ohpenn

Every city hs the same issues with the Census. Sure some more than others. I think the estimates got way off track because of countless condos being built but sit there empty and the area benefitted from significant in migration that crashed hard with the recession and housing bust. There is no way the city could have grown in the fashion that the estimates had to begin with.

Well that’s not really true. People are leaving certain areas in droves. We all knew that Detroit had been hard hit when the auto industry really hit hard times in recent years – combine that with long term issues and the worst economic crisis since the Depression and well, it just wasn’t going to be good for Detroit, or a lot of Michigan and Ohio with similar economies. But as we all know, Columbus, Indy, the Twin Cities are doing well. Chicago may have suffered within the city, but the metro is fine and will continue to be. Some smaller metros are doing well too. This is not to downplay some serious issues and clearly Michigan and Ohio in particular have major problems Obviously some cities in these states are not considered “rust belt” but they are part of rust belt states.

I don't know why Wash PA is mentioned, it's not a separate core, or a CSA county. Washington county has spillover 'burbs from Allegheny county and there is a corridor down to the town of Washington along 79. Lawrence County, with New Castle is however a CSA county and has a little more distance, but its inclusion i think must statistically meet the Census standard, but I can't imagine significantly.

While I feel that Akron should have never been separated from Cleveland, given the close proximity, it seems awkward having Canton included. And I just don’t see Dayton as close enough to Cincy to add up, let alone having Springfield in the mix. Hell, why not add Columbus?

I really don't understand comments like "city A is bigger than city B" when comparing cities with wildly different geography and in particular one locked into pre-war limits and one that can expand to include what would normally be suburbs. This is why city populations are useless other than in the context of city government and planning etc.

I wasn't directing it anyone - just responding from browsing the various posts. Again, nobody is calling Charlotte utopia. Well, nobody but some folks you can find in any city that have blind praise for the city, whether in NC, OH or anywhere else. There are people who would despite all its problems and lack of jobs, would never ever leave Youngstown, even if they landed a great job that they were qualified for and paid really well. This is true everywhere, so you have to discount the cheer leading straw man from this.... For some, coming from loooong economically depressed areas like the ones you mentioned would make a lot places appear dramatically better.

I think there is either confusion or simply irrationality at play when discussing some cities. Clearly Charlotte significantly lacks density and doesn’t have much in the way of character etc. However, nobody is calling it a utopia. The fact is that for a variety of reasons, sun belt cities have grown dramatically the past several decades, which feeds off itself. Obviously the last couple years have been different and Charlotte, a large banking center, got hit particularly hard, but that doesn’t change the long term dynamics at play. Additionally, outside of relatively poor urban planning, which NC shares with most of the country, the state has invested in research, higher education and similar areas better than most, if not all, the South and the Triangle area is as solid as any region in this regard and UNC-Charlotte has become a research university as well.

Well Florida never said that Pgh would benefit. He actually wrote that book while at CMU and often sited Pgh as a city that needed his criteria to prosper. to see what's happening in Pgh or Ohio cities or anywhere else, people need to dig deeper. For example, Pittsburgh has suffered from natural decline for 20 or so years - that's a looong aftershock from the massive mid 80s earthquake that hit the city and region. Good things are happening, but take time and still have yet to gain more births than deaths, even suburban Westmoreland county typically has minor migration gains, but they are offset by natural decline. Allegheny and a few other counties that typically have had population losses annually saw slight gains recently - now part of that is the recession, but employment and housing have been better than the national average. Cleveland got hit hard in both housing and jobs in the recession. I think Florida was only partially right. If a city has jobs, it will gain people. Now to become a destination city (moving without a job, or a national impression of a "cool" place to live and find a job) is secondary and I think can organically gain traction from creating jobs in the first place. The dynamic needs to change for any trends to change. I hope that these long struggling cities can find something to get some traction. I don't know how, but 2020 will be here in no time at all. City, county, and state leaders need to think hard on how improve the job situations. It's hard to get optimistic since this has been the same story for decades now, but All of these cities have something to offer, and each needs to find something that works for them. They shouldn't think about retention or coolness, or attraction of people. Create jobs and these things will happen.

You can find so many similar articles in a lot of cities, but it would be nice if the newspapers were writing more informed and intelligent articles. Young people come and go. If Columbus (which overall does decent) wants to increase that number, it has a few significant options, the first being create more jobs, period. Not "creative class" jobs. Not tech jobs. Simply more of a variety of jobs of which creative, and tech and so many other jobs fall into. If that can happen, and it's tough because it mostly happens organically, then it feeds off of itself. A significant, but distant second, would be to truly mold the city into an even more urban destination that is attractive to many people - in others do the leg work that makes the city a brand for urban living (like Portland, which struggles because young people move there and right now it doesn't have the jobs, but decades of smart policy biult a brand and a real product worth wanting). I am not suggesting merely copying another city, but building and enhancing Columbus, which does suffer from a lack of identity outside of the Great Lakes area.

Why, so many cities have massive and continued city limits expansion... the difference is that it's just a political boundary and the reality is that a lot essentially suburban growth is happening within "cities" like Houston etc. and therefore are much less dense.

What's more interesting from reading some Texas data this week, is that the state would have marginal growth if not for the incredible Hispanic growth this decade. While it's not a shock that Hispanic growth would be large, its population grew like 42% compared to the white population growing but a couple percent. It's going to be interesting watching how the dynamics change the state.

Was there for the first time last year. Really lively and interesting city for its size. I definetely want to head back there again.

Boston and Philly are very impressive. They don't have the size of Chicago or NYC, but Center City is impressive, as is central Boston. At this point and time, with somethings that vary, Indy, Cincy, Columbus, Cleveland and Pittsburgh are in a similar category, as well as KC, and StL. Some of the historically bigger cities have some amenities not attained by some younger ones, but generally they are peers.

I've been to Mobile several times including Mardi Gras (and as any proud resident will tell, they celebrated before New Orleans) In fact, it's one of the oldest cities in the U.S. You can see some nice history, as well as mid century stuff there. The newish tall tower is nice, but the scale of size is awkward. And I couldn't believe when I saw that the owner (apparently the owner) who also owns a large downtown hotel adjacent to the convention center, put the same crown on the hotel. It looks awful. It can be said that so many cities have potential and many do, but Mobile really does. It's a decent small (midsize small) port city with history and could be more of a destination like other old port towns.

Grand Rapids looks like a very impressive mid size city. Nice diversity in buildings too. How married to the auto industry is that town?

I have lived in Atlanta for over a decade now when Atlantic Station was just an idol old steel mill site. I was thrilled to hear of a walkable mixed use development, but when it opened earlier this decade I was disappointed by its island like separation from the city along the vast parking underneath it. Of course the "hidden" parking might sound good, but it plays out like a concrete island which is very distant from Midtown across the connector (downtown portion of interstate where 75 and 85 are one) I am critical of Atlanta on many things. That said there have been many positive developments to make the city more dense. Atlantic Station missed the mark, but the individual developments in Midtown and beyond have been productive. And no, Atlanta does not have the density of the Northeast or some Midwestern cities, but it was a big enough city pre-war to have several large old neighborhoods. Tourists usually don't see them and transplants often end up in the burbs, but they exist. That statement is not accurate at all.

I would say that topography did impact growth patterns. Pittsburgh has its fair share of sprawl, but the older areas are simply dense hilly neighborhoods. Even some of the inner burbs are relatively dense. One could not just throw a sprawling neighborhood just anywhere and it’s certainly was harder to find long flat pieces of land for big box development. That said, all of that does exist. I think from looking at numbers that Pittsburgh really slowed down by the end of the 60s and hit its population peak around ’70 or 71 – ironically just as the U.S. Steel tower was completed and dominated the skyline. Of course the city population, like most others was already declining. Another ironic thing is that the city now has seen increases in younger demographics as opposed than many burbs. I would guess because young professionals want to live in the city and the burbs have many older workers and empty nesters etc. I really feel for Detroit because I know it will take a long time to recover. Pittsburgh is not out of the woods – again the legacy of the downfall lives on in the demographic oddity of natural decline and the inherent slow growth from slow growth. It is very frustrating as all of industrial Northeastern and Midwestern cities have some great institutions, neighborhoods and character and continue to struggle.

The steel industry was very significant to the Pittsburgh area. Yes it was significant to Cleveland, but Cleveland also seemed to have more industrial diversity and just was not as dominated by steel as Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh had (and has) large corporations not related to steel and that helped, but when the city hit bottom in the early/mid 80s it was depression level economic loss. Pittsburgh had to move and fortunately its institutions including Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Pittsburgh and others' investments helped the transition. The region is still suffering from the 70s and 80s epic population loss as it suffers from a higher death rate than birth rate which most other cities do not encounter. Net loss from migration is much lower now and there would like be an overall population gain if not for this unique natural loss situation.

Your description was that of W's White House. Or talk about broad, sweeping political party platforms.... like the Southern Strategy.

W's white house? The GOP is suspicious anytime minorities have representation.

wow.

:wtf: :wtf: "time?" You're right, Atlanta, Miami, DC, and oh wait the entire country including Ohio will never recover from the foreclosures. When it costs more than DC, Boston and NYC, then it will be a problem. Until then, they'll keep moving to Atlanta and living like kings for the "cheap" housing. Insert city name to your comment and it will apply to 95% of U.S. cities. It claimed to be a mecca??? Again with the strawcity. March 2009 - the economy is in freefall. Are you suggesting that jobs are coming to some other city??? Well the city did lose or is losing GM and Ford and I would assume so other manufacturing, but how significant is that as a % of the overall metro? Cities do attract people. compared to what? Delta's problems would be a significant concern, yes. ...well there you have it. Continued immature city bashing for irrational and contrived reasons. Some valid points (Delta etc) noted, but the biggest ones are flawed. Seriously from your comments Atlanta is dying or dead - that it will be the new rust best city.... :roll:

I know. My comment was who was high praising it for you to say it was over rated? Yes it is and that won't change. It's only overbuilt to the extent of the current economic crisis. Once the economy is rolling again, it will be fine as it has crossed a threshold where it has hit a true critical mass of residential living. 10 years ago there were a handfull of maybe a dozen apt/condo towers, now there are many many more - street level retail has developed and more is on the way around 7th/8th streets through 14th etc. Again, 10 years ago there was very little to walk to beyond the Arts center and some clubs. Ok, you don't like the museum, but really your comments are making Atlanta to be more than it is to tear it down. Like an absurd strawman or strawcity I should say. Yes the city is a poster city for poor planning. But that does not mean that some areas are not now becoming better or that there are not nice dense old neighborhoods. Just be fair about it and calm down.

I'm not sure who is rating Atlanta to over rate it, but it has in fact improved. Downtown is a lost cause Midtown has improved significantly and there are some really nice city neighborhoods. I believe that the problem with the windows is code issue.

well I think most decent size campuses have those 60's/70's era buildings. I don't mind them since there are often surrounded by so many classic campus buildings and their is something interesting to me in noting a time, even if it looks bad now, relatively speaking.