A few days in Cleveland - Some cross city observations... (Pittsburgh: how much, neighborhood)

[ML North]

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

The Little Italy/Bloomfield comparison is the only one where the Cleveland side is actually more constrained geographically. Little Italy is jammed between the hill, University Circle and the cemetery so it is a really small area. Despite most Italians having moved out generations ago it still has a strong communal feel to it on the local level where everyone there knows everyone else.

Although smaller, I think Cleveland's little Italy may have better Italian food than Bloomfield. And Presti's is pretty awesome, too.

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by GregHenry

Sorry, but the old cars were junk. Low compression, sloppy tolerances, crappy alloys, single valve, pushrod cams, carbuereted, inefficient fuel cycle burn. Cars started getting good when the Japanese arrived. A Japanese motor from the past 30 years unburdened by EPA and NHTSA crap is an amazing piece of metal.

The sweet spot would have been a Japanese car from the late 80's, before all the extra crap became mandated. Great engineering, but still somewhat easy to work on.

I don't agree with you much, but you're spot on here. The old cars were junk compared to today. A car used to be ready for the scrap heap at 80,000 miles. 200,000 miles is a given today unless you neglect maintenance, or drive really hard.

That said, two points here. I've been to Cleveland many times. Pittsburgh beats Cleveland inside the city limits. Cleveland beats Pittsburgh with regards to inner suburbs. Cleveland lacks anything that compares to Shadyside, Squirrel Hill, and the South Side. Cleveland has 3 Mt. Lebanons in Shaker Hts., Cleveland Hts., and Lakewood. Cleveland also doesn't have the ring of crappy mill towns, as most industry was located in the city proper. I think the difference in tastes is this. People like Greg, who grew up in the Midwest, and liked it there, prefer the Midwestern style of city. Other than Cincy, they tend to be flat, and spread out, with a feeling of space. Pittsburgh boosters tend to be people who like places like NYC, and Boston, with their crazy narrow streets, dense construction, rowhouses, and streetlife. Pittsburgh is more like the later, while Cleveland is more like the former.

As for population moving to newer cities, that's mostly for the weather. Otherwise, sprawling Detroit would be a mecca for growth.

[sparrowmint]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

As for population moving to newer cities, that's mostly for the weather. Otherwise, sprawling Detroit would be a mecca for growth.

Oh god, like Detroit doesn't have other factors inhibiting growth. Watch some Charlie Leduff, the best journalist in America right now. The weather isn't the main thing people think of when they think of Detroit. And that's disregarding the fact that there is bubbling growth in R&D and tech and other stuff going on that's bringing in young professionals there.

[eschaton]

I'm glad the thread got a lot of discussion, even if it seems semi-derailed.

Originally Posted by LIRefugee

I'd like to see Pittsburgh expand its light rail at least as much as cities such Cleveland or St. Louis have, but there seems to be something of a funding-crisis-by-choice situation at the state level.

It's a bit odd, considering both states are a bit further to the right than Pennsylvania, which one would think would lead to even more hostility to public transit (and its perceived benefit to urban constituents). A lot probably has to do with decades-old decisions to retain rail systems in those cities, while they were scrapped here.

Originally Posted by heartchya

I also felt Pittsburgh by far has a much better look to it than Cleveland. To each their own I guess. Just with Market Square and The Rink at PPG alone I feel downtown Pittsburgh has more going on. It's always interesting to read others perceptions though.

Pittsburgh is a lot nicer looking I think, and probably offers more in terms of downtown "family fun" and things for older people to do. I do think it's a bit lacking in 20something nightlife however. Downtown Cleveland isn't.

Originally Posted by ex-burgher

I prefer the scale in Pittsburgh to Cleveland. In Cleveland, the streets are so wide that a feeling of urbanity is often missing. Of course it does make it easier to drive a car. Also, the lakefront IS a joke. very little access downtown and we went to Wendy Park which was full of litter. The sand on the beach was disgusting.

A lot of people talk about the wide streets in Cleveland (and other Midwestern cities) as signs they are autocentric. My guess is actually they date to streetcars. Cities built up concurrently with a streetcar system ended up with main boulevards which were at least four lanes wide (if not wider), because dedicated lanes for the streetcars were built in. In contrast, older East Coast cities had their road grid stuck in place before streetcars became a big thing, and hence there wasn't room to later add those ultra-wide roads. They just made do with more cramped streets, which means they don't look out of place today.

Originally Posted by stburr91

I know people have this fantasy about adding light rail to serve the current desirable neighborhoods in the Pittsburgh area, but that just isn't going to happen, and frankly would be a poor way to spend infrastructure funding. The region would be much better off focusing on TOD along the busways first, and then maybe putting light rail up the Allegheny and Mon rivers.

Restoring a rail line in along the Busway would be a breeze. It would presumably cost a good deal of money, but given rail always has a cache that buses lack, I think the development boost would make it worthwhile.

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

A lot of the difference is that Downtown Cleveland is a much larger geographic area than Downtown Pittsburgh since Cleveland lacks natural barriers around downtown to confine development to a small area. So we have wider streets and the larger buildings are scattered more. The Key Bank Tower also dwarfs the appearance of everything else in Cleveland's downtown so that makes it look a bit sparser.

Yeah, I got that vibe when I was in Public Square. Whose dumb idea was it to have a parking lot directly abut the square anyway? Having that one open side kinda ruined the vibe.

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

Downtown Cleveland experienced a lot of dense commercial development in Cleveland's redevelopment efforts of the 1980s. The focus of much of our urban efforts in that era were on downtown. But, with the economic collapse of the financial industry as well as the general rust belt exodus of jobs, Cleveland lost a lot of the need for office space it required in the 80s, so now a decent fraction of those skyscrapers is vacant from the hard times.

Yeah, I definitely saw at least one vacant skyscraper with a "for sale" sign on it. Coming from Pittsburgh, this seemed shocking - almost Detroit-like.

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

After the Flats fell apart in the 90s, the next entertainment district that emerged to replace it is the Warehouse District, which is part of Downtown (Cleveland, despite being a larger city has only 36 neighborhoods compared to the 70 or so (?) that Pittsburgh has so ours are generally larger). This led to a huge push of people wanting to live in downtown. At the moment, we have a surplus of office space and a shortage of apartments compared to the demand. It isn't uncommon for people to live downtown and commute to other neighborhoods for work as strange as that sounds.

That's pretty much what I had expected. We didn't get to the Warehouse District - our hotel was in Gateway, and we spent most of our time downtown there. Again, this is odd from a Pittsburgh POV, as our city has a huge Class A office shortage (although downtown living is perhaps taking off a bit as well).

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

The West Side Market is probably the most notable thing in Ohio City that attracts visitors.

We attempted to go, but it was closed for some reason. Is it not normally open on weekdays?

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Oakland never became a really bad neighborhood, did it?

I'm hardly an old-timer here, but my understanding is while some of Oakland might have been rougher in the past (particularly West Oakland, which is near the Hill District), for the most part it's been stable throughout its history. If anything it's become a victim of the success of the universities as (aside from Schenley Farms, which are protected as they are in a historic district), old time working residents continue to be displaced, and the neighborhood becomes more and more monolithic as a student ghetto.

Originally Posted by SmittyXCWRU

The first public transit that's still in use today was built in 1910 when Shaker Heights was built as a planned suburb around a streetcar line designed to take its inhabitants to downtown. The Cleveland RTA was formally started in the 70s when the County voted to pass a 1% sales tax to fund it. Cleveland may very well owe the RTA to Shaker Heights. The RTA acquired the Shaker light rail lines from the Shaker Heights Rapid and purchased a railroad line that ran from the airport through Downtown, through University Circle, to East Cleveland. Railroads were an important part of Cleveland's history and industrial development so it was easier for Cleveland to purchase a line for transit than it would be for a city like Pittsburgh which has a different history. Being flat also helps a ton.

Rail was an important part of Pittsburgh's history too. It still tore up all its streetcar lines, except for a few lines to the South Hills which aren't very convenient for travel within the city (except directly around downtown, and to the city neighborhood of Beechview).

On the whole, thanks for some insightful information!

Originally Posted by ML North

Just curious, where did you stay? Did you have any good food?

We stayed at a Radison in the Gateway district.

We ate at:

Flaming Icecube
Johnny Mango
East End Brewery
Noodlecat
Accent

[ML North]

I've stayed in that general area before. I'm glad you had a good trip.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by Herodotus

People like Greg, who grew up in the Midwest, and liked it there, prefer the Midwestern style of city. Other than Cincy, they tend to be flat, and spread out, with a feeling of space. Pittsburgh boosters tend to be people who like places like NYC, and Boston, with their crazy narrow streets, dense construction, rowhouses, and streetlife. Pittsburgh is more like the later, while Cleveland is more like the former.

I haven't ever been to Cleveland, but I know that being from SF - a hilly, compact city - Pittsburgh felt similar to SF and that was a big part of its appeal. Now that I think about it, I haven't been to many flat, sprawling cities that I've liked. Seattle is another hilly city that I like. I do like Chicago, even though it's big and flat, it feels compact. I never noticed that connection until reading your post. Thanks.

[GregHenry]

Originally Posted by juliegt

I haven't ever been to Cleveland, but I know that being from SF - a hilly, compact city - Pittsburgh felt similar to SF

They're not really that similar. I don't care if you live right in the heart of San Francisco, it's impossible to do all of your living, working and dining in those small city limits. When you run your errands and buy your car parts, sporting goods, housewares, etc., you're running from Oakland to Vallejo to San Jose. Once outside those tiny city limits, things feel pretty normal in the Bay Area, even flattening out, having wide streets and looking like typical America suburbs.

Pittsburgh feels like Pittsburgh for miles in all directions.

[groar]

Originally Posted by juliegt

I haven't ever been to Cleveland, but I know that being from SF - a hilly, compact city - Pittsburgh felt similar to SF and that was a big part of its appeal. Now that I think about it, I haven't been to many flat, sprawling cities that I've liked. Seattle is another hilly city that I like. I do like Chicago, even though it's big and flat, it feels compact. I never noticed that connection until reading your post. Thanks.

yeah, my mom grew up in san francisco and she's always exclaiming about how much pittsburgh reminds her of it when she comes to visit.

obviously there are some big differences (sf is just a bigger and more cosmopolitan city, for one), but it's surprising how many similarities there are.

[Goodjules]

Originally Posted by groar

yeah, my mom grew up in san francisco and she's always exclaiming about how much pittsburgh reminds her of it when she comes to visit.

obviously there are some big differences (sf is just a bigger and more cosmopolitan city, for one), but it's surprising how many similarities there are.

I agree. BTW, what neighborhood(s) did she live in? that's another similarity. SF & PGH are both cities of distinct neighborhoods.

[pman]

downtown cleveland indeed has more people 11,400 as of the 2010 census. up from 4600 in 1990.
Downtown Cleveland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
though if I'm not mistaken, their downtown is much larger in land area, perhaps more comparable to "greater downtown" so perhaps it's about the same.