Look, I'll come right out and say that the aggressive nature of my post wasn't called for. It's no excuse, but I guess I was looking for a fight after a rough day at work (and a few post-work drinks) and your post happened to be the first thing I came across.
Still, my points stand...
Of the three pictures you posted on google streetview, one looks nice, the other two are nothing to look twice at. a CVS drugstore? really? Park Street in Portland, State Street in Portland, Vaughn Street in Portland, Congress Street even, Exchange, Middle, all of these streets look equal to (if not better) than the images you posted.
Like I said in my last post, streetview is a terrible way to get a feel for an area. I was simply posting those pictures to show that it's not as run-down as the impression you got from your first look. As for the CVS, like I also said in my last post, there is no streetview in Wayland Square and that image was a capture from outside of it.
Exchange, Congress and Middle Streets are the most urban streets in the core of Portland (Middle Street for a few small blocks is very nice). The three images I posted earlier were neighborhoods OUTSIDE of downtown Providence. Your comparisons to the three main streets in the center of Portland emphasize the point I was trying to make... that Providences outlying neighborhoods have real (albeit small) urban centers (btw, I didn't even mention
Atwells Avenue on Federal Hill) with shops, restaurants and all sorts of other attractions all located OUTSIDE of the dense, urban core of the city. These neighborhood centers act as downtowns for their neighborhood. Portland has nothing even close to this. Downtown Portland is the only neighborhood center in the city (the whole state, really).
By the way, your comparisons in Portland show how little you really do know about Providence. Those areas and the areas you compared them to in Providence are really nothing alike. Not even close.
I also have to point out that you love providence for how urban it is, but say that its best parts are the historic (and more quaint) districts that are more like the cities you referred to as mere "weekend getaways" earlier.
You missed my point. My point was that outside of the very urban core, there are smaller mixed-use urban pockets. In Portland, the ONLY destination is downtown. In Providence, that's not the case. Sure, downtown is the biggest for shopping, dining, nightlife, etc; but it's not the ONLY option. The great thing about Providence is that I can live in a "quaint" historic neighborhood like College Hill or Federal Hill and have a "downtown" area in my neighborhood with all sorts of shops, restaurants, bars, etc that can keep me occupied until I want to go downtown for the bigger city amenities and atmosphere. There's nothing even close to that in Portland. Downtown is the "neighborhood center" for the whole city. Providence has the best of both worlds while Portland has just the quaint little downtown area (it's VERY nice, but it's all there is... no other options).
That being said, I think the following quote accurately depicts what I have most likely been exposed to in Providence:
You are right.
And you experienced one of the biggest problems with Providence which probably tainted your view. My whole point is that you really missed a ton of the city and subsequently are basing your opinion on very little in the way of what actually exists in Providence. Forget about the disclaimer comment in here, it doesn't negate the rest of your post (all I can think about is in dumb and dumber when Lloyd says, "Man! You are one pathetic loser! No offense."), you DID crap on Providence and did so with insufficient exposure:
Providence is full of a lot of dumpy wasteland. I don't mean to crap on it, because I know it is the so-called renaissance city of new england, and it has gotten better (and has some pretty nice parts to it, too) but as an overall place the city has a LONG way to go before it is a nice place to be in general.
Back to my original question... Where is all of this "dumpy wasteland?" You say that you don't know the city well, but you apparently know that there is a lot of wasteland. Sure, there are some bad spots (this site of this proposal on the working waterfront being one), but, "full of a lot of dumpy wasteland?" Really? Where? Also, given your limited exposure, how are you qualified to judge whether or not it's a "nice place to be in general?"
And, again, with the pissing match between Portland and other cities, if that's what you feel you need to make this into, you gotta ease up. But I'll indulge you for now. I like Portland a lot, because I am from here, but I am under no delusion that it is some rival of Boston.
It wasn't intended to be a pissing contest. It was brought up to use as a common reference point (we're both familiar with Portland) in a discussion about Providence. I can see where you would think that's what I was aiming for by the tone of my last two posts, but that's not the case.
That being said, I'd like to ask this question. If you like Portland and dislike Providence and I know you're an urban enthusiast like me, what URBAN aspects does Providence lack (that keep it from being a "nice place in general") that Portland has (that add to your enjoyment of it)? I'm curious because I can't think of anything in that regard.
Also, you said that Providence compares well to others in its class? You have to be kidding. It has one of the highest poverty and crime rates per capita of a city that size in the country.
Yup, that's another thing that Providence needs to work on. It's not perfect. When you look at per capita crime, you're looking at the specific city population, not the urbanized area or metro area. You're smart enough to know that Providence's urban area stretches FAR beyond the city limits (to include nearly 10x the population that lives IN the city limits). It's not the same as most cities around 180,000 because Providence is a MUCH larger city than that. It's crime rate isn't that bad either; I don't know where you're getting your data. of the 332 cities compiled
in this list using 2008 FBI crime data, Providence ranks 205. By the way, #1 is the worst (highest crime) and #332 is the best. Providence is in the better half of cities in the nation in terms of crime. Does it need work, yes. Is it really bad? Not at all.
Like crime, the poverty is very isolated too. It's not rampant across the city. There are neighborhoods to avoid (generally crime and poverty are hand in hand), but the vast majority are quite safe.
So, again, compare it to similarly sized cities and you'll see that Providence will be among the best in most categories. Would you really want to live in Jacksonville, Indianapolis, Columbus, Orlando, Buffalo, Louisville, or Hartford over Providence? Do you really think all of those cities are better all around than Providence? No. Freakin'. Way.
And it is and old industrial city. In fact, its one of the first cities in the United States to industrialize. This isn't changed or made a misstatement of fact by the fact that it existed before the industrial revolution. You can't possibly not understand this point.
Yes, Industry played a major role in Providence's growth. However, Providence was a functioning, growing and in many ways, thriving city long before industry moved in. The result is that the core of Providence and many of it's neighborhoods were created and came to be what they are before industry existed in Providence. Much of the industry that DID develop in PVD actually developed outside the city (see: Pawtucket). Providence's downtown area and MOST of the adjacent neighborhoods were there before there ever was industry in the area. So, like I said, Providence is a old colonial port city first and foremost. Industry came later and much of it was outside of the city itself. You can't possibly not understand that point.
If providence isn't an old industrial city, what on earth is?
For starters? Lawrence or Lowell MA. Fall River, MA. Lewiston, ME. Buffalo, NY. Cleveland, Ohio. I could go on, but you get the point. Those cities came from essentially nothing (maybe a small trade post, but mostly just good riverfront/lakefront land) and were developed specifically for industrial purposes. If you know anything about Providence's history you know that's not the case. Industry played a role in the area's development, but Providence is certainly not an old industrial city. Not by a long shot. By your logic, Rome is a medieval city. Sure, it's history goes centuries beyond that, but the medieval era played a role in shaping it so therefore it is a medieval city. Providence was a growing and functioning city for centuries before the industrial age. If you really experienced Providence, the proof of that would be all around you.
You said Portland is a larger than average tourist town? Providence is a larger than average mill city.
Now you're reaching. Again, Providence was around LONG before there were any mills in the area.
Portland, by the way, only recently became known for being a tourist destination, and much to the chagrin of its inhabitants. For most of its history (if you knew anything about it) it has been as hard working and "city minded" as anywhere in new england, albeit with fewer residents for obvious reasons. The thing is, this "touristy" label was applied after the fact, long after Portland built itself as a self sufficient seaport and industrial base. People on their ways up the coast stop in Portland because its the only thing close to providing some semblance of what they are used to in larger cities. So, ironically, it was portland's urbanity that stopped its urban development (once the tourists discovered it, they froze it in time).
.
I could say the same thing about Burlington, Portsmouth or even Gloucester, MA. Like Portland, they are all very small cities that were "hard working" before tourism started to grow. Like Portland, they have small pockets of urbanity that are quirky, quaint and picturesque. The quaint, quirky and picturesque aspects of these cities is what draws tourists. Read any travel review (not local) about Portland and the raves are about the quiet, quaint streets of the Old Port and the picturesque scenery. I'm not going to say that Portland isn't urban at all... It is in pockets (but again, so is Gloucester), but the draw to Portland is not it's urbanity. In fact, much of the draw of Portland is that it has some urban amenities in an area that looks and feels like a small/mid-size town. When I was in Portland, the only people talking about the "city" aspects of it were Mainers and some other Northern New Englanders. Those from outside of Northern New England who moved there often raved about how it was so "cute," or how it was so quiet and not crowded. I understand that it's the only city in Maine and that clearly influences the view the locals have on it. Still, Maine's one of the most rural states in the Country and Portland's one of the most rural metro areas.
To take it one further, the fact that tourists HALTED the "urban growth" in Portland further supports my point that it's a tourist town. If the urban aspect of Portland was really the draw for those tourists, then the city should have no trouble continuing the urban growth, right? The thing is, the city thinks that "urban growth" (even small scale in Portland) will detract from the "cuteness" and "quaintness" that the tourists are drawn to in Portland. Ask anyone outside of Maine considering a visit to Maine just how high up an "urban experience" ranks on their reasons for visiting.
Interesting. You might like to know that, according to the U.S. census site, Portland has a pocket (in the west end) that is denser (more people per square mile) than anything in Providence. True, its probably only a few blocks in scope, but its difficult to reconcile this with your statement that Portland isn't "city" enough. What does that even mean?
You got me! That tiny chunk of the West End that, when viewed separate from the context of the city is denser than anything in Providence (love to see the actual link, by the way) proves that Portland is a real "urban" area. Come on, dude. Seriously? Every one with half a clue knows that Providence is a MUCH larger, MUCH more dense city (as a whole, not a two-block chunk of one neighborhood) than Portland. It also has far more in the way of urban amenities than Portland could ever dream of. I know you can't deny that (but you'll probably try anyway).
For some reason you were drawn to a community college in this place, spent most of your time there, saw downtown and said its too small, and formed your opinion just as fast as I did about Providence.
I went to USM. In Portland. Not a community college. Was that an attempt at a knock on my college education? I went because it was cheap (cheaper than in-state MA tuition), I wanted to try to live somewhere else for a bit and my girlfriend happened to live there. I'm glad I did. I didn't like Portland, but I wouldn't have known that had I not tried.
Ah, so you spent four years living in various neighborhoods in Providence, working there, and getting an education there? Good. Then we may have equal experience between these two cities. I lived in the West End, Parkside and the "Arts District." I think I may have seen/experienced more of Portland than you did of Providence. I've established before why I didn't like it so I don't need to get into it again. In short, I found that it was a boring place for a 20-something and it was FAR too small. I'm hardly in the minority when I say I feel that way. Most of my classmates (except the hardcore, life-long Mainers) have left by choice (not just because of jobs, either) and one of the biggest complaints I hear about Portland is that it's lame for 20-somethings unless you A) Hate city living or B) love the outdoors (or both). You grew up there and that plays a big role in your passion for it. I didn't have that attachment and there was nothing else keeping me there. My girlfriend now lives in San Francisco as she, too couldn't wait to leave. Her sister is moving to Providence (of all places). It's a good fit for some people, but it's a tough place for a 20-something craving the city life. Portland just doesn't offer that.
I'm not saying and never have said I don't like Portland. I actually do. I just couldn't stand living there. I like visiting it like I enjoy visiting Newport, RI, Provincetown, MA, Bethel, ME, etc.
Man, this could be a quote from me to you, regarding Providence compared to Portland. It sums up the illogicality of your arguments the whole way.
Oh, you really missed my point. My whole beef with Portland is that it's too small. I think the few "city" aspects of Portland are hyped up to nearly astronomical levels by locals so that the reality rarely matches the hype. I couldn't stand that locals (Not you, I know you're playing Devil's Advocate here in many respects) love to act as if Portland is the be all and end all when it comes to an urban environment (I've said all along, Portland is a larger than average tourist town and a very good one at that. The only reason I brought Portland up at all is for familiarity. There is no comparison to Providence and Portland. I didn't ever "expect" Portland to have what Providence does (it doesn't, not even close)... I just expected Portland to live up to some of the local hype in many areas and it didn't. It's great for what it is, and that's a very small city. I don't care to live in a very small city. I will visit when I need a weekend away though.
and, I don't think its like saying NYC is just up the road from Boston (in comparison to what I said regarding Boston being close by to Providence) because I would rather be in Boston any day over NYC. Its not all size relevant.
Yes, but this contradicts your previous point that you can't compare two vastly differently sized cities. Boston may be as big as you care for and that's fine. Still, Providence doesn't have what Boston has mainly because it's a hell of a lot smaller. That's what I was challenging.
As I said earlier, perhaps you are right and I should reserve judgment. However, that still doesn't justify your awkwardly defensive attitude about the city, and because the whole reason I visit this site is to discuss these things, I won't reserve judgment. A great city should be self evident; one shouldn't have to go "searching" or looking for pockets of good urbanity. Also, If it's as great as you say, I'm sure its reputation isn't tied to the outcome of this petty dispute.
I've already said there's no excuse for the defensiveness. Tough day, that's all. I apologize for the tone (not the debate) as it was uncalled for. You're right to call me out on it. There was no need for it.
Discussion is fine. You just took an opportunity to make an (ill informed) remark on how "bad" you think Providence is. You sugar-coated it by adding the oddly contradictory, "I don't mean to crap on PVD," but followed it up by, well... crapping on PVD. You
did reserve judgement without getting a good feel for the city.
A great city is self-evident. If you head to downtown Providence, the urban center and focal point of the city, you'll see that in the architecture, shopping streets, restaurants, beautiful river walk and evidence of modern growth (new buildings everywhere) combined with historic prominence (the aforementioned great architecture). If you venture just outside of downtown you'll find Federal Hill, College Hill, Wickendon St. Benefit St. South Main, etc. No, you don't have to search; but you do have to open your eyes. It's easier to "see" what's great about Portland as it's all isolated in a tiny little pocket right around a tiny little downtown area. Providence, being larger, is more spread out. So once you leave the downtown and vicinity, you DO have to look for those neighborhoods. How many visitors just "stumble" into great neighborhoods in Brooklyn or Boston's outer neighborhood centers? That's not a problem in Portland because there are no neighborhood centers outside the city center. If I just saw Bayside, Deering, North Deering, Riverton, Oakdale, Most of the East End off of the Promenade, Stroudwater, the Eastern Waterfront, or the awkward vacant lots adjacent to the Old Port, I wouldn't be impressed with Portland either.
