Rustbelter

Man, they could have just as easily written this about San Francisco, except instead of rents going up 20%, they doubled and tripled. Though like all trend-setting places filled with 20-something millionaires lacking social grace, SF is clearly entering a post-hipster phase (basically an even worse version of the hipsters in the rest of the country- makes Brooklyn look like Greek Life by comparison). The Mission District is the worst of the 1% and worst of hipsterdom blended together in a $10 cage-free hops, gluten-free barley craft beer that might as well be skunked Tecate. Currently Berlin is the hipster/bohemian capital of the western world. It's not nearly as yuppie or expensive as SF, and when I was there it looked like Berlin's creative class produced real art. I didn't get a trust-fund type of vibe from the place. Really, it's hard to compare Berlin to SF since they are so different and Berlin has a very unique history as to how got to where it is today.

It would not be ideal for commuting, but I think it's the best compromise that will still allow you access to trendy areas of the city. That will be important if you're moving from out of the area. Also, Jefferson Park is fairly urban and does have some bars you could walk to. In Chicago the young professional scene is very much concentrated within the neighborhoods that are closer to downtown. It's not like Cleveland where people will travel to various areas of the metro area to socialize. Arlington Heights is known for being more of a nightlife destination than Palintine. That is why I suggested Arlington Heights. My girlfriend is from Chicago's northwest suburbs, and I'm from northeast Ohio but now live in Chicago. If you have anymore questions let me know.

Hoffman Estates is pretty far away from any urban life and commuting there from most of the city would be hell. I agree that Arlington Heights is your best bet for nearby suburbs, but it's not going to be the greatest. It does have a decent downtown area though. It will probably put you within a 20 min. commute. Do not move to Elgin, it's a pretty undesirable city. One area I would check out in the city is Jefferson Park. It's blue collar and not trendy, but it is located off the Blue line which will easily take you to trandy areas to hang out in (e.g. Wicker Park, Logan Square, Downtown). That said, your commute from there may still be close to an hour but it might be worth it to have better access to the city. Edison Park was mentioned above but it's not directly off the Blue Line or highway. Just look on Craigslist for apartments.

No, I can't. It's only second-hand info from a friend of mine from Ireland who has been trying to get a job in the U.S. His brother got a job in Chicago at a major real estate firm that prefers hiring immigrants and is willing to the eat the costs of doing so. They also have a strong Irish-American Network chapter in Chicago which helps in settling Irish there. I have decided to help get one started here in Cleveland. But that's just one ethnic group. Other networks need to be established. I don't know if that's happened or is happening. I work in the Chicago technical/white collar world and I suspect that in most cases where immigrants are hired for white collar work it's because they will work for less money. Most immigrants in Chicago do blue collar jobs (with the exception of union/tradesmen positions which are taken by the locals). I don't think Cleveland really needs immigrants to fill its blue collar workforce like Chicago does since it has a lower cost of living. The immigrants in Chicago are filling in the void that was once occupied by working class locals who won't work at the current wage rates. In Cleveland the working class locals can still get by with an acceptable standard of living. Unfortunately Cleveland's working class has moved to the suburbs over the years and left vacant city neighborhoods behind.

I'm not sure of the logistics of these fests, but in Chicago where I live they usually charge to get into neighborhood street fests and have controlled access points for entrance. I have never seen any of these problems in Chicago at neighborhood fests, and obviously Chicago has many of the same issues with ignorant urban youths that cause problems. The entry fee is usually $5 to $10 depending on the fest. However, there are often problems in Chicago at the larger fests that take place downtown where anyone can get in. There were also problems this year at Chicago's pride parade, which is not contained and has become a huge event comparable in numbers to larger downtown events. Also, I think it depends on the nature of the fest. I don't here about this kind of thing happening at the Feast in Little Italy or the fests in Tremont. Why is that?

CHUD is back in Cleveland!

In Chicago the hipster bars are usually pretty chill, although there are a couple that can be a bit much. The most annoying bars in Chicago are by far the fratty/bro bars in Lincoln Park and Lakeview or the scenester bars in River North. Never really had any issues with annoying hipsters in Cleveland either.

Not to mention that if the West Shore Commuter Rail ever comes to fruition you would have this GFS located where prime TOD should be.

C-Dawg will really love this one! Hipsters on food stamps They're young, they're broke, and they pay for organic salmon with government subsidies. Got a problem with that? By Jennifer Bleyer http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/hipsters_food_stamps_pinched/

That Gordan Market layout is awful! Is it really that difficult to build up to the street? I'm sure it would not cost any more to develop the site in such a manner. It's like no thought at all was put into the context of its surroundings.

The residential plans shown above for 3700 Lorain show that this area is becoming more viable for better development than a half-way house or a McDonald's.

As a libertarian-minded person I would think that demand for public transit would rise if the true cost of driving was actually paid by drivers. Also, it is much more cost effective to build in an urban, pedestrian oriented model since you have more people to support less miles of infrastructure and can provide more efficient transportation options (nothing is cheaper than biking or walking). The problem is that things have become so convoluted due to our auto-dependance and the push towards suburbanization. Another problem is that doing work in urban cores often requires more bureaucracy than its outlying communities. All things that are a result of government intervening too much IMO. Here are some articles about anti-sprawl/pro transit from a fiscal conservation viewpoint. http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2012/09/fiscal-conservatives-case-against-sprawl/3311/ http://works.bepress.com/lewyn/28/ http://www.theamericanconservative.com/sorry-but-when-i-said-vast-i-really-meant-vast/ http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2011/07/3379/

The problem with the 90s momentum was that not enough residential development was built to go along with the Flats scene and other big projects that where happening downtown. Not sure why this aspect was missed during that time though. Was it lack of vision by the local government and developers? Did people just not see downtown and the surrounding areas as a viable place for living? During that time period I was in college and did see downtown as a party and entertainment spot, but did not think much about living there or even know if it was a viable option to do so. This was of course before I discovered the merits of urban living. Your comments about crime and the decline of Tower City are valid, but a larger residential population in these areas would deter the criminal element due to the "eyes on the street" factor. It would also create a demand for shopping downtown and could have kept Tower City going strong after the novelty wore off to the suburbanites. Critical mass is the key. Unfortunately residential development has only become an initiative in recent years, when really this should have been happening more in the early 90s. I agree. Cleveland's main competition is other cities, not its suburbs. I don't think many people get that. Read Cleveland.com and the #1 thing people on there claim as the silver bullet for Cleveland's problems is fixing the schools. Never mind that just about every large city in the US has crap schools. Not saying the schools should be ignored, but I'm just pointing out that to many people from the suburbs the way to fix Cleveland is to make it more suburban. Not sure I would ignore suburbanites all together though. The younger ones looking for more out of life and retirees looking to down-size should be made aware that an urban lifestyle can be better than a suburban lifestyle for them. Improved schools and safety will be a by-product once communities are revitalized.

^^^ One thing about Montreal is there is a good mix of families, blue collar folks, and hipsters in many neighborhoods. Unlike in the US where you have the trendy urban professional neighborhoods vs. the ghetto neighborhoods vs. the immigrant neighborhoods vs. the old blue collar neighborhoods. Yeah, there are certainly neighborhoods that are trendy and are immigrant heavy but you don't see the polarization of good and bad areas that you see in US cities. I doubt Montreal really has any truly bad areas by US standards, just areas that are less trendy than others and poorer. And even those lesser neighborhoods have good functioning urban amenities.

Nice photos! I also went to Montreal over the summer and had a great time. After NYC it's my favorite North American city and it also has what I think is the second best transit system after NYC's. The Plateau is an amazing neighborhood for sure and seems pretty much ideal to me. It has some gentrification along St. Laurent Blvd for sure, but for the most part I thought it was pretty authentic with a good mix of trendiness and old school charm. It's certainly not as gentrified as what I have seen in other cities. That place is good but it's no Slyman's!

I would like to see the West/Detroit area built up with TOD as well, but given the street width and traffic flow I don't think it will be an easy task or an easy sell to the community. Sadly this intersection has been screwed up by accommodating the automobile, and I'm sure there would be opposition to narrowing Detroit Ave and slowing down traffic. The West Blvd stop also does not flow very well into the surrounding neighborhoods due to the railroad and street layouts. I would bet the West Blvd stop was put there because it was a cheap place to put it and it could accommodated parking and bus connections. W. 85th and Madison on the other hand blends right into an existing residential neighborhood and it would make for a very good pedestrian corridor (some commercial buildings already exist here). I know there is the cost of building a new Red Line stop here, but if you're going to restructure the West/Detroit intersection to make it TOD then it would also require a new station to make it more pedestrian oriented. Anyway, I think both of these stations could be justifiable since they're about 1/2 mile apart which is pretty typical for urban rail station spacing. I'm not saying that the West Blvd station should go away.

Very True. Even cities considered "healthy" have few middle class families because of poor urban schools. Middle class people just can't afford the desired space along with private schools in our select few good urban districts. This is just part of the sad state that many of our urban areas have become. What you generally have left in urban areas is a relatively small amount of upper class people who can send their kids to privates, with the majority of families being lower income who are stuck with poor quality inner-city schools. It will be a long process to change this in any city. For now I think cities must focus on those trendy areas, which will slowly lead to city-wide improvements via tax revenues, safety, and attracting business. And out of those areas you will get a handful who are willing to raise families in an urban setting and begin the process of improving those urban schools.

The north Cudell area is definitely a rough spot that needs to be redeveloped in order for the west side neighborhoods to attain some cohesiveness. Right now this area is basically a pocket of ghetto between the the stable Lakewood/Edgewater area and the up-and-coming Detroit-Shoreway area. I think it will take some larger scale developments with vision to turn this area around since people and businesses will have more confidence in numbers. Some Battery Park type infill in the triangle shaped area located south of Detroit, north of the RTA tracks, and west of 85th Street would be a good start. Taking things a step further, I would really like to see a new Red Line stop at 85th Street just north of Madison along with new mixed used buildings and townhomes (built along and north of Madison between W 98th and W. 65th). This would be a great TOD spot! Unfortunately I doubt this is something I will ever see happen, nor is it something the City of Cleveland and the RTA would have the vision to proactively explore.

Pittsburgh has many other healthy neighborhoods with urban density though, such as Bloomfield, Friendship, South Side Flats, Oakland, Polish Hill, Lawrenceville, Morningside, Mexican War Streets, and Regent Square. Not to mention that Pittsburgh has a few of its own urban suburbs such as Millvale, Sharpsburg, and Aspinwall. I know with Cleveland you have to throw Little Italy, Tremont, Ohio City, University Circle and Edgewater into the mix, but I think Pittsburgh has the edge when it comes to livable urban neighborhoods. Pittsburgh also has the advantage of them being within closer proximity to each other rather than having the doughnut hole effect that Cleveland has. People who visit Pittsburgh are likely to venture to these areas since they're closer to the urban core. Visitors coming to Cleveland are not going to be heading off to Lakewood and Cleveland Heights, where much of Cleveland's best urbanism exists, because they're off the beaten path. I think this has a lot to do with the perception of these cities.

So is anyone with authority making sure this is brought to the forefront of discussion? I have a feeling this aspect will be totally ignored.

I think this is as big of an issue as it pertains to downtown retail as the actual downtown population, and is an obvious problem for Cleveland. In fact I might say that this is Cleveland's biggest problem. The cities that are relatively similar to Cleveland's metro size, which do have the type of retail we would like to see in Cleveland, not only have a more robust downtown population but also have healthy neighborhoods that are directly adjacent to downtown. Aside from downtown residential infill, Cleveland is in serious need of more infill in the Flats and in the area between E. 30th and E 55th. The near west side neighborhoods must continue to develop more as well. Because of this I think Cleveland needs to have a larger downtown population than other similar places to compensate for the "donut hole" type areas that exist.

Portland is not cheap. Yes, it's the cheapest city on the West Coast but still much more expensive than any of Ohio's cities.

I actually like that the buildings proposed for the Flats East Bank are not right on the water because it opens up the riverfront to the public more. And isn't that one of Cleveland's biggest development issues? I know about those new buildings in Milwaukee that you're referring too, and I think they form a barrier between the public and the riverfront. That being said, I do think developments like those along the river in Milwaukee would be suitable for some other areas in Cleveland; such as along Old River Road to the south of the Shoreway and along Columbus Road.

Perhaps. Many towns like Chagrin Falls or Vermillion have benefited by becoming commuter towns. Others like Lorain have become dumps. In Ashtabula County the best town is Geneva, which may benefit from being closer to the jobs in Lake County. Geneva, along with Geneva-on-the-Lake, are the only areas in Ashtabula County that have improved during my lifetime. Although neither of these towns had industrial and shipping economies like Ashtabula and Conneaut. This is certainly the case with some towns, but there also some ghetto towns around those cities for sure. Newburgh, NY for instance is horrible. There are also fine towns in NY and PA that are in the middle of nowhere. Well there are some, with Chagrin Falls and Hudson being the most notable I think. Unless you're talking about towns outside of the metro area; then I would tend to agree. Although Geneva-on-the-Lake certainly has its charms! Actually one town that I always thought was under rated is Fairport Harbor. It's a nice town, but given its character and location you would think it should be more of a hot-spot. I suppose it's also probably considered a Cleveland suburb though. Yes, the Mall was awful for Ashtabula. Back in the 80s Ashtabula actually had a decent downtown but now it's a ghost town. Once the manufacturing left Ashtabula and Conneaut those towns really went downhill, and they did not do anything to try and reinvent themselves. I think Conneaut could actually be a nice tourist town in the mold of what you see in Michigan. It still has good bones and has one of the largest beaches on Lake Erie; although that would require a large influx of money and I don't know where that would come from. One thing I noticed about many of the nicer small towns I have been to is that they don't sprawl much. This is certainly not the case in Ashtabula. One very nice town in PA that is not too far away from NE Ohio is Warren, PA. I can't find any real reason why Warren should be so much nicer than what you find 50 miles to the west? Maybe in some instances this just comes down to people in Ohio (or elsewhere) not valuing their older communities?

That's what i was thinking. The concerns in that article are the last thing Cleveland needs to worry about. Much of Ohio City still has commercial areas that are in serious need of revitalization and infill. I think this article kind of shows that people in Cleveland are not used to seeing serious gentrification and rapid construction that you see in other cities where "sterilization" is a legitimate concern.