Another string of positive media stories on Cleveland (Columbus, Cincinnati: middle-class, section 8)

[WRnative]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

It's funny, I've thought many times about quitting my job and starting a Cleveland food truck here. I don't know if the name Cleveland would attract much, but the food certainly would. Cleveland is a brand that is just fundamentally misunderstood. But after people buy a Polish boy from me, they'll change their mind.

Boston natives that I've known in my lifetime wouldn't be caught dead eating at a "Cleveland" food truck.

[theurbanfiles]

I'll try and spread the word around to other people to help, and I will let you know. It's exciting to have something so local down here. In the general area, there is a Steel City Bar & Grill, a Casa Di Pizza (Buffalo Chain), Skyline Chili has a few spots, etc, so there's some precedence, though I'm not sure I've seen a Mom/Pop concept be so forward about its location roots, unless it's NYC, Chicago or Boston (and obvious ethnic food places, China House, etc.) Should be interesting.

[ZnGuy]

I'm curious if Clevelanders consider this story positive. Cleveland ranks 84th in U.S. News & World Report's annual Top 100 Best Places to Live | cleveland.com
I think a typical Clevelander could think it's positive that they made the list. I think the reality is it is not positive. What do you think?

[j_ws]

Even if it doesn't register as a positive, I don't think it's a negative by any means.

Neutral. I am neutral about this ranking. If anything it could be seen as a motivator to improve.

I'm shocked that Harrisburg, PA ranked so high (34?!?!?) and Philadelphia so low (77). Allentown, PA is 79.

So, overall, these rankings are according to one metric and obviously lack the type of anecdotal details and experiences that really define living in a place.

As for Allentown, it's definitely a cool little city in terms of how dense and well-preserved it is, as it never had a population decline and therefore no large-scale abandonment. I really do appreciate the place. That being said, there isn't a ton of culture. They've started developing a better local art scene, and the Lehigh Valley has some ~decent~ bars, but a 2AM trip to the airport Denny's is still a trending activity on the list of "what the hell can we do right now?"

Life in Harrisbug isn't any better.

So I think these lists really differ for each demographic. This list is probably tailored to families and would not look the same if you were to adjust it for a different age group, income level, etc.

[WRnative]

Originally Posted by ZnGuy

I'm curious if Clevelanders consider this story positive. Cleveland ranks 84th in U.S. News & World Report's annual Top 100 Best Places to Live | cleveland.com
I think a typical Clevelander could think it's positive that they made the list. I think the reality is it is not positive. What do you think?

For those interested in quality of cultural institutions, parks (Cincinnati proper clearly has better neighborhood parks than Cleveland proper), mass transit and professional sports, nobody would choose Columbus, Toledo and Dayton over Cleveland. These three cities also are inferior to Cleveland in healthcare institutions. These same factors collectively would weight Cleveland well above most of the cities in the rankings.

Without spending much time analyzing the components of these ratings, it's hard to evaluate the merits of the ratings. I would note that 25 percent of the ratings is based on "desirability" and "net migration," factors with little bearing on the quality of life for existing residents, but which clearly are negatives for the Cleveland metro.

The "desirability" index arguably is a pooling of ignorance, yet is 15 percent of the composite rating:

<<
The Desirability Index measures whether or not people want to live in a given metro area. To determine this, we asked people from all over the country to tell us where they'd prefer to live.

• Desirability Survey: Using Google Consumer Survey, we polled people across the country to find out in which of the ranked metro areas they would most like to live. The metro areas were then ranked according to the percentage of the total votes they received.>>

http://realestate.usnews.com/places/methodology


I would like to see how badly this one factor hurt Cleveland in these rankings.

[j_ws]

Originally Posted by WRnative

The "desirability" index arguably is a pooling of ignorance, yet is 15 percent of the composite rating:

[bjimmy24]

Boston is #8. I can speak from 4+ years of experience, it's fine but not that great.

[andrew61]

Originally Posted by WRnative

For those interested in quality of cultural institutions, parks (Cincinnati proper clearly has better neighborhood parks than Cleveland proper), mass transit and professional sports, nobody would choose Columbus, Toledo and Dayton over Cleveland. These three cities also are inferior to Cleveland in healthcare institutions. These same factors collectively would weight Cleveland well above most of the cities in the rankings.

According to the article, the reason Cleveland scored so low was because of the job market here. It goes with what I've been saying about the region being economically depressed. All those cultural institutions and other attractions Cleveland boasts are all well and good, but are of little use in attracting new residents if one can't find a suitable job here.

I was perusing the 2017 World Almanac the other day, in particular the U.S. Population section. According to the 2015 Census estimates, if they are to be believed, Columbus has now topped 800,000 population in the city proper while Cleveland has slipped to 388,000. Cleveland, which was the fifth-largest U.S. city when my parents were kids, has now fallen out of the top 50, sadly. Worse still, the metro area as a whole has fallen out of the top 30.

I guess all those cultural institutions Cleveland has over many other cities aren't helping.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by andrew61

According to the article, the reason Cleveland scored so low was because of the job market here. It goes with what I've been saying about the region being economically depressed. All those cultural institutions and other attractions Cleveland boasts are all well and good, but are of little use in attracting new residents if one can't find a suitable job here.

I was perusing the 2017 World Almanac the other day, in particular the U.S. Population section. According to the 2015 Census estimates, if they are to be believed, Columbus has now topped 800,000 population in the city proper while Cleveland has slipped to 388,000. Cleveland, which was the fifth-largest U.S. city when my parents were kids, has now fallen out of the top 50, sadly. Worse still, the metro area as a whole has fallen out of the top 30.

I guess all those cultural institutions Cleveland has over many other cities aren't helping.

Well, Cbus borders are huge and it helps to be able to relocate all the state's money to your city and create bureaucracies that hire more people every year.

FOr the record, the only census where Cleveland was #5 was in 1920. That is 100 years ago. So I don't really think about that too much. The population of the USA was 1/3 what it is today. Cleveland's population at the time was under 800,000. 800k back then was good for number 5. 800k today... #18. People started moving west and south. Cleveland MSA is 1 million people larger today than in 1920 as well.

Even if you take CLE's max census population, 915k, that only gets you to 12 today. There are also 400k more people in the CLE msa today than at that time in 1950.

I get the overarching point, that I too bemoan the loss of a truly urban Cleveland with a lot of jobs that attracted people from all over the country and world. Its politicians have certainly held the city back. People aren't opposed to living and working in cold, gray places. People are moving into Minneapolis, Boston, NYC, Philly afterall.

[j_ws]

Originally Posted by andrew61

I guess all those cultural institutions Cleveland has over many other cities aren't helping.

They probably are.

Cleveland has a weak job market, but the cultural scene is a huge component in retaining what we can. There are a lot of people in my demographic that are staying longer because of what the city does have to offer.

I probably wouldn't be as committed to the city if there weren't this high level of cultural complexity. Columbus is definitely a much healthier city, but I believe they also do have a much larger metropolitan area and therefore the difference between Cleveland and Columbus might not be as disparate as is initially appears (though yes, the trends you're referencing are accurate).

Cleveland is not going to be the city it was when you're parents were kids. That's not in the cards and I think it's problematic to try and hold the city to the standard of a midcentury industrial center because that world no longer exists. Cleveland's rate of population loss has slowed and if we can get it to plateau and then maybe see slight, incremental increases that is good for the city. Ultimately, Cleveland needs to embrace a "smart shrinkage" mentality and plan for a future city that is smaller, denser, and based on the industries we do have (healthcare, biomedical tech, etc.). There are a growing number of entities that really capitalize on the intersection of technology and social movements and if the city can really grow these industries in the right way then we could really establish a unique, noted reputation. There is definitely a regional aspect, too, and I think a sort of complacency inherent to the regional mindset also needs to change before we see healthy growth.