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.
You're free to use either MSA or CSA, I don't really care as long as we compare the two. I think these two match up rather well with one another.
Factors:
- Location
- Climate
- Topography
- Diversity
- Culinary scene
- Cultural Institutions (museums, botanical gardens, memorials, art galleries, zoos, so on)
- Performing Arts (theater, symphony opera, ballet, musical organizations)
- Music scene
- Sports scene
- City parks
- Nightlife
- Theme parks/Amusement parks
- Educational institutions (both K-12 and higher education - colleges and universities)
- Job market and economy
- Cost of living
- Crime and safety
- Architecture
- City neighborhoods
- Area suburbs
- Public transport (inner city rail and commuter rail)
- Airports
- Infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, so on)
- Downtown vibrancy
- Structural density
Sacramento matches up well with a TON of cities. It, like Oakland, has the misfortune of being in a state that is essentially a country unto itself, thus it is often overlooked. But in reality, Sacramento (and Oakland) are on par with all of the more popular mid-tier cities...
Never been to Cleveland, but was born in Sacramento and was just there last month, so I'll give this a shot. I'll highlight things that would be important to me, and touch on the rest of the criteria afterwards...
-I'd call location a draw. One's in Ohio, one's in California, I'd be happy in either. However, I'm an urbanist, and while Sacramento is definitely on the doorstep of The Bay, the only other urban draws within 250 miles is Fresno. Cleveland is surrounded by interesting urban areas on nearly all sides--Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Columbus, Detroit. But I could be happy living in both locations...
-Certainly, I'll take Cleveland's climate. Sacramento is dry, hot as hell in the summer. The upside is its got warmer winters, but I'd rather have Cleveland here. Give topography to Cleveland as well. Sacramento is rather ugly to me...
-Diversity is not even close. Ethnic diversity, racial diversity, religious diversity, lifestyle diversity, on and on...Sacramento has this running away...
Last edited by murksiderock; 09-17-2016 at 01:25 PM..
Location- Sacramento closer to the ocean and close to mountains
Climate- Sacramento by a landslide, Cleveland's climate sucks.
Topograpy- Both cities are pretty flat but Sacramento is close to mountains eastern. Eastern Sacramento has some hills as does South Cleveland. Cleveland is greener though so I'll give it a slight edge.
Diversity- Sacramento
Culinary scene- Not sure probably Cleveland
Cultural institutions- Cleveland
Performing arts- Cleveland
Music scene- depends on what you are looking for
City Parks- Neither city has great parks
Nightlife- Cleveland
Theme Parks- Sacramento
Education- Sacramento
Economy- Sacramento
Cost of living- Cleveland
Crime- Sacramento in a landslide
Architecture- Cleveland in a landslide
City neighborhoods- both have their ups and downs but I'd say Sacramento
Suburbs- Sacramento
PT- Cleveland
Airports- Cleveland
Infrastructure- tie
Downtown- Cleveland
Density- Cleveland
It's actually kind of a tie but I'd go with Sacramento because of the weather and economy.
Factors:
- Location: Sacramento
- Climate: Sacramento
- Topography: Cleveland closer in, Sacramento further out
- Diversity: Sacramento
- Culinary scene: Sacramento might have more ethnic options, and it is considered a farm to table capital. But Cleveland has a big farm to table scene also, and I think one could make a case that both have plenty of quality restaurants, but, that Cleveland's likely has places with better atmosphere.
- Cultural Institutions (museums, botanical gardens, memorials, art galleries, zoos, so on): Cleveland
- Performing Arts (theater, symphony opera, ballet, musical organizations): Cleveland
- Music scene: Not qualified to answer
- Sports scene: Cleveland
- City parks: Cleveland (it has a great lake and a national park, plus the metroparks in area)
- Nightlife: I'm guessing pretty comparable
- Theme parks/Amusement parks: Tie (both are about an hour from a major park (Six Flags/Cedar Point))
- Educational institutions (both K-12 and higher education - colleges and universities): Hard to say. City alone, or overall region? Don't know enough about CA's K-12. As for colleges, UC Davis is slightly behind Case, I would guess Sacramento State isn't really much different from Cleveland State or Kent State or Akron. No major edge here IMO.
- Job market and economy: Honestly not sure
- Cost of living: Definitely Cleveland
- Crime and safety: There are plenty of safe areas in both cities.
- Architecture: Cleveland, though not by as much as I would've thought, Old Town Sac has some good Historic Architecture.
- City neighborhoods: Not sure about Sacramento's, Cleveland has some cool ones
- Area suburbs: Both have several nice ones
- Public transport (inner city rail and commuter rail): From what I can tell, Cleveland.
- Airports: About even from a statistical standpoint it looks like.
- Infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, so on): Not sure.
- Downtown vibrancy: Old Town Sacramento is more vibrant than anything I saw from a foot traffic standpoint in Cleveland. However, that felt more touristy/seasonal, and outside of that, Cleveland's Downtown feels more vibrant, IMO.
I think if all things were equal, Cleveland would have a modest advantage over Sacramento, at least on the things that are important to me. That being said, Sacramento has two things that are HUGE. 1) Weather: In that it has probably the 4th best weather in the country, at least according to my admittedly subjective standards. Sure, it gets hot in the summer, but it is a dry heat and so even during the day it isn't usually too bad, and then it cools down, usually into the low 60s, in the mornings/evenings. Fall and spring appear to be perfect, and winter, while cool, is never unbearable, if anything it's invigorating (low 50s). 2) Location: Perhaps the best located city in America, and I really believe that. It is less than 2 hours from the SF Bay Area, one of the most dynamic urban experiences on the planet, in addition to the Redwoods/Pacific Ocean that is there. 1 hour from Napa. 1 hour from mountains that exceed a mile in elevation. Less than 2 hours from Tahoe and the skiing/hiking/resort towns/casinos in that vicinity. That right there is really impressive.
At the same time, I think the debit from Sacramento would be it's cost of living, which, while low by CA standards, still isn't low.
Also, the other question is, if I would like "Just Cleveland" and it's offerings, somewhat better than "Just Sacramento", it's true that one, especially if working wouldn't have the time to just flock away to the mountains or SF every weekend. Cleveland having the lake and it's park system right there (yes, I realize Sacramento has Lake Folsom, but still), is big. I also to some degree enjoy the seasonal changes Cleveland offers, and Cleveland's location shouldn't be slept on either, as another poster pointed out, Day Trips to a host of other cities are possible, in addition to day trips to the waterfalls/gorges of WNY, and the Allegheny Mountains, both of which, in their own way are as beautiful as many places out west.
As a Sacramento homer who's only been to CLE airport (but would very much like to visit properly someday):
Location
Cleveland has access to a wider variety of interesting cities than Sac, and cheaper flights to the Eastern half of the US. But no large cities within a two hour drive whereas Sac has access to the Bay in less than two hours. Plus like someone alluded to upthread, being smack dab in the middle of NorCal (sorry real NorCal), Tahoe, Napa, Bay, Redwoods, Delta, Yosemite, etc. It's kinda nice.
Climate
I don't see how this one goes to Cleveland. Yes, Sac gets hot in the summer but find me a city that's not costal California that has better year round weather.
Topography
Some people hate flat cities, but it does make biking and walking easier. Sac's eastern suburbs are in oak woodland hills. From downtown Sac drive 30-40miles west and you have coastal mountain ranges, drive 30-40 miles east and you're in the Sierra Nevada. Cleveland while no Pittsburgh or SF isn't a Chicago or Sac type flat city. And I know people hate when Sac tries to claim stuff 40 miles away so personal preference on this one.
Diversity
Sac, hands down. Plus integrated, which is just as important.
Culinary scene
Cleveland has great European cuisine and a good food scene overall from what I've gathered. The diversity of Sac gives us a wide variety of authentic cuisines, although skewing towards Asian and Latin. I don't doubt that Cleveland has access to great produce but Sacramento can source some of the best in the nation locally. Maybe only Fresno is better positioned to take advantage of the agricultural behemoth that is the great Ca Central Valley. CLE has the west side market, Sac has some large farmers markets and is coming online with more indoor market stuff.
Cultural Institutions (museums, botanical gardens, memorials, art galleries, zoos, so on)
Cleveland hands down. Sac has cultural institutions but the Bay has really eliminated the need to pour money into our own. Hard to compete with SF. Performing Arts (theater, symphony opera, ballet, musical organizations)
Again, Cleveland hands down.
Music scene
Don't know how it is in Cleveland but there's a huge musical drain on Sac from our promising artists leaving for LA or the Bay. Still, California has a pretty good local circuit and Sac has venues that are on the radar of many bands in certain genres.
Sports scene
Cleveland, by far.
City parks
Hmmm. I'd say Cleveland has this with the Emerald Necklace. Sacramento does have thousands of acres of riverfront parks along the American and Sacramento rivers that run through town, and some pretty cool classically urban parks.
Nightlife
Cleveland seems like more of a drinker's city, so I suppose I'd go with them on this. A warm summer's night bar/club hopping around Midtown Sac is a fantastic experience though, hard to put into words.
Theme parks/Amusement parks
Push, Cedar Point and Six Flags Vallejo are about the same distance. I think both CSA's have a water park.
Educational institutions (both K-12 and higher education - colleges and universities)
I'd say Case and Davis are a tie and K-12 probably is also.
Cost of living
Cleveland, although for California Sac offers an incredible bang:buck. I'm surprised that people are willing to pay more for an equivalent place in Denver. It's like why not buy a cheaper house in Sac, still have your mountains, have the Pacific 90 miles away, and all of the other California amenities.
Crime and safety
Dunno but I feel quite safe in Sac and what we consider a "ghetto" is waaay nicer than others.
Architecture
Hmmm, Cleveland I'd say. Maybe people knock Sac for being so new but most of the 4 square miles grid in Downtown/Midtown was built out in the 1800s in the half century following the Gold Rush. Some shi**y urban renewal killed a lot of good architecture but there are still many old Victorians in the core and other cool buildings. But Cleveland had 380K people in 1900 while Sac only had 30K.
City neighborhoods
Sac has some great streetcar suburbs and East Sac and Land Park are both upscale urban neighborhoods that seamlessly border our core grid.
Area suburbs
Because Sac is a newer sunbelt metro there are some classically stucco, ticky tack California suburbs. As much as citydata knowcks that stuff, many people find them desirable. $400K for a top rated school district, 2500+ sqft home, and almost nonexistent crime in California? Sign me up.
Public transport (inner city rail and commuter rail)
Cleveland has a decent rail system but I believe Sac's light rail system carries more daily riders. Props to CLE for having an airport stop.
Airports
That Red Line airport stop is nice, although I prefer SMF Terminal B to many airports. Nice new terminal, great food options, and fast security lines.
Infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, so on)
Sac, overcapacity but being a sunbelt metro pretty new infrastructure all around.
Downtown vibrancy
Subjective. Sac's CBD has traditionally been a typical 9-5 office worker zone that has little residents and quiets down after work hours. The 4 square miles core grid though, downtown on the west side and midtown on the east side, has 30,000 residents and 100,000 daytime workers, so there's vibrancy there for sure.
Structural density
Cleveland, all of the rust belts have such good bones from their past.
Hell, I'm happy we're being compared to Cleveland. Sacramento is so overlooked and underrated, although seeing what has happened to PDX and Austin I'm leery of catching the hype train. I'd prefer we stay under the radar for a while longer. Cleveland though needs the hype and has the capacity to absorb it I think. Good things ahead for that city.
I'm a Cleveland native who has frequented San Francisco many times, but never Sacramento. SF of course is an amazing city -- it ranks in my top 3 of most interesting American Cities (along with NYC and Chicago), so just being a 2-hour drive from there gives Sacramento a big boost imho.
The only things I know about Sacramento, aside from the Kings, having UC-Davis (a very good school) in its burbs and the fact that it's Cali's capital are these:
-- I've been following Sac's light rail, and they seem to have done an amazing job with it. It has expanded considerably and is about 40+ miles long, as opposed to Cleveland's 32-34 miles, and I believe it does carry more people. Sac's LRT does have that downtown street mall thing, which I don't like as I prefer subways downtown, like Cleveland's entrance to Tower City, but the LRT appears to be very extensive.
-- Sacramento has a heritage of diversity -- it's supposed to be one of the most diverse big cities in America, which is a major plus.
-- Sacramento has derided as being "boring" and has been derisively labeled "Sac-Town." ... That's OK with me, because as a Clevelander, I know about stupid and unfair stereotypes and labels affixed to cities by haters. I'm sure Sacramento is a very nice and livable town and I'd very much like to visit someday.
I give a slight edge to Sacramento based on personal preferences. I feel Cleveland wins in most objective categories (transit, entertainment, culture, COL) but Sacramento wins out in two key areas for me: asian influence and proximity to LA and SF. NYC and DC are the nearest important cities to Cleveland and obviously not as accessible.
I give a slight edge to Sacramento based on personal preferences. I feel Cleveland wins in most objective categories (transit, entertainment, culture, COL) but Sacramento wins out in two key areas for me: asian influence and proximity to LA and SF. NYC and DC are the nearest important cities to Cleveland and obviously not as accessible.
LOL what's funny is that I just googled drives from Sacramento to LA and Cleveland to DC.
- Sacramento to LA: 386 miles
- Cleveland to DC: 373 miles
Sure, San Francisco is closer to Sacramento than Cleveland and NY.
I give a pretty big edge to Cleveland. But then again, I don't really like California in general, so not really fair.
Sacramento matches up well with a TON of cities. It, like Oakland, has the misfortune of being in a state that is essentially a country unto itself, thus it is often overlooked. But in reality, Sacramento (and Oakland) are on par with all of the more popular mid-tier cities...
Never been to Cleveland, but was born in Sacramento and was just there last month, so I'll give this a shot. I'll highlight things that would be important to me, and touch on the rest of the criteria afterwards...
-I'd call location a draw. One's in Ohio, one's in California, I'd be happy in either. However, I'm an urbanist, and while Sacramento is definitely on the doorstep of The Bay, the only other urban draws within 250 miles is Fresno. Cleveland is surrounded by interesting urban areas on nearly all sides--Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Columbus, Detroit. But I could be happy living in both locations...
-Certainly, I'll take Cleveland's climate. Sacramento is dry, hot as hell in the summer. The upside is its got warmer winters, but I'd rather have Cleveland here. Give topography to Cleveland as well. Sacramento is rather ugly to me...
-Diversity is not even close. Ethnic diversity, racial diversity, religious diversity, lifestyle diversity, on and on...Sacramento has this running away...
You are the only person in recorded history to utter the words "I'll take Cleveland's climate"....
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.
Levees and earthquakes
