This is my first post, so forgive me if I repeat anything that has already said. My wife is from Pittsburgh and I graduated from Pitt, so I feel I can add a to the discussion. Pittsburgh has some very nice neighborhoods. Some of these neighborhoods are vibrant and dense. However, I think Pittsburgh benefits from its geography. To a certain extent, Cleveland is disadvantaged by its geography. This is why I always hated the Cleveland/Pittsburgh comparison because the two cities are really different. First, some of these Pittsburgh neighborhoods (Squirrel Hill and Shady Side) never experienced the decline seen in most Cleveland neighborhoods. Essentially, Cleveland had to start from scratch in neighborhoods like OC and Tremont. From my understanding, Squirrel Hill and Shadyside never saw the sharp decline OC and Tremont experienced thirty years ago. Also, Cleveland is flat and very accessible. We built extensive freeways that made it easy to get in and out of the city. Pittsburgh does not have an extensive freeway system. The Parkway is the only freeway that truly cuts through the city (279 does run through the city, but is more extensive on the north side of town). Cleveland’s suburban development is more extensive than Pittsburgh’s. Exiting Clevelanders had a plethora of suburban options. You could move to Shaker or Cleveland Hts, Westlake, Bay Village, Mayfield Hts, Parma, Euclid, Beachwood, Maple Hts, Strongsville or Solon. Pittsburgh on the other hand, is limited by its topography, reducing the number of suburban options. Urban sprawl in Pittsburgh is not as pronounced as it is in Cleveland.
Squirrel Hill is Pittsburgh's Shaker or Cleveland Hts. When Pittsburghers looked to move out the city in the 50’s and 60’s, their options were limited. Therefore, Squirrel Hill and Shady Side stayed the same because there were few suburbs that offered that type of housing. Cleveland has several suburbs that offer “Squirrel Hill” type of housing. Finally, my mother-in-law has told me stories of how dense Pittsburgh was in the 50's and 60's. The city of Pittsburgh is roughly 55 square miles. In 1950, there were almost 700,000 people in 55 square miles. Cleveland is 77 square miles, at its peak there was 900,000 people in the city of Cleveland. I didn't do the math, but from a quick glance, Pittsburgh was denser than Cleveland was at its peak. Therefore, some of that density still exists today in several Pittsburgh neighborhoods. This does not mean we can’t learn from Pittsburgh. I think Pittsburgh has a few more natural advantages that helps keep some neighborhoods in the city vibrant.