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.
10 lane highways do not impress me especially if it destroyed the original city
Who said Pittsburgh needs 10-lane highways? Pittsburgh can have six- or eight-lane highways and still be much better off. Pittsburgh currently has four-lane highways that are wholly inadequate for a metropolitan area its size. And a study back in 2002 noted that even if you built other modes of transit between downtown Pittsburgh and the airport that cut traffic demand in half, I-376 would still be over capacity west of downtown. Bottom line, I-376 needs more lanes, regardless of other modes of transit. Not necessarily 10, but definitely more than four.
Who said Pittsburgh needs 10-lane highways? Pittsburgh can have six- or eight-lane highways and still be much better off. Pittsburgh currently has four-lane highways that are wholly inadequate for a metropolitan area its size. And a study back in 2002 noted that even if you built other modes of transit between downtown Pittsburgh and the airport that cut traffic demand in half, I-376 would still be over capacity west of downtown. Bottom line, I-376 needs more lanes, regardless of other modes of transit. Not necessarily 10, but definitely more than four.
Expand where? NYC and Philly have the same issue within the inner-city. The roads are maintained lately and cannot expand easily considering the terrain and built environment. I use 376 daily and it's not that bad if you know how to drive.
A bit of a generalization. First, ugliness is in the eyes of the beholder; you are of course entitled to your opinion and, yes, the bulk of Cleveland's residential housing is wood frame, detached often deeply set back (but not always) with side driveways and tree lawns. Are houses always or mainly boxes or boxy? As an overall statement, I say: no. The neighborhoods, esp those that are popular now: Ohio City (many pre-20th century Victorians with several brick versions), Tremont, roughly similar but with tons of infill apts and brick flat-style houses, Detroit-Shoreway, lots of turn-of-the-20th Century architect-built houses, often with decorations such as turrets, dormers and other features; many row-house style terrace apartments -- which pop up all over older sections of town, including Glenville, Ohio City, Edgewater, Cudell, Lorain Station and others... And then there are also many, many quads or 6-unit (or larger) brick walk-up apts (occasionally some are wood frame, too) sprinkled all over town.
And yes, a bread 'n butter style that sprang up largely around and after World War I are the famed (to some non-Clevelanders: infamous) Cleveland doubles -- those ubiquitous -- several are sheathed in brick. Cleveland doubles came about during Cleveland's period of early 20th-century industrial growth when factory workers flocked to the city from the South and Eastern Europe. The style was fixed and apparently these houses, though often substantial, were quick to build -- and because Cleveland is historically the 'Forest City' lumber for construction was readily available.
I know Colonial-style rowhouses or similar brick homes in places like Philly, Baltimore and small sections or Pittsburgh are most attractive to posters. Brick always beats out wood frame -- except for those grand and intricate Victorians in New Orleans (Cleveland has plenty of these, too) or the famed Painted Ladies of SF's Haight-Ashbury. ... but Cleveland is such a hodge-podge of residential types it is really unfair to singularly typecast it, as this random old beauty reveals:
I was not saying that Cleveland had universally ugly residential vernacular, just that out of the five cities, it probably has the least nice residential vernacular.
I would agree with you regarding what the most popular neighborhoods are right now in Cleveland, but in Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and St. Louis, they really wouldn't be considered to be anything special because there are lots of intact outer-ring neighborhoods which are fairly similar.
Detroit is different - it was built more similarly to Cleveland (in terms of both materials and the time the population boomed). Obviously it has lost a lot more due to blight, but I feel like the still intact portions of Detroit (Indian Village, Palmer Woods, etc.) while suburbanish, tend to beat out anything similar within Cleveland city limits.
But yeah, I am biased. I like mid-Atlantic brick rowhouse-style vernacular housing a lot more than I like Great Lakes-style detached frame housing. And I'm saying this even though I grew up in New England, surrounded by wood housing. Frame housing just doesn't maintain its charm unless well maintained, because it's so easy for homeowners to rip off all the ornamental trim and replace the wood siding with aluminum or vinyl if they want to save money. It's much, much easier to ruin a wood house than a frame house. So if the comparison was Cleveland vs. Milwaukee vs. Buffalo, it would be more of a draw for me.
Who said Pittsburgh needs 10-lane highways? Pittsburgh can have six- or eight-lane highways and still be much better off. Pittsburgh currently has four-lane highways that are wholly inadequate for a metropolitan area its size. And a study back in 2002 noted that even if you built other modes of transit between downtown Pittsburgh and the airport that cut traffic demand in half, I-376 would still be over capacity west of downtown. Bottom line, I-376 needs more lanes, regardless of other modes of transit. Not necessarily 10, but definitely more than four.
I mean, if not that, at least better transit services would be nice. I always thought that a nice sort of Y shape service through downtown Pittsburgh would make sense since there's the East End, North Side, and South Side so a frequent rail service running among the the three ends through downtown seemed sensible enough. That and some commuter rail with a somewhat frequent spur to the airport.
Detroit is different - it was built more similarly to Cleveland (in terms of both materials and the time the population boomed). Obviously, it has lost a lot more due to blight, but I feel like the still intact portions of Detroit (Indian Village, Palmer Woods, etc.) while suburbanish, tend to beat out anything similar within Cleveland city limits.
I disagree with this. You are citing Detroit's wealthiest neighborhoods. Why not compare them to Cleveland's Edgewater or parts of Glenville (lower/along Rockefeller Park) or the Shaker Square area, or sections of West Park or even Old Brooklyn? Cleveland's housing in those areas, esp Edgewater, match or exceed those of Detroit housing types. In terms of housing types in more middle-class, or even trendy areas of Cleveland, are you even considering Ohio City, Tremont or Detroit-Shoerway? ... What about Little Italy? You are making generalizations not rooted in fact.
I disagree with this. You are citing Detroit's wealthiest neighborhoods. Why not compare them to Cleveland's Edgewater or parts of Glenville (lower/along Rockefeller Park) or the Shaker Square area, or sections of West Park or even Old Brooklyn? Cleveland's housing in those areas, esp Edgewater, match or exceed those of Detroit housing types. In terms of housing types in more middle-class, or even trendy areas of Cleveland, are you even considering Ohio City, Tremont or Detroit-Shoerway? ... What about Little Italy? You are making generalizations not rooted in fact.
The other areas you mention are all fine in Cleveland are a mix. I actually think Ohio City has a nice mix with a lot of historic homes. I think Tremont and Little Italy are actively ugly in terms of their residential vernacular (the appeal of the neighborhoods is more the amenities than the housing stock. Pittsburgh has trendy, ugly frame neighborhoods too, so I'm not just being a homer here.
I do think that pound-for-pound Cleveland probably has more nice-ish houses left than Detroit, due to how degraded much of the (originally similar) housing stock is. However, Detroit was an area with much more money a century ago than Cleveland, and it still shows in places.
To be honest most industrial cities don’t have great residential vernacular. This is because largely they grew from towns in 1865 to major major cities in 1930. All of them universally threw up housing as fast as possible.
One reason St Louis has the best vernacular is since it grew so slowly from 1880-1930. It has 4 decades of greater than 40% growth, Cleveland had 10. St Louis had 3 decades of over 100% growth, Cleveland had 4. Detroit also had 10 and 4.
Also note St Louis has 3 more censuses than Detroit or Cleveland on Wikipedia so St Louis has a fairly sustained period of relatively modest growth that gave the city time and space to breath a bit more than its Northern Counterparts.
To be honest most industrial cities don’t have great residential vernacular. This is because largely they grew from towns in 1865 to major major cities in 1930. All of them universally threw up housing as fast as possible.
One reason St Louis has the best vernacular is since it grew so slowly from 1880-1930. It has 4 decades of greater than 40% growth, Cleveland had 10. St Louis had 3 decades of over 100% growth, Cleveland had 4. Detroit also had 10 and 4.
Also note St Louis has 3 more censuses than Detroit or Cleveland on Wikipedia so St Louis has a fairly sustained period of relatively modest growth that gave the city time and space to breath a bit more than its Northern Counterparts.
IMHO the Victorian era tended to be the best period for American architecture, which was more or less the latter part of the 19th century. This is when styles like Italianate, Second Empire, Queen Anne, Romanesque Revival, Stick/Eastlake, etc. were common.
Earlier housing styles - like Georgian, Federalist, and Greek Revival - have their charms, but in terms of residential vernacular they tend to be more understated - shorter buildings, smaller windows, and less ornament overall.
Things also began simplifying around 1900. This is when you see the rise of the electric streetcar, coupled with industrial-scale building, which resulted in the first "subdivisions" - entire blocks built out with largely identical building styles. You also saw the emergence of "kit" houses (often ordered via the Sears catalog) and styles like the American Foursquare and Bungalow which looked fairly identical across the country - meaning most neighborhoods built out during the "Streetcar suburb" phase in the country are kinda interchangeable.
Looking at the major interior cities, of the U.S. in terms of when they took off, it was roughly Cincinnati, then Pittsburgh, then St. Louis, then Chicago, then everyone else. The later cities tended to have later architectural styles in their residential zones, which led to a much more "samey" feel. Though historically there undoubtedly was a lot more interesting/varied housing in the cores - it's just much of the small late 19th century portion of the city was wiped out by expansion of the CBD and other early urban renewal even before urban blight was a major issue.
IMHO the Victorian era tended to be the best period for American architecture, which was more or less the latter part of the 19th century. This is when styles like Italianate, Second Empire, Queen Anne, Romanesque Revival, Stick/Eastlake, etc. were common.
Earlier housing styles - like Georgian, Federalist, and Greek Revival - have their charms, but in terms of residential vernacular they tend to be more understated - shorter buildings, smaller windows, and less ornament overall.
Things also began simplifying around 1900. This is when you see the rise of the electric streetcar, coupled with industrial-scale building, which resulted in the first "subdivisions" - entire blocks built out with largely identical building styles. You also saw the emergence of "kit" houses (often ordered via the Sears catalog) and styles like the American Foursquare and Bungalow which looked fairly identical across the country - meaning most neighborhoods built out during the "Streetcar suburb" phase in the country are kinda interchangeable.
Looking at the major interior cities, of the U.S. in terms of when they took off, it was roughly Cincinnati, then Pittsburgh, then St. Louis, then Chicago, then everyone else. The later cities tended to have later architectural styles in their residential zones, which led to a much more "samey" feel. Though historically there undoubtedly was a lot more interesting/varied housing in the cores - it's just much of the small late 19th century portion of the city was wiped out by expansion of the CBD and other early urban renewal even before urban blight was a major issue.
Yes, the later industrial cities pumped out more plain homes super rapidly compared to St Louis. And you can see it in the overall vernacular of the cities.
Especially because St Louis was very wealthy as well.
The other areas you mention are all fine in Cleveland are a mix. I actually think Ohio City has a nice mix with a lot of historic homes. I think Tremont and Little Italy are actively ugly in terms of their residential vernacular (the appeal of the neighborhoods is more the amenities than the housing stock. Pittsburgh has trendy, ugly frame neighborhoods too, so I'm not just being a homer here.
I do think that pound-for-pound Cleveland probably has more nice-ish houses left than Detroit, due to how degraded much of the (originally similar) housing stock is. However, Detroit was an area with much more money a century ago than Cleveland, and it still shows in places.
I have no idea what you're talking about but, whatever. Mere opinion is not fact.
btownboss4 is correct in that Industrial Age boomtowns like Cleveland, Detroit and even Chicago, to a degree, grew quickly and formulaic developer homes were thrown up, often cheaply, as opposed to architect-designed homes. Detroit and Cleveland had quite a few; Cleveland likely had a bit more wood-frame homes than Detroit (Cleveland was/is the 'Forest City'), percentage-wise, but not much more.
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.
