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.
I'm curious why so many are mentioning Cleveland? My impression is it is mostly single-family homes, and has lost a lot of its legacy old school urban architecture.
I would say:
1) Baltimore
2) Pittsburgh
3) Milwaukee.
St Louis and Cinny also has some good urban bones. But, they are smaller/less vibrant IMO.
I could also see an argument of Portland Oregon. It isn't traditionally urban. But, it has seen a ton of infill and has a very walkable core.
Single family homes are not inherently "unurban," and apartments and townhomes are not inherently "urban." It's possible that Cleveland was mutilated to a greater extent than many other American cities due to post war "development," but it still has enough of its original man-made environment to make it more 'urban' than most other cities its size. And Milwaukee is not a 2-3 million metro.
Anyway, the only ones that stand out are Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Maybe St Louis and Cincinnati too.
Single family homes are not inherently "unurban," and apartments and townhomes are not inherently "urban." It's possible that Cleveland was mutilated to a greater extent than many other American cities due to post war "development," but it still has enough of its original man-made environment to make it more 'urban' than most other cities its size. And Milwaukee is not a 2-3 million metro.
Anyway, the only ones that stand out are Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Maybe St Louis and Cincinnati too.
I haven't visited St Louis, but if the cities on this list, I'd rank Cleveland dead last. While they are too small to qualify, I'd also rank Milwaukee, New Orleans and Richmond over Cleveland, in terms of urbanity.
I haven't visited St Louis, but if the cities on this list, I'd rank Cleveland dead last. While they are too small to qualify, I'd also rank Milwaukee, New Orleans and Richmond over Cleveland, in terms of urbanity.
When discussing "urbanness," I only really take into account two things- the level of walkability and public transportation available to the average resident. By that metric, I think Cleveland beats Richmond and New Orleans. I would say it beats Milwaukee too, but by a much slimmer margin.
New Orleans and Richmond are more "urban" than most southern cities though.
Last edited by Taggerung; 08-22-2019 at 08:54 AM..
I really don't understand the people arguing for Cleveland. It's probably the least urban/walkable of the major rust belt cities, barring Detroit (which was badly hurt by urban renewal). There's very little built intensity outside of the downtown area.
When discussing "urbanness," I only really take into account two things- the level of walkability and public transportation available to the average resident. By that metric, I think Cleveland beats Richmond and New Orleans. I would say it beats Milwaukee too, but by a much slimmer margin.
New Orleans and Richmond are more "urban" than most southern cities though.
Have you actually been to all three cities?
Richmond's built form is far more urban, and I would argue that it's more walkable.
Neighborhoods with walkscores of 90 or better:
Cleveland- 1
Richmond- 5
Neighborhoods with walkscores between 80-89:
Cleveland- 0
Richmond- 6
Walkscore 70-79:
Cleveland- 5
Richmond- 6
Nothing with a walkscore under 70 is TRULY walkable.
To my mind, the major things when considering urbanity basically come down to:
1. Walkability (best measured by the total population of neighborhoods which score highly on Walkscore).
2. Built form. Things like long unbroken linear business districts, rowhouses, walkup apartment buildings, etc add to the urban feel, while strip malls, parking lots, and detached single-family homes feel less urban.
Here's a collection of streetviews I did the other year of urban residential streets in Pittsburgh:
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton
Here's a group of streetviews I put together for a thread on another forum from the classically urban residential streets in Pitttsburgh. I excluded business districts.
Honestly not done. I could think of another five at least, but they mostly aren't impressive. There are maybe a dozen walkable suburban business districts which are relatively intact and active however.
Since these were links from several years ago, the streetviews are kinda old. In some cases you can move the year forward and see newer development.
Single family homes are not inherently "unurban," and apartments and townhomes are not inherently "urban." It's possible that Cleveland was mutilated to a greater extent than many other American cities due to post war "development," but it still has enough of its original man-made environment to make it more 'urban' than most other cities its size. And Milwaukee is not a 2-3 million metro.
Anyway, the only ones that stand out are Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. Maybe St Louis and Cincinnati too.
I get the arguments for Baltimore and Pittsburgh. They are both very old school classic urban cities.
But I have a hard time ranking Cleveland, St Louis, and Cincinnati. Cincinnati has always reminded me of a mini Pittsburgh. Its core areas have the tightest built environment of the three. But it feels a little smaller than the others. St Louis has row house areas and thriving urban areas such as CWE and Delmar Loop. Cleveland has arguably the best downtown and then emerging pockets around U City/little Italy and then Ohio City/Detroit Shoreway/Tremont. But I don't know enough to say one objectively stands above the others I ask have a hard time ranking any of the three above Pittsburgh or Baltimore.
Denver, Columbus and especially Portland also probably deserve to be in the discussion. Portland urbanism is probably "overrated", but it does have a vibrant downtown and lots of bustling neighborhood commercial strips. I would put it above the Cle,Cincy, STL group at this point.
I haven't visited St Louis, but if the cities on this list, I'd rank Cleveland dead last. While they are too small to qualify, I'd also rank Milwaukee, New Orleans and Richmond over Cleveland, in terms of urbanity.
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.