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.
Cleveland's hardly alone in this, but it seems like the city is always held up (at least on C-D) as the best (or worst) example of it, which is not quite fair.
Fair enough.
As I said people like to champion Pittsburgh as being one giant cohesive walkable mecca; however, they always gloss over the fact that Uptown and the Hill District are smack dab in the middle of the city and are largely "dead zone" neighborhoods. With a new hospital coming to Uptown and the Penguins redeveloping a very large parcel of property in the part of the Hill District closest to Downtown (including funding being approved for a new "deck park" that will cover I-579) I foresee that changing little by little, though. We're modeling our new BRT between Downtown and Oakland off of the success of Cleveland's HealthLine.
I'm not exactly transit-averse, per se, but I just feel like the best way to experience a city in a day or two is purely afoot. You get to just sense/experience more on a sidewalk on your own two feet than in a cab/Uber/Lyft; on a bus; on a train; or even on a bicycle for that matter. In NYC I would come around some corners on foot and nearly stop in my tracks (instinctively moving to the right first, of course, so as not to have someone behind me run into me for being in the way). I'd then snap a photo of a beautiful architectural detail I would not have otherwise noticed using any other mode of transport.
If Cleveland could "fill in" between Downtown and University Circle/Little Italy, then it would be a bigger urban success story than it currently is. Same with Pittsburgh for the Hill District and Uptown.
To be fair, though, for as much as Pittsburgh is lauded on here our Downtown and our version of University Circle (Oakland) aren't walkable to one another either without walking through Uptown or the Hill District (neither of which is a vibrant neighborhood at the moment). You could conceivably walk from our Downtown up through the Strip District, Lawrenceville, and Bloomfield (via Penn & Liberty Avenues) on into Shadyside---and then backtrack into Oakland. Such a walk is generally pleasant---but it is very long. Besides distance walkers/runners like myself nobody touring Pittsburgh would ever do this. I mean I live in Polish Hill. My walking commute is 2.4 miles to my Downtown office, which I do almost daily.
Pittsburgh obviously needs to do better when it comes to filling in the gaps in our urban fabric, though we're ahead of Cleveland. Much of it though has to do with topography. Basically Pittsburgh is like two cities. You have the "lower city" - Downtown, Strip District, Lawrenceville, lower North Side, and South Side. All these are areas which tend to be older and more rowhouse dominated (where the historic fabric remains). In contrast the "upper city" is Oakland and the East End, which really only started getting built out at the very end of the 19th century, and is generally a little bit greener and more spread out. If you get around on a bike like I do, the divide is quite notable.
One of the things I've said Cleveland does better than Pittsburgh is mixed use. We might have a couple of 30+ block business districts like East Carson and Butler, but generally speaking back streets are almost exclusively residential. In contrast in the oldest parts of the West Side, like Ohio City, Tremont, and Detroit-Shoreway, there are a lot more mini business districts and random businesses tucked on side streets. I'm guessing Cleveland just has more lenient zoning than we do.
Funny, when we were searching for a new city I spoke with Peter as well. We traveled to Louisville and quite liked it. Some really quirky brick laden neighborhoods with good restaurants. Also loved the Ali Museum. The two cities definitely share the old-world industrial feel, but there really is little comparison with Cleveland beyond that. It's like comparing Cleveland to Chicago. CLE is a much larger city with much more going on. And not only in the inner city but also in the sprawling metro. Louisville sprawls outward to the east some but is surrounded by rural Indiana and rural Kentucky. Cleveland has a plethora of really nice suburbs, exurbs and beyond in every direction (except north obviously due to the lake).
Again, it's a shame this thread devolved into Louisville vs Cleveland. Peter has some real issues with what he feels are comparative cities. When I told him we landed in Cleveland and really liked it, he actually got really upset. I don't understand why. Louisville is a cool little city. Cleveland certainly has its issues. But in all honesty, Louisville is better compared to Grand Rapids, Richmond or maybe even Memphis.
I also feel like Detroit shouldn't be compared here either. Sure, it's decline was steep and the inner city is a shell of what it once was, but as a metro area it's still massive compared to the others.
False. I never got "mad" you were moving to CLE. But you made a post which essentially bashed Louisville based on a VERY superficial visit. So I messaged you to say hey, you actually missed most of what Louisville has to offer. What I actually said is "Louisville is the Cleveland of the South." The two cities are very similar in many ways, I am not even playing. My in laws even agree.
The cities are NOT the same size. But from an amenity standpoint lots of slightly smaller cities push CLE in an amenity package particularly on the way they are presented. Louisville is one of them. A bit off topic but cities 50% smaller than Louisville have in some ways similar amenities...Charleston SC is a great example!
Detroit MSA is 4.3 M
Pitt is 2.3 M but also losing population
Columbus/Indy/Cincinnati are effectively the same size at 2.1 M ish
Cleveland is 2M and declining (you can'y just pull in Akron or else Louisville could pull in NKY and Lexington, Cincy can pull Dayton, etc)
Louisville is 1.3 M.
Yet people want to compare CLE to cities 4-6 TIMES its size yet SCOFF at comparisons to a city like Louisville which offers alot of what CLE has. Also, for the record, Louisville's ART museum is NOT equal to Cleveland's. But Cleveland's doesn't blow any of these city's art scenes away like its boosters want you to think. Louisville's expanded Speed Museum, just like Cleveland's art museums are NOT a primary reason anyone would ever visit either city, but they are nice....anyone wanting a REAL art museum is going to go to a REAL big city....none of these on this list.
So my problem with CLE Is not the the city itself, but shameless boosterism here which wants to compare it to megalopolis cities in the east coast or Chicago.
Everyone agrees with me that the culture nodes in CLE are hodge podge and spread out except those that live there. I stick to my objective argument that Pittsburgh, Columbus, Cincinnati and Louisville are more enjoyable and easier seen by the weekend traveler....and all without a shadow of a doubt have SUPERIOR waterfronts....Cleveland's major weakness too.
And to the cleveland boosters...I have listed massive music festivals for Cbus, Cincy, Louisville....what about CLE?
Fair enough.
I'm not exactly transit-averse, per se, but I just feel like the best way to experience a city in a day or two is purely afoot. You get to just sense/experience more on a sidewalk on your own two feet than in a cab/Uber/Lyft; on a bus; on a train; or even on a bicycle for that matter. In NYC I would come around some corners on foot and nearly stop in my tracks (instinctively moving to the right first, of course, so as not to have someone behind me run into me for being in the way). I'd then snap a photo of a beautiful architectural detail I would not have otherwise noticed using any other mode of transport.
If you can hoof it, do it! We used to walk Manhattan regularly, from Harlem-to-Wall Street, no problemo. Now being somewhat older... not so much, but still walk quite a bit. I've always liked rapid transit because it can get you from place-to-place in cities as fast as, if not faster, than cars, and then you can fan out from the train station and walk around; hop another train to another 'hood, and walk some more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
If Cleveland could "fill in" between Downtown and University Circle/Little Italy, then it would be a bigger urban success story than it currently is. Same with Pittsburgh for the Hill District and Uptown.
If you had been in Cleveland in the early half of the 20th century through the 1950s, you'd have seen this (I'm not speaking from first-hand experience, btw... I'm not that old)... Unfortunately that ship has sailed and the suburban-ish drive-able nodes and suburban-like townhouses and McMansions are the order of the day in Midtown... Unfortunately Cleveland blew it by not building a subway line rapid transit extension up the Euclid corridor which could have promoted more Toronto/Younge Street type high-density, walkable development...
I really, really, REALLY wish Cleveland could get the Midtown/Hough/Fairfax area figured out. If I could visit, park in Ohio City, and then walk to Little Italy and back in a very long day on a very long walk I'd do cartwheels.
That would be a massive walk but I 100% agree! Unlike TheProf's opinion, I actually think those areas will begin to seriously gentrify soon (by "soon" I mean in the next 5 - 10 years). Something like $4 Billion of development has already went into the Euclid Corridor linking DT to UC. Midtown is already pretty solid with commercial developments, condos and a growing brewery/restaurant scene (including our tiny but growing Asia Town).
The Cleveland Clinic continues to build outward into the Fairfax neighborhood and a lot of talk about how they can do it inclusively is underway. There's already a development plan for Fairfax that includes an affordable townhouse community, parks, a community center and tax incentives for anyone who wants to build SFH's.
The Hough has already seen some change. Again, there's serious development happening all down Euclid Ave. with some admittedly strange residential gentrification happening as you push into Hough. See here: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5074...7i13312!8i6656
Super nice houses that are super affordable (due to obviously the area they're in). But I think that mixed with the commercial development and planned community developments, the Hough will see a resurgence soon. It's just too great of a location (between UC and DT) to not be desirable. We've actually seriously considered making the leap but still feel there's just too much nearby blight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRnative
As you spend time at the Cleveland Museum of Art, could you comment on Peter's repeated claim that the Louisville's Speed Art Museum is comparatively sufficient to the point that the CMA isn't a vastly superior tourist attraction?
I've never been to the Speed Art Museum but concerning CMA I'll leave it to the words of a family member from San Fran who is a big time art connoisseur: "This is unbelievable on so many levels. I'll fly back just to visit this. You're so lucky!"
False. I never got "mad" you were moving to CLE. But you made a post which essentially bashed Louisville based on a VERY superficial visit. So I messaged you to say hey, you actually missed most of what Louisville has to offer. What I actually said is "Louisville is the Cleveland of the South." The two cities are very similar in many ways, I am not even playing. My in laws even agree.
The cities are NOT the same size. But from an amenity standpoint lots of slightly smaller cities push CLE in an amenity package particularly on the way they are presented. Louisville is one of them. A bit off topic but cities 50% smaller than Louisville have in some ways similar amenities...Charleston SC is a great example!
Detroit MSA is 4.3 M
Pitt is 2.3 M but also losing population
Columbus/Indy/Cincinnati are effectively the same size at 2.1 M ish
Cleveland is 2M and declining (you can'y just pull in Akron or else Louisville could pull in NKY and Lexington, Cincy can pull Dayton, etc)
Louisville is 1.3 M.
Yet people want to compare CLE to cities 4-6 TIMES its size yet SCOFF at comparisons to a city like Louisville which offers alot of what CLE has. Also, for the record, Louisville's ART museum is NOT equal to Cleveland's. But Cleveland's doesn't blow any of these city's art scenes away like its boosters want you to think. Louisville's expanded Speed Museum, just like Cleveland's art museums are NOT a primary reason anyone would ever visit either city, but they are nice....anyone wanting a REAL art museum is going to go to a REAL big city....none of these on this list.
So my problem with CLE Is not the the city itself, but shameless boosterism here which wants to compare it to megalopolis cities in the east coast or Chicago.
Everyone agrees with me that the culture nodes in CLE are hodge podge and spread out except those that live there. I stick to my objective argument that Pittsburgh, Columbus, Cincinnati and Louisville are more enjoyable and easier seen by the weekend traveler....and all without a shadow of a doubt have SUPERIOR waterfronts....Cleveland's major weakness too.
And to the cleveland boosters...I have listed massive music festivals for Cbus, Cincy, Louisville....what about CLE?
I never made a post bashing Louisville, I specifically said we enjoyed it very much. I responded to you telling me moving to CLE was a bad choice. You told me it was dirty and that nobody wants to live there . You said that Louisville has better neighborhoods, better amenities, better restaurants, a better waterfront, better weather, "far more development", a better economy, etc. All I said was that Louisville is surrounded by a sea of red and was far smaller than CLE.
I don't see anyone comparing CLE to Chicago or "megalopolis cities in the east coast". Only you.
And yup, CLE lacks the music festivals. 100% agree. Can we move on now?
Cleveland is also particularly dangerous, I was robbed twice on Campus while walking toward Playhouse Square. I did really enjoy my time in Cleveland but I felt very secluded at CSU and found I needed to drive to get to a lot of areas in the city.
What years did you attend Cleveland State? I know many persons who have attended school there, often for night classes, and they considered it very safe. Playhouse Square is adjacent to the CSU campus and is very safe.
Did you report your robberies? The CSU federally mandated crime report statistics report an average of 3-4 robberies annually from 2015-2017, so you apparently were a robbery magnet.
CSU's annual crime statistics indicate a very safe campus, especially for an urban university. The university has a significant police force.
I agree with eschaton that Cleveland doesn't feel cohesive from a pedestrian standpoint. I love visiting Cleveland for day-trips. When I do I drive from our domicile near Downtown Pittsburgh and park in Ohio City. After exploring that admittedly awesome neighborhood and the West Side Market we walk across a bridge to Downtown. From Downtown we'll take the HealthLine up Euclid to University Circle. From University Circle I like to explore a bit and then walk around Little Italy, which is sort of a synergistic barnacle clutching onto University Circle anyways.
As noted repeatedly, downtown Cleveland has 4 contiguous entertainment and dining districts (Playhouse Square, Gateway, Warehouse District, and Flats East Bank) all within one mile of Tower City (the latter three are within a half mile of Tower City and the Gateway District is essentially adjacent). These districts are connected by free bus trolleys. I don't know why these substantial entertainment & dining districts, especially collectively, wouldn't be considered easily walkable. Additionally, Ohio City's Market District is easily walkable and connected to downtown by very short rail or bus rides.
The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and Museum is 1.1 miles from Tower City, easily walkable, but also connected to Tower City by the Waterfront rail rapid line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
To be fair, though, for as much as Pittsburgh is lauded on here our Downtown and our version of University Circle (Oakland) aren't walkable to one another either without walking through Uptown or the Hill District (neither of which is a vibrant neighborhood at the moment). You could conceivably walk from our Downtown up through the Strip District, Lawrenceville, and Bloomfield (via Penn & Liberty Avenues) on into Shadyside---and then backtrack into Oakland. Such a walk is generally pleasant---but it is very long. Besides distance walkers/runners like myself nobody touring Pittsburgh would ever do this. I mean I live in Polish Hill. My walking commute is 2.4 miles to my Downtown office, which I do almost daily.
Oakland is 270 feet above downtown Pittsburgh. Many persons would not want to make that climb, especially in hot weather. Additionally, mass transit options between downtown Cleveland and University Circle are more robust (one rail rapid line and one 24/7 bus rapid line) than between downtown and Oakland, based on my memory of Pittsburgh visits, but I imagine that Oakland and downtown are connected by very good bus service because Pittsburgh, like Cleveland, offers very good mass transit compared to Louisville or Cincinnati.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityRising
I really, really, REALLY wish Cleveland could get the Midtown/Hough/Fairfax area figured out. If I could visit, park in Ohio City, and then walk to Little Italy and back in a very long day on a very long walk I'd do cartwheels.
Very few persons ever would want to walk the 8 miles between Ohio City and University Circle, especially when the Red Line offers an 18-minute connection.
That would be a massive walk but I 100% agree! Unlike TheProf's opinion, I actually think those areas will begin to seriously gentrify soon (by "soon" I mean in the next 5 - 10 years). Something like $4 Billion of development has already went into the Euclid Corridor linking DT to UC. Midtown is already pretty solid with commercial developments, condos and a growing brewery/restaurant scene (including our tiny but growing Asia Town).
The Cleveland Clinic continues to build outward into the Fairfax neighborhood and a lot of talk about how they can do it inclusively is underway. There's already a development plan for Fairfax that includes an affordable townhouse community, parks, a community center and tax incentives for anyone who wants to build SFH's.
You may right, as evidenced by the new Dave's Supermarket in Midtown.
One of the things I've said Cleveland does better than Pittsburgh is mixed use. We might have a couple of 30+ block business districts like East Carson and Butler, but generally speaking back streets are almost exclusively residential. In contrast in the oldest parts of the West Side, like Ohio City, Tremont, and Detroit-Shoreway, there are a lot more mini business districts and random businesses tucked on side streets. I'm guessing Cleveland just has more lenient zoning than we do.
Cleveland planners and even developers emphasize mixed-used development in order to create more cohesive neighborhoods. I'm surprised if that's not an emphasis as well in Pittsburgh.
All of the above development developments have easy mass transit access to downtown.
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.
