms "port" and "seaport" are used for different types of facilities handling ocean-going vessels, and river port is used for river traffic, such as barges and other shallow-draft vessels.

And there's also a page that lists ports in the US, and Port of St. Louis and East St. Louis is listed.

At the same time, dictionary.com says (among other unrelated definitions) that it's

A city, town, or other place where ships load or unload.
a place along a coast in which ships may take refuge from storms; harbor.
Synonyms: anchorage "https://www.dictionary.com/browse/port

merriam-webster's definition is nearly identical.

Cambridge dictionary says,

a town by the sea or by a river that has a harbour, or the harbour itself:
a naval/fishing/container port
We had a good view of all the ships coming into/leaving port.

Collins dictionary is basically the same.

So they do mention a river, but also specify "harbour" and 'ships" which doesn't really apply to barge traffic on a harbour-less river. In fact, many of the definitions seem to equate the words port and harbour.

Of course dictionaries and encyclopedias just try to track how a word is being used rather than commenting on whether or not it should be used in that way. So it doesn't have any bearing on arguments around whether a term should be changed to be more fair, clear, logical etc. But personally, I'd be inclined to say that the term port on its own implies ocean access, while specifically using the term "river port" refers to a different but similar facility that isn't navigable to the ocean by most vessels. It both makes the most sense to me and seems to be the most common usage.

[Steely Dan]

^ I'm more like this:

A port is a port.

Below that you can have "sea ports", "river ports", and "lake ports".

That ordering makes the most sense to me.




Super simple black and white litmus test:

If your city has an official "port authority", then guess what, it's a "port city"!!!

[JManc]

Are we really arguing about what a port is? This is so SSP.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by JManc

Are we really arguing about what a port is?

Still light years more fascinating than the circle-jerk dip-shittery of the CE toilet

[Prahaboheme]

Originally Posted by JManc

Are we really arguing about what a port is? This is so SSP.

Well, to bring this full circle I think all agree Baltimore is a port city.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Prahaboheme

Well, to bring this full circle I think all agree Baltimore is a port city.

But what about Nashville????

Hmmmm.......

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Still lighter years more fascinating than the circle-jerk dip-shittery of the CE toilet

Facts.

[SIGSEGV]

St. Louis isn't a port city, more of a beer city. Now Porto, that's a port city.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

St. Louis isn't a port city, more of a beer city. Now Porto, that's a port city.

That's true actually. St. Louis was bragging about being a port city and Porto was like, "Oh yeah? Hold my beer!" And ever since then Porto was known as a port city and St. Louis was known as a beer city.

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by craigs

Do you have a source for that?

https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/governmen...n-st-louis.cfm

https://waterwayscouncil.org/media/i...-in-the-future

[wwmiv]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^ I'm more like this:

A port is a port.

Below that you can have "sea ports", "river ports", and "lake ports".

That ordering makes the most sense to me.




Super simple black and white litmus test:

If your city has an official "port authority", then guess what, it's a "port city"!!!

Yes! 100% agreed.

(And Although I think this stretches the definition a bit…) many also now classify airports and rail hubs as ports, too.

https://www.portsanantonio.us/