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.
What are the differences between these two Kentucky cities in terms of: affordability, charm, downtown development, culture, industries, etc? Any thoughts?
Louisville has many more neighborhoods that are charming, and more charming at that, such as Cherokee Triangle, Highlands, Original Highlands, Old Louisville, Brownsboro Road, Crescent Hill, Clifton, and St. Matthews. Lexington can't replicate and has let its most historic portion become the less-than-adequate part of its city (I say that since Lexington doesn't really have but just one really bad area.)
There are billions of dollars of downtown development slated for downtown Louisville over the next ten years, whereas Lexington is about 6-7 years behind many other peer cities trying in even starting downtown development. The Muhammad Ali Center, Museum Plaza, riverfront area, condo development, and two more hotels are in the works for downtown Louisville. Lexington is still celebrating the opening of its UK Basketball Museum ten years ago!
Culture: Louisville has a vibrant arts scene, about the most active and alive of any city its size. The racial and ethnic diversity is very apparent, too. Lexington doesn't have its resident opera or symphony, but you can catch an occasional odd film at the Kentucky Theatre.
Industries: Louisville has a growing economy and four Fortune 500 HQs. Lexington is stagnant and only has Lexmark. The Louisville metro area is growing considerably faster in terms of population than Lexington's. Compare Oldham, Bullitt, and Shelby Cos. around Louisville to Scott, Madison, and Jessamine Cos. around Lexington and you'll see what I mean.
Most importantly, Lexington people are either (a) faux-rich, snooty, and lack common manners, or (b) very hillbilly-acting, "rednecky" and still lacking decent manners. Either way, I've been to a slew of major metro areas and Lexington ranks toward the bottom of my list in terms of people. Louisville is more of a middle-class city without so many ladies trying to act and dress like Lindsay Lohan or guys trying to strut their inner Trace Adkins; Louisvillians are a little more down-to-earth.
Louisville has many more neighborhoods that are charming, and more charming at that, such as Cherokee Triangle, Highlands, Original Highlands, Old Louisville, Brownsboro Road, Crescent Hill, Clifton, and St. Matthews. Lexington can't replicate and has let its most historic portion become the less-than-adequate part of its city (I say that since Lexington doesn't really have but just one really bad area.)
There are billions of dollars of downtown development slated for downtown Louisville over the next ten years, whereas Lexington is about 6-7 years behind many other peer cities trying in even starting downtown development. The Muhammad Ali Center, Museum Plaza, riverfront area, condo development, and two more hotels are in the works for downtown Louisville. Lexington is still celebrating the opening of its UK Basketball Museum ten years ago!
Culture: Louisville has a vibrant arts scene, about the most active and alive of any city its size. The racial and ethnic diversity is very apparent, too. Lexington doesn't have its resident opera or symphony, but you can catch an occasional odd film at the Kentucky Theatre.
Industries: Louisville has a growing economy and four Fortune 500 HQs. Lexington is stagnant and only has Lexmark. The Louisville metro area is growing considerably faster in terms of population than Lexington's. Compare Oldham, Bullitt, and Shelby Cos. around Louisville to Scott, Madison, and Jessamine Cos. around Lexington and you'll see what I mean.
Most importantly, Lexington people are either (a) faux-rich, snooty, and lack common manners, or (b) very hillbilly-acting, "rednecky" and still lacking decent manners. Either way, I've been to a slew of major metro areas and Lexington ranks toward the bottom of my list in terms of people. Louisville is more of a middle-class city without so many ladies trying to act and dress like Lindsay Lohan or guys trying to strut their inner Trace Adkins; Louisvillians are a little more down-to-earth.
Wow JCM - you sound a little bitter about a few things!?!?!?!
The Louisville bias and Lexington bashing by some of the members of this board is out of control. Lexington is a very nice city. It is smaller than Louisville and thus will have less of an art scene, less quantity of charming neighborhoods, smaller downtown... That doesn't mean it is a bad city. It is kind of like saying Chicago is SO much better than Louisville because it has much more of all those things as well.
Lexington has a nice, compact downtown that I think is fairly vibrant for a city of its size. Charming downtown neighborhoods like Chevy Chase, Ashland, South Hill and Gratz Park offer a nice variety of older housing, newer townhomes and infill, nice parks, restaurnats and boutiques. UK's campus blends into downtown on its south side nicely, adding a vibrancy to the South Hill and Chevy Chase areas.
Louisville is nice as well, for all the reasons jcm mentioned. I think the biggest difference is a matter of scale and what a person prefers. One isn't "better" than the other.
The Louisville bias and Lexington bashing by some of the members of this board is out of control. Lexington is a very nice city. It is smaller than Louisville and thus will have less of an art scene, less quantity of charming neighborhoods, smaller downtown... That doesn't mean it is a bad city. It is kind of like saying Chicago is SO much better than Louisville because it has much more of all those things as well.
Lexington has a nice, compact downtown that I think is fairly vibrant for a city of its size. Charming downtown neighborhoods like Chevy Chase, Ashland, South Hill and Gratz Park offer a nice variety of older housing, newer townhomes and infill, nice parks, restaurnats and boutiques. UK's campus blends into downtown on its south side nicely, adding a vibrancy to the South Hill and Chevy Chase areas.
Louisville is nice as well, for all the reasons jcm mentioned. I think the biggest difference is a matter of scale and what a person prefers. One isn't "better" than the other.
Ditto that! If you're looking for sheer size and amount of offerings, you will be happier with Louisville. It is simply a larger city. However, for its smaller size, I think Lexington holds its own pretty well and has its own share of charm, arts, restaurants, etc...just on a smaller scale.
I moved two years ago from Chicago to Lexington because I wanted to try a small city and Lexington is a very nice example of one. If I wanted the big city experience I'd pass on Louisville and go back to Chicago.
Seems to me that Louisville is too big and too small at the same time, know what I mean?
Last edited by Irishtom29; 06-13-2008 at 11:18 AM..
Is Louisville like Chicago compared to Lexington? Of course. Is Lexington like Berea compared to Louisville? Sure.
Louisville has done amazing wonders with its arts, cultural, and diversity elements considering how its metro is no larger than Nashville's, Memphis', Birmingham's, or Greensboro. Just the words "Actors Theatre" completely annihilate the visual arts scenes in the other cities.
Lexington still has 260,000 people in its urban service area and is a regional center for a total of 1,000,000 people in central and eastern Kentucky and the best it can do is the occasional passing-through-town Broadway show. Lexington does have a nice array of restaurants, but even considering that Lexington is a city with a small town feel, it is very disappointing with regards to art museums, plays, and live concerts.
Louisville has done amazing wonders with its arts, cultural, and diversity elements considering how its metro is no larger than Nashville's, Memphis', Birmingham's, or Greensboro.
Yeah, those places are dumps.
Look, coming from Chicago I see Lexington as charming and approachable, with little traffic and crowding and friendly, liberal and open people. As many shops, coffee spots, used bookstores and such as I need. Laid back but not dead.
But Louisville? To me it's a third-rate big city with a big city's vices and damned few of it's virtues. If one is a yuppie or bobo wannabe you'd be better off to go to Chicago, get yourself a place in Wicker Park or Bucktown.
Look, coming from Chicago I see Lexington as charming and approachable, with little traffic and crowding and friendly, liberal and open people. As many shops, coffee spots, used bookstores and such as I need. Laid back but not dead.
Glad you like it in Lexington. It is a great city, even though a certain person on here keeps doggin it like it's something bad.
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.
