I do think Pittsburgh is ahead of Cincinnati in terms of taking advantage of the river(s), but it's Downtown is dead. It has some really nice entertainment areas, but Cincinnati picks up where Pittsburgh left off RE: Downtowns. This tide could change once noky does their thing and the Banks starts to develop.

If only our football team was better than theirs and we could distance our baseball team a little further from theirs.

I do think Pittsburgh is ahead of Cincinnati in terms of taking advantage of the river(s), but it's Downtown is dead. It has some really nice entertainment areas, but Cincinnati picks up where Pittsburgh left off RE: Downtowns. This tide could change once noky does their thing and the Banks starts to develop.

 

Their downtown is a real neighborhood though! I love that about Pittsburgh. People are comfortable downtown. People on the streets will come up to you and talk to you (and not because they're asking for money). Cincinnati's downtown is for business during the day and fancy restaurants at night.

I do think Pittsburgh is ahead of Cincinnati in terms of taking advantage of the river(s), but it's Downtown is dead. It has some really nice entertainment areas, but Cincinnati picks up where Pittsburgh left off RE: Downtowns. This tide could change once noky does their thing and the Banks starts to develop.

 

Their downtown is a real neighborhood though! I love that about Pittsburgh. People are comfortable downtown. People on the streets will come up to you and talk to you (and not because they're asking for money). Cincinnati's downtown is for business during the day and fancy restaurants at night.

 

... but it's dead.

Well their T train or whatever, sucks. We waited forever for that thing and it didn't show up. No one else was even around.

 

I just liked the fact that people were hanging out downtown.

 

I think the gritty parts of Pittsburgh look really dreary. If you're FROM those areas of Pittsburgh, you probably don't think very highly of the city. But the nice areas of Pittsburgh are extremely nice. They also have 2 great universities. Carnegie Mellon might as well be MIT. They just need to focus on retaining these people coming out of these schools. The problem with UC is that the co-op program sends kids all over the U.S. and to them - only the east and west coast exist. A lot of them intend on staying but they're bound for the suburbs where they grew up.

>It was a fun article by the Enquirer mostly for the fact that they had remember what it is like to be a booster, since they've mostly specialized in the end of times

 

Dave Holthaus wrote for The Post for 20+ years. 

 

Pittsburgh's midtown area, where Pitt & Carnegie Mellon are, easily surpasses UC & its environs.  The streetscapes, quality of housing, and walkability is some of the best in the United States.  It's a shame it's not linked by rail with downtown Pittsburgh.  It wasn't sullied by ridiculous highway-era mistakes like the Jefferson & MLK road widenings or the invidious EPA.       

Next Leaders Summit coming soon, will put Cincinnati YPs on the map

http://www.soapboxmedia.com/innovationnews/0811summit.aspx

 

More than 250 young professionals from across the country will descend on downtown Cincinnati this fall during the 2009 Next Leaders Summit. And organizers are planning to get participants out into the city as part of the event.

 

The Next Leaders Summit, formerly the YP Summit, was founded in 2004 by Young Professionals of Milwaukee (now FUEL Milwaukee). The first one attracted about 50 people, then grew to around 100 in 2005. The following year, Next Generation Consulting in Madison, Wis., took over the event, which was held in the company's home-base city. The summit also has been in Louisville, Ky. and Cocoa Beach, Fla.

 

The Mayor's Young Professionals Kitchen Cabinet is hosting the Cincinnati event; other summit partners include Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber – HYPE, CincyUpdate.com, Downtown Cincinnati, Inc., Greater Cincinnati Convention and Visitors Bureau, LEGACY and United Way Emerging Leaders Society.

 

The Next Leaders Summit is billed as "the only forum in the world committed to developing the skills and capacity of our future leaders - and unleashing the power of the next generation to build better cities and workplaces." The ultimate aim is to create an atmosphere in cities that attract and keep the young talent so vital to their continued vibrancy.

 

"Different cities have different issues, and basically this is an opportunity to hear other cities best practices," said Clara Rice, former YPKC president and a forum organizer.

 

Among the reasons Cincinnati was chosen for the summit is its walkability, its urban density and its location (the city is within driving distance of 60 percent of the U.S. population). This all fits in the YP notion that workers look for a great place to live, not just a great place to work.

 

"People in our generation don’t choose first a place to work. They look for a place to live, and then look at the job," Rice said.

 

The summit will be based at the Westin Hotel downtown, but plans are to get YPs out into the city, including a dinner on the Purple People Bridge connecting the city and Newport on the Levee, as well as some events in Over-the-Rhine’s emerging Gateway Quarter. There will be time for some partying, too, with the city's Oktoberfest celebration set for that same weekend.

 

Topics will include: "Knock 'Em Dead: How to Craft and Deliver Winning Presentations," "Positioning your YPO in the Start-Up Years," "Using Social Media to Motivate and Engage," and "Creating the Bridge Between YP's and Boards." There will be a mix of speakers, panel discussions and break out groups. Among the speakers is Jake Greene, author of Whoa, My Boss Is Naked! A Career Book for People Who Would Never Be Caught Dead Reading a Career Book. His topic will be "Personal Positioning for the Pop Culture Generation." You can find the entire schedule here.

 

The Next Leaders Summit will be Sept. 17-19. Registration is $229, but Cincinnatians get a $50 discount with the registration code cincypo.

Same old story.  How many times must the Enquirer going to run the same shit story about attracting 'YP's'?

Same old story. How many times must the Enquirer going to run the same sh!t story about attracting 'YP's'?

 

Because probably more than any other group YP's move to places because they want to move there.  Lots of people move because of families, or a new job, but rarely do you see an established family pick up and move to Phoenix just because they want to live in Phoenix. 

Yes I know that, but we've been hearing the same thing for years now.  Advertise the low cost of living! Let the YP's know how cool (and cheap) Cincinnati is! We must attract the YP's! Why does the city continue to hire consultants to tell us the same damn thing year after year, and why does the Enquirer keep reporting on each study as if it were some breakthrough revelation?

When YPs spend money, the money is more likely to stay in the community. They tend to spend money at independent businesses like bars, restaurants, used record stores, guitar shops etc. as opposed to the general population whose money is more likely to go to Wal*Mart, Applebee's and such, where it gets sent to other states and countries.

 

    YP's buy used records? I had no idea.

They must also sip coffee, shop at locally-owned stores and buy overpriced Segway personal transportation devices so they can get to their workplace that much quicker.

I don't understand this either. Columbus paid big bucks for a consultant to prepare and present a study for what we should do to attract YPs, especially Downtown. We discovered that YPs like mass transit and affordable urban living with lots of amenities within walking distance. Gee, who would have guessed that they'd want buildings with apartments, stores, and bars instead of parking lots? If you build an attractive urban space, you don't have to seek out YPs, because all sorts of people would be attracted, plenty of YPs included. Stop wasting money on consultants and re-urbanize.

Even I can agree with C-Dawg on this one!  YP's are not going to come if the jobs aren't here, and they are not going to turn down good jobs because we have no streetcar.

^ Yes, they will. If they've got equivalent job offers in cities with rail transit and without, assuming no ties to either area, they'll go for the city with rail much more often than not.

How many YP's actually have that many choices. Maybe a 1000 a year in a city Cincy's size.

Those in the medical field, for example.

But I'd argue that the decision tree for those in the medical profession is far more complicated and includes the level of compensation plus the fact that many of their options are set in the process of medical school and the like. Plus, that is not a particularly entrepreneurial enterprise which is supposed the idea behind throwing all this energy at these folks. 

The operative word is equivalent.  There are positions in Cincinnati which may not be able to be matched.  How one determines equivalency obviously is up to the individual.

Even I can agree with C-Dawg on this one!  YP's are not going to come if the jobs aren't here, and they are not going to turn down good jobs because we have no streetcar.

 

Talk to some of Cincinnati's biggest companies and ask them about their ability to attract young talent to Cincinnati.  Young people are increasingly choosing location and lifestyle first and figuring out the job situation next.  The reason why is because it has been seen that these younger generations are placing higher importance on social and life experiences over things like economic standing and household size for example.  It's a demographic shift from the Baby Boomers and it is one every city needs to plan for as we move forward in the 21st Century.

 

And a bit of anecdotal evidence for ya...I've had a half a dozen friends move away from Cincinnati to places like NYC and Chicago over the past month or so.  They have no jobs in mind, but they're making it work until they do find something.

YPs generally have big goals and dreams for themselves career wise.  They want to live in a city which has big goals and dreams for itself.  This is why places like Chicago attract them.  Cincinnati is OK with mediocrity and actually shuns those that have bigger and better ideas.  The urbanophile did a great write up on this mindset in the Midwest, and it really opened my eyes to how true it is. 

 

Until Cincinnati attempts to achieve bigger and better, it will never attract the bigger or better. 

People have been moving to cities like NY and Chicago without jobs in place for generations.  Every age group will give you that same anecdotal evidence, everyone knows of someone moving to NY to "make it".  I don't think you can consider cities the size of Cincinnati in that same league.

 

 

People have been moving to cities like NY and Chicago without jobs in place for generations.  Every age group will give you that same anecdotal evidence, everyone knows of someone moving to NY to "make it".  I don't think you can consider cities the size of Cincinnati in that same league.

 

 

 

This is the wrong mindset.  Look at Portland.  They are the same size as Cincinnati.  In fact, they have passed us up in size.  In 20 years, you'll be saying 'we can't compare ourselves to cities like Portland."  Theyre in our league now, but theyre growing up.  Cincinnati will continue to drown in mediocrity unless mindests change and people realize how great a city Cincinnati is and should be. 

Being able to retain and attract all types of people is generally a positive for a region. YP's have been unduly fetishized the sum of all that cities should be structured toward. Ohio has filled the country with YPs for generations. YPs only exist for about 10 ten years, then they are simply adults or parents or failures. Amazing every year new YPs show up but I'd still argue for a city Cincy-sized that the total number we are talking about is still pretty small.

If you can't continue to attract and retain young people then your city is destined for decline.  As you said, young people turn into families, friends, shop keepers, investors, etc.  If you're constantly hemorrhaging these young people then there's no future.  Don't believe me, ask rural America.

YPs only exist for about 10 ten years, then they are simply adults or parents or failures.

 

I like that quote!  unfortunately, sometimes all 3!!

Who will populate our cities down the road if it isn't the young people of today?

If you can't continue to attract and retain young people then your city is destined for decline.  As you said, young people turn into families, friends, shop keepers, investors, etc.  If you're constantly hemorrhaging these young people then there's no future.  Don't believe me, ask rural America.

 

There is some basic demographics here in that if a region is losing young people they are also losing people in the years that they are most likely to marry or cohabitate,  have children and start households.  So there will be less babys and children in a region a few years down the pike if they continue to lose the people most likely to have children.

 

This also has an economic impact in terms of young families in the market for goods and services, such as clothes, furniture, food, etc...the fewer of these families, the less of a market. 

 

If you can't continue to attract and retain young people then your city is destined for decline. As you said, young people turn into families, friends, shop keepers, investors, etc. If you're constantly hemorrhaging these young people then there's no future. Don't believe me, ask rural America.

 

There is some basic demographics here in that if a region is losing young people they are also losing people in the years that they are most likely to marry or cohabitate, have children and start households. So there will be less babys and children in a region a few years down the pike if they continue to lose the people most likely to have children.

 

This also has an economic impact in terms of young families in the market for goods and services, such as clothes, furniture, food, etc...the fewer of these families, the less of a market.

 

 

That is true to a point. However, the highest achieving most mobile YPs have some of the lowest fertility rates around and often delay children greatly if they ever have them. I'd say a city is better getting a bunch of folks in the 75th - 95th percentile rather chasing after the top 5 percent. I'd imagine those around the 75th percentile are more likely to settle down and make a home somewhere than those that rise to the top and become part of the cosmopolitan elite.

 

One group that a city would think would provide a lot of value would be academics - and they do create knowledge and the like - but so many are overwhelmed by debt and have to delay starting a family until very late that they are of limited value for growing a local market. Their children can be 'unique' as well.

 

 

That is true to a point. However, the highest achieving most mobile YPs have some of the lowest fertility rates around and often delay children greatly if they ever have them. I'd say a city is better getting a bunch of folks in the 75th - 95th percentile rather chasing after the top 5 percent. I'd imagine those around the 75th percentile are more likely to settle down and make a home somewhere than those that rise to the top and become part of the cosmopolitan elite.

 

A good summation of the "winner take all"  culture, where the top go for the top.  That cosmopolitan elite is found in very few cities.

 

I have to say when I was thinking of the loss of the, say, 21-35 demographic, I was think not just of yuppies.  Your comment about academics is quite good.  I was also thinking of people like people in the trades, skilled workers and technicians of various types, etc.

 

 

 

"Who will populate our cities down the road if it isn't the young people of today?"

 

No one. Duh.  :roll:

 

 

^You mock, but the reality has been seen in many places across the world where places have been unable to attract and retain have died a slow death.  I recently saw this example on the Greek islands where towns and villages have been deserted as the youth quickly move out for Athens or greener pastures elsewhere throughout the world.

 

The same can be seen throughout the United States in the many small rural towns that have seen their youth move away once able for better lives in cities.  Now that cities are the clear choice, the movement is further selecting the winners of which cities will survive and which will not.

I agree that attracting folks is mostly a net positive - though there are limits and I'd argue that Portland is actually an example of that right now with the inflow being much higher than the capacity of the local economy to support it. To follow along with my theme, a lot of these mobile young adults are not actually as valuable as they think they are (a generation of children where all the children were above average). I can think of a thousand reasons to support the streetcar, the rejuvenation of core neighborhoods, investment in the arts and humanities, but the YP issue falls lower down.

 

Cities and regions do die. Ironically (or not) it often happens in the very shadow of the 'hot' YP places - Massachusetts outside of Greater Boston comes to mind most directly, Gary, Indiana would be another. 

^Agree 100% with your above post. Improving the city and its urbanity shouldn't be for yuppies, it should be for the good of all. Hell, I'd argue older people benefit most from a good mass transit system. Imagine what it'd be like to not be able to drive a car while living in Ohio? Yuppies actually have more options.

 

Completely agree.  I'm not sure who is advocating improving our cities solely for the benefit of yuppies, but it certainly isn't me.  The way the younger demographic is currently thinking just tends to fall in line with being attracted to better urban areas.  The cities improving their urban areas and creating walkable, social, and intriguing places are the ones doing the best job at attracting young talent to their regions.

The point is yes, there are a yuppies -- hundreds of thousands of them -- in the suburbs of Boston, New York, etc., but a much larger percentage of those types people are in those center cities.  The kind of people who would live in the suburbs here will live in the center cities of the major metros. 

 

Case in point...a couple I know who are Cincinnati natives who met at OU lived in Loveland when the guy worked at the downtown 5/3 tower, but when they moved to Boston they bought a condo in Beacon Hill.  They went from two cars to zero and took a cab to the hospital when she went into labor. They had all kinds of excuses for not living in downtown Cincinnati, but really what it came down to was their parents didn't want them to live in downtown Cincinnati because of their perception of it. There are all these 55 year-old Westwood Concern-types who don't want to have to tell other 55 year-old Westwood Concern-types that their kid lives downtown, because then they have to defend it.  You don't have to defend living in the city in the more popular and populous cities.   

 

^Very true.  When someone says they live in downtown Cincinnati or OTR, many (dare I say most) people in the suburbs ask with horror, "why!?!?". Until downtown Cincinnati becomes cool again, I think this will continue.  The opening of the first phase of the Banks will help with this, as well as the current momentum being gained with the new bars and restaurants opening. However, I think the only thing that will really change the perception of Downtown is a revitalized, or at least a stable OTR.  Whether that is from the Streetcar or through the slow expansion of the Q, it is absolutely essential to change the general public's opinion of "downtown", as many people don't differentiate.

The point is yes, there are a yuppies -- hundreds of thousands of them -- in the suburbs of Boston, New York, etc., but a much larger percentage of those types people are in those center cities.  The kind of people who would live in the suburbs here will live in the center cities of the major metros.

 

Case in point...a couple I know who are Cincinnati natives who met at OU lived in Loveland when the guy worked at the downtown 5/3 tower, but when they moved to Boston they bought a condo in Beacon Hill.  They went from two cars to zero and took a cab to the hospital when she went into labor. They had all kinds of excuses for not living in downtown Cincinnati, but really what it came down to was their parents didn't want them to live in downtown Cincinnati because of their perception of it. There are all these 55 year-old Westwood Concern-types who don't want to have to tell other 55 year-old Westwood Concern-types that their kid lives downtown, because then they have to defend it.  You don't have to defend living in the city in the more popular and populous cities.

 

...jmecklenborg, always with the astute observation that reveals a different angle on the topic. 

 

Interesting.  The supply is there but it's the distribution thats's skewed. 

 

I should ask, is the issue only with downtown, or does the attitude of "why the city" hold for places lke Mnt Adams, Hyde Park, Clifton, Mnt Lookout, etc?  If it's only downtown, the situation in Cincy might be more of a marketing one vs wholesale rejection of living in the city as a characeteristic of the metropolitan culture (like one sees in Dayton).  If its a marketing one, it just means "downtown" has to be added to a collection of desirable city neighborhoods...say, a new Mnt Adams.

 

 

^Having lived in the suburbs my whole childhood and Clifton now, I can say that around 90% of Cincinnatians will be shocked if you tell them you live in OTR, or even want to go to OTR for a bar, restaurant, event, etc.  Downtown has a better perception if you're going for a visit, but if you lived there people would be surprised - not because of a perception of crime or anything, but they'd wonder why you wanted to live there when you could have a house and a yard in Hyde Park instead. 

 

As for perception vs. reality, whenever I have anyone visiting downtown, either from out of town or the suburbs, I sneak them over into the Gateway Quarter for awhile before I break the news that we're actually in OTR, or as most of them know it "The country's most dangerous neighborhood."  They're always surprised.

 

But in my experience, there are only certain neighborhoods within Cincinnati limits that measure up to the standards of the suburbs when it comes to overall perception by the region.  Hyde Park, Mt. Adams, Oakley, Mt. Washington, and Mt. Lookout are the first ones that come to mind.  Most everywhere else would merit a surprised response from most Cincinnatians. 

I must say, as a Clevelander and Miami grad I am very surprised by the comments made in this thread, and others, about the image that people in the Cincy region allegedly have of the city.  If it is true, it is a wholesale change from the attitudes of Cincinnatians during the 70's and early 80's (not too long ago).

 

I remember being overwhelmed by how positive people from Cincy (and most of the people I knew where from the suburbs) were about all of of the city.  In fact, it tended to border on the obnoxious.  Fellow Clevelanders were very jealous, but we thought much of bragging was justified when we visited the city (primarily Mt. Adams which use to blow us away and downtown, but other parts as well).  People I graduated with from all over, in all fields, were very anxious to take jobs in Cincy.  Downtown seemed vibrant and again people seemed very proud.

 

I guess I am very confused by the current attitudes if true.

^^^ Jeff, there is definitely an difference between let's just say ... when someone says: Mt. Adams, or Gaslight, or Hyde Park & Mt. Lookout.

>If it is true, it is a wholesale change from the attitudes of Cincinnatians during the 70's and early 80's (not too long ago)

 

The preface to 1981's "Cincinnati: The Queen City", a coffee table book by local historian Dan Hurly, talks about this attitude. I remember the attitude from when I was a kid, and also because 7 of 8 of my great-grandparents were alive when I was young and were all Cincinnati born & bred. Also, my grandmother had an antique store with lots of Cincinnati memorabilia, and people were very positive.

 

Even through the bicentennial year (1988) everything seemed very positive, but things went downhill with the closing of the department stores. The closings were blamed on "the city", when it's the interstate highways that were to blame, and "the city" was expected to drop everything and immediately recruit new department stores. But that wasn't possible without huge subsidies, so people complained about the subsidies.

 

The decline of downtown retail snowballed perfectly into the mid-90's stadium thing, which snowballed perfectly into the 2001 so-called riot.

 

When The Browns left Cleveland, that sent shockwaves through Cincinnati, created a false sense of urgency, and people gave Mike Brown the kitchen sink. People were meanwhile quite jealous of Jacobs Field, The Flats, and the Rock Hall. That really reinforced the suburban "big fix" idea, that there were these big flashy stand-alone projects that could fix Cincinnati, when really the whole problem was a lack of downtown housing and a car-dependent culture.

 

In the mid-90's, the condo renovations hadn't started, and there were several large vacant buildings in the downtown area. They've all been successfully redeveloped, but suburbanites don't know and don't believe you if you tell them. Honestly I don't think the 1,000 or so residents in those redeveloped buildings have contributed a ton to downtown's liveliness, we definitely need a lot more people before there is a constant level of street activity.

When The Browns left Cleveland, that sent shockwaves through Cincinnati, created a false sense of urgency, and people gave Mike Brown the kitchen sink.  People were meanwhile quite jealous of Jacobs Field, The Flats, and the Rock Hall.  That really reinforced the suburban "big fix" idea, that there were these big flashy stand-alone projects that could fix Cincinnati, when really the whole problem was a lack of downtown housing and a car-dependent culture.

Bingo...

 

 

In the mid-90's, the condo renovations hadn't started, and there were several large vacant buildings in the downtown area.  They've all been successfully redeveloped, but suburbanites don't know and don't believe you if you tell them. Honestly I don't think the 1,000 or so residents in those redeveloped buildings have contributed a ton to downtown's liveliness, we definitely need a lot more people before there is a constant level of street activity.

...and double bingo.

Jeff, there is definitely an difference between let's just say ... when someone says: Mt. Adams, or Gaslight, or Hyde Park & Mt. Lookout.

 

Whatever.  They are all in the city.  I think the others indirectly answered my question.

^Yes, it's just a negative perception of Downtown/OTR for the most part.  You could probably throw the West End in there as well.  There are other neighborhoods with bad reps, but they seem to fall into a different category than the center city.  Fortunately things are improving...it's hard to deny reality.

I'd add to Jmech's narrative the fact that during the 90s, it seemed like the inmates had gotten hold of the asylum in the form of Cincy's city Council. Some of these folks matured over the years but in their first try they were a bunch of doofuses.

Jeff, there is definitely an difference between let's just say ... when someone says: Mt. Adams, or Gaslight, or Hyde Park & Mt. Lookout.

 

Whatever. They are all in the city. I think the others indirectly answered my question.

 

"Whatever" what?

 

Are you saying that Mt. Adams/Hyde Park/Mt. Lookout can be lumped in with "Downtown"? No, it can't. It's purely marketing and perception.

 

 

Go read this: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Rural-Brain-Drain/48425/

 

It speaks interestingly to a lot of the issues Ohio is dealing with and that we've been discussing, though it focuses on more rural areas instead of urban. I'd say that Eastern Kentucky is 'the' best example of a place in which the best of every generation leaves, leaving the area without any serious human capital.

Agree, and the comments were interesting too.  One person commenting from India notes this is a global phenomenon.

 

 

Another thing that is tough about Cincinnati is financing.  There is a lot of opportunity here but it is tough to get financing here for new businesses and the like if you don't know the right people.  Ask anybody who is in venture capital here- it is a different game than inmost other markets.  Compare that with the fact that a lot of the real estate development and property ownership of large apartments tends to be more locally owned than in other comparable markets and you start to see that some of the parochial aspects of our political culture exists in our local business culture as well, both with good and not so good results.