Nothing un-manageable to be sure, but when mom's not happy, look for her to start seeking greener pastures.

 

Ugh. I have that issue going on right now... Bay Village is now the holy land..no problems there...

 

The issues are with the higher up district level adminstrators, she peachy keen happy with everybody from the principal on down at the actual school. I think part of her problem is she has never worked in a large corporate/bureacratic organization and doesn't understand how they operate....

Yes, but the difference is that much of the Heights area was built up at a time when quality and character were important.  And a lot of the remnants of that era have stood the test of time.  These areas were and are unique.  The same cannot be said of Solon and other nearly-identical cookie-cutter suburbs.  There is very little offered in Solon that one cannot find in about two dozen other suburbs in Greater Cleveland.

 

Age helps, the crappy stuff either gets torn down or improved, and the quality construction gets a nice patina. Most of Lakewood is cookie cutter, take 4 or 5 main house designs and about another dozen option and you can probably create 80% of the houses, but it has a nice feel because the houses have taken on their own character over the years.

 

I mean you distill grain into alcohol, you have Everclear or  moonshine, stick it in an barrel for 5 years, then it's fine whiskey. Or something like that...

 

 

 

^^and at one time the inner ring suburbs were the craze - think about how great the Heights and Euclid schools were 40 years ago. Probably among the country's best, certainly Heights High. Would you have been so angry that parents moved their families from Cleveland or are inner ring suburbs somehow more Cleveland than outer?

Communities change and people move. And I think it's silly to vilify people jut because they have the resources to live the life that they want. Being pro urban does not mean anti suburban.

 

Glad someone else believes there's alternatives from the perspective of "if it's not inner-ring, it's awful, souless, and I can't believe anyone would live there."

 

It's about lifestyle.  Solon offers an opportunity to live in a communicty where the vast majority of people have similar core values to each other.  All the amenities and benefits of urban living are pretty much null and void if it means having a population of people in your community who don't take care of their yard, don't look after their kids, and are generally bad neighbors. 

 

People choose to live in Solon because A) the schools are great B) anything a parent wants their kid to be involved in is available and C) its likely close to where they work.  Many people will sacrifice most everything else to meet those criteria. 

 

And say what you want about how schools are measured or how good Solon really is as a school system, but college admissions people will give an edge to a student from Solon because it's "Solon" when comparing two Ohio public school students with pretty much identical resumes. 

^^and at one time the inner ring suburbs were the craze - think about how great the Heights and Euclid schools were 40 years ago. Probably among the country's best, certainly Heights High. Would you have been so angry that parents moved their families from Cleveland or are inner ring suburbs somehow more Cleveland than outer?

Communities change and people move. And I think it's silly to vilify people jut because they have the resources to live the life that they want. Being pro urban does not mean anti suburban.

 

Yes, but the difference is that much of the Heights area was built up at a time when quality and character were important.  And a lot of the remnants of that era have stood the test of time.  These areas were and are unique.  The same cannot be said of Solon and other nearly-identical cookie-cutter suburbs.  There is very little offered in Solon that one cannot find in about two dozen other suburbs in Greater Cleveland.

 

Character and quality are great...until after a generation or two it stops getting maintained.  See Glenville.  And you're starting to see it in parts of Cleveland Heights.  I hope you realize there's a huge population of people living in Solon that moved from the Heights area because they got sick of dealing with what was/is going on there. 

 

At some point you want to stop fighting to keep your city a great place to live and just live there.

^Speak for yourself, champ.  BTW, we get our fair share of exurbanites too who are 'sick' of living out there.

 

^^That really depends on the college.  Personally, I will take the straight A student from Heights or Shaker over the the straight A student from Solon.  IMO, those A's speak a great deal towards the student's discipline and focus when coming out of a school system that does not have the resources to hold the student's hand along the way.  Of course, it's not so black and white and there would be various factors to consider, but the more obstacles that were overcome the more impressive the application is going to be.

 

Plus, the really top colleges will only take a certain amount of students from each district.  IIRC, there was a big controversy at Heights my senoir year because they decided to award valedictorian to the student who didn't get into Harvard because of the numbers game (i.e. Harvard had already taken their quota from Heights ahead of her).

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/bplive/2011/top100/

 

Go Solon

 

I  knew you folks would see this. ;op

 

My sister and her family live there and they absolutely love it. Hell of a school system too.

 

Also, I went to this party on Westminister Dr. there on Sunday - holy god is that a nice area.

This is the funniest thing I've read in two days! 

 

Did somebody just say that Westminster Dr. in Solon was nice?!?!?!??!?!?!  Anybody, take a street view there.  Tell me that's not the worst of the worst stereotypical McMansion development.  Am I still on UrbanOhio or what? :? ?

100% Agree!

 

^^and at one time the inner ring suburbs were the craze - think about how great the Heights and Euclid schools were 40 years ago. Probably among the country's best, certainly Heights High. Would you have been so angry that parents moved their families from Cleveland or are inner ring suburbs somehow more Cleveland than outer?

Communities change and people move. And I think it's silly to vilify people jut because they have the resources to live the life that they want. Being pro urban does not mean anti suburban.

But those homes are crap!  From a design and construction stand point.  Don't even get me started on the mailboxes at the street.  ::)

 

Heights High and Shaker were some of Ohio and the Nations best.  Neither school is the way it was in the 70'/80's but they are far from the worst.

 

^^and at one time the inner ring suburbs were the craze - think about how great the Heights and Euclid schools were 40 years ago. Probably among the country's best, certainly Heights High. Would you have been so angry that parents moved their families from Cleveland or are inner ring suburbs somehow more Cleveland than outer?

Communities change and people move. And I think it's silly to vilify people jut because they have the resources to live the life that they want. Being pro urban does not mean anti suburban.

 

Yes, but the difference is that much of the Heights area was built up at a time when quality and character were important.  And a lot of the remnants of that era have stood the test of time.  These areas were and are unique.  The same cannot be said of Solon and other nearly-identical cookie-cutter suburbs.  There is very little offered in Solon that one cannot find in about two dozen other suburbs in Greater Cleveland.

 

I don't begrudge anyone their right to live where they choose.  However neither should they begrudge me my right to criticize/make fun of their personal decision. ;)

 

And we have a winner.  Name a street, any street in Solon that matches the architectural detail of the Streets in Cleveland Height and Shaker Heights!  Even in the NON MANSION areas of CH and SH the homes have character. 

 

 

 

 

 

Character and quality are great...until after a generation or two it stops getting maintained.  See Glenville.  And you're starting to see it in parts of Cleveland Heights.  I hope you realize there's a huge population of people living in Solon that moved from the Heights area because they got sick of dealing with what was/is going on there. 

 

At some point you want to stop fighting to keep your city a great place to live and just live there.

 

Please explain this?  I do not understand how you can make such a blanket statement.  There are a lot of variables that contributed to the down fall of certain Cleveland neighborhoods.  There are neighborhood in Cleveland where people during the riots and to this day fought to keep that element out of their area.

 

If what happened in Hough adjacent to Glenville had happened in Solon, I think the same type of neighborhood issues would occur.  I also think they would be more pronounced in the outer burbs.

^Speak for yourself, champ.  BTW, we get our fair share of exurbanites too who are 'sick' of living out there.

 

Juding by populations trends and property values in Cleveland Heights vs. Solon, I'm not speaking for myself. 

 

^^That really depends on the college.  Personally, I will take the straight A student from Heights or Shaker over the the straight A student from Solon.  IMO, those A's speak a great deal towards the student's discipline and focus when coming out of a school system that does not have the resources to hold the student's hand along the way.  Of course, it's not so black and white and there would be various factors to consider, but the more obstacles that were overcome the more impressive the application is going to be.

 

You should let the students at Heights and Shaker know you're giving them a nod when they apply to Hts121 University.  The accredited colleges and universities around the country - particularly in the region - do give preferential treatment to certain districts (and to be fair, Shaker is one of them...but so is Solon).

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban.  Creating school districts, fire departments, city halls, and retail centers in new areas inevitably makes those same services worse in the old areas.  Everyone should live wherever they chose, but should also be willing to accept that a decision to live in the Solons, Brecksvilles, and Weslakes of the world directly leads to the creation of the Kinsmans, Lexingtons, and Storers of the world.  And I hate that.

 

Character and quality are great...until after a generation or two it stops getting maintained.  See Glenville.  And you're starting to see it in parts of Cleveland Heights.  I hope you realize there's a huge population of people living in Solon that moved from the Heights area because they got sick of dealing with what was/is going on there. 

 

At some point you want to stop fighting to keep your city a great place to live and just live there.

 

Please explain this?  I do not understand how you can make such a blanket statement.  There are a lot of variables that contributed to the down fall of certain Cleveland neighborhoods.  There are neighborhood in Cleveland where people during the riots and to this day fought to keep that element out of their area.

 

If what happened in Hough adjacent to Glenville had happened in Solon, I think the same type of neighborhood issues would occur.  I also think they would be more pronounced in the outer burbs.

 

What needs to be explained?  A well built, high character house from 1920 won't be well built with lots of character in 2011 if it wasn't maintained over time.  Most of the housing stock in Glenville was of this mold when it was built - high quality, lots of character Over time some of it has been maintained.  Most of it hasn't.  So who cares if it was built during a time when quality and character were important if quality and character weren't maintained over time?

 

I never offered a reason as to why houses weren't maintained.  That's not relevant to the discussion.

Can't we just agree that different people like different things?

 

For personal lifestyle and aesthetic reasons Solon wouldn't top my list, but I totally get its objective appeal.  And I think it's pretty awesome that it's both a high performance exurban community and has pretty amazing religious and racial diversity. 

 

EDIT: and the fact that different people like different things kind of suggests that generalized rankings of "best places to live" are always going to be kind of meaningless.

^Speak for yourself, champ.  BTW, we get our fair share of exurbanites too who are 'sick' of living out there.

 

Juding by populations trends and property values in Cleveland Heights vs. Solon, I'm not speaking for myself. 

 

I was responding to your last sentence.... about people who just stop trying to make their community a better place to live.  Sure, the inner ring has more challenges (as do all non-white picket fence communities that have any sense of density and urbanity).  But don't suggest that there aren't people here who care about their neighborhoods.  That is the view from beyond the 271 loop, but it is not reality.

 

^^That really depends on the college.  Personally, I will take the straight A student from Heights or Shaker over the the straight A student from Solon.  IMO, those A's speak a great deal towards the student's discipline and focus when coming out of a school system that does not have the resources to hold the student's hand along the way.  Of course, it's not so black and white and there would be various factors to consider, but the more obstacles that were overcome the more impressive the application is going to be.

 

You should let the students at Heights and Shaker know you're giving them a nod when they apply to Hts121 University.  The accredited colleges and universities around the country - particularly in the region - do give preferential treatment to certain districts (and to be fair, Shaker is one of them...but so is Solon).

 

In terms of what?  Are you saying a C student at Solon will recieve preferential treatment over a C student from Heights?  Perhaps, but I would guess that has more to do with the college simply guessing that the financial aid needs of that student would be far less than any other factor.  Personally, I would frown upon a student who had a silver spoon in his/her mouth and still only managed a C average.

 

As for top level students, I would definitely disagree.  The top students from the worst districts usually have their pick of schools.  The top students from Solon and the private schools probably not so much because there are simply way more 'top' students from those systems and, like I said above, colleges like to spread their demographics as much as possible.

 

For example, you may have 10 Solon student with 4.0 gpa's and 1500 on the SAT and 2 kids from Heights with the same resume.  If all of those student apply to Harvard, I would bet that Harvard takes both Heights kids before they take all 10 students from Solon..... even though every student has identical credentials on paper.

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban.  Creating school districts, fire departments, city halls, and retail centers in new areas inevitably makes those same services worse in the old areas.  Everyone should live wherever they chose, but should also be willing to accept that a decision to live in the Solons, Brecksvilles, and Weslakes of the world directly leads to the creation of the Kinsmans, Lexingtons, and Storers of the world.  And I hate that.

 

That's BS.  Solon, like most of the suburbs, were their own incorporated village/city with their own fire department, school system, etc 100 years ago.  Solon was a small farm town when my parents moved there.  The fire department and police station were in 1 building and there was no retail when I was a kid.  The people started moving there - mostly because they got sick of what was going on in their old neighborhood - and the city was developed around it.  422 didn't exist - it was built to keep up with the traffic demand.

 

People saw Kinsman, Lexington, and Storer becoming what they have become while they lived there and moved out while they could.  And those who stayed to try to fight it out?  They were often left with a house they couldn't sell or something bad happened to them, like being vandelized or worse.  I'm not sure when it became acceptable to blame the people who moved out for not wanting to put up with bad neighbors instead of blaming the people actually causing the problems, but I think it needs to stop. 

 

My grandmother gutted it out in the home my dad grew up in until the mid 90's.  My dad, aunts/uncles kept urging her to move - but she had raised a family there, lived there for 50 years - it was her home!  Ultimately after the house was broken into for the second time - this time while she was home - she had no choice to move.  And that's the smae story for most of the people who tried to stay.  And for those who moved prior to this, that you're blaming for everything, they have similar stories but they just made their decision before they felt it was forced upon them.

 

So enough with blaming people who moved out.  Some moved because they wanted a bigger house or whatever.  Just as many, if not more, didn't want to move, they just felt they had to.  I don't know why they get any of the blame.  They weren't the ones making it a bad place to live.

 

Character and quality are great...until after a generation or two it stops getting maintained.  See Glenville.  And you're starting to see it in parts of Cleveland Heights.  I hope you realize there's a huge population of people living in Solon that moved from the Heights area because they got sick of dealing with what was/is going on there. 

 

At some point you want to stop fighting to keep your city a great place to live and just live there.

 

Please explain this?  I do not understand how you can make such a blanket statement.  There are a lot of variables that contributed to the down fall of certain Cleveland neighborhoods.  There are neighborhood in Cleveland where people during the riots and to this day fought to keep that element out of their area.

 

If what happened in Hough adjacent to Glenville had happened in Solon, I think the same type of neighborhood issues would occur.  I also think they would be more pronounced in the outer burbs.

 

What needs to be explained?  A well built, high character house from 1920 won't be well built with lots of character in 2011 if it wasn't maintained over time.  Most of the housing stock in Glenville was of this mold when it was built - high quality, lots of character Over time some of it has been maintained.  Most of it hasn't.  So who cares if it was built during a time when quality and character were important if quality and character weren't maintained over time?

 

I never offered a reason as to why houses weren't maintained.  That's not relevant to the discussion.

 

I think it's very relevent to the discussion, considering the points bumsquare just made.  However, if you chose not to use them, the homes in Solon will never with stand the test of time like the homes in the neighborhood I grew up in. 

 

My parents house is 82 years old, will that s--t in Solon have the same appeal as homes on any of the Park street in 82 years?  Better yet, will those tacky ass homes be there?

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban.  Creating school districts, fire departments, city halls, and retail centers in new areas inevitably makes those same services worse in the old areas.  Everyone should live wherever they chose, but should also be willing to accept that a decision to live in the Solons, Brecksvilles, and Weslakes of the world directly leads to the creation of the Kinsmans, Lexingtons, and Storers of the world.  And I hate that.

 

That's BS.  Solon, like most of the suburbs, were their own incorporated village/city with their own fire department, school system, etc 100 years ago. Solon was a small farm town when my parents moved there. The fire department and police station were in 1 building and there was no retail when I was a kid.  The people started moving there - mostly because they got sick of what was going on in their old neighborhood - and the city was developed around it.  422 didn't exist - it was built to keep up with the traffic demand.

 

People saw Kinsman, Lexington, and Storer becoming what they have become while they lived there and moved out while they could.  And those who stayed to try to fight it out?  They were often left with a house they couldn't sell or something bad happened to them, like being vandelized or worse.  I'm not sure when it became acceptable to blame the people who moved out for not wanting to put up with bad neighbors instead of blaming the people actually causing the problems, but I think it needs to stop. 

 

My grandmother gutted it out in the home my dad grew up in until the mid 90's.  My dad, aunts/uncles kept urging her to move - but she had raised a family there, lived there for 50 years - it was her home!  Ultimately after the house was broken into for the second time - this time while she was home - she had no choice to move.  And that's the smae story for most of the people who tried to stay.  And for those who moved prior to this, that you're blaming for everything, they have similar stories but they just made their decision before they felt it was forced upon them.

 

So enough with blaming people who moved out.  Some moved because they wanted a bigger house or whatever.  Just as many, if not more, didn't want to move, they just felt they had to.  I don't know why they get any of the blame.  They weren't the ones making it a bad place to live.

 

When did your parents move to Solon?

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban. 

I totally agree with this.  I would agree that the people of Solon are really nice and probably some of the smartest and most diverse in the exurbs.  This does not excuse how atrocious Solon's Mcmansions and car-centric infrastructure and shopping districts are.  It is as mindless as it gets.  For me it is not even so much the architecture that is the problem.  These suburbs have become so generic and filled with many chain stores instead of independent stores like in Cleveland or inner-ring suburbs.    They are cultural wastelands compared to Cleveland or inner-ring suburbs.  There is no sense of place and as previous comments have mentioned this could be almost anywhere in America.  Why somebody would want to live like this is beyond me.  And yes I grew up in Chagrin Falls so I do have some perspective on this.  The only place I would ever live out that way is the old town in Chagrin.  Beyond that it is just mostly 60's,70's,80's,90's anywhere in America exurbia.

 

Glad someone else believes there's alternatives from the perspective of "if it's not inner-ring, it's awful, souless, and I can't believe anyone would live there."

 

Right, but we're talking about Solon which is, for the most part, soulless.  :lol:  Chagrin Falls would be a better example for your argument.

 

It's about lifestyle.  Solon offers an opportunity to live in a communicty where the vast majority of people have similar core values to each other.  All the amenities and benefits of urban living are pretty much null and void if it means having a population of people in your community who don't take care of their yard, don't look after their kids, and are generally bad neighbors. 

 

Sure, but there are large areas of the Heights suburbs in which people do have similar core values and do take care of their homes/yards.

 

People choose to live in Solon because A) the schools are great B) anything a parent wants their kid to be involved in is available and C) its likely close to where they work.  Many people will sacrifice most everything else to meet those criteria. 

 

The schools aren't great.  The kids that attend the schools and their families are.  You think if you switched the student bodies of Solon and Cleveland Heights that much, if anything, would change in the way of the all "important" test scores (for either group)?

 

Also, if you live in Solon and work downtown, you're not really close to where you work.  Especially not in winter.

 

And say what you want about how schools are measured or how good Solon really is as a school system, but college admissions people will give an edge to a student from Solon because it's "Solon" when comparing two Ohio public school students with pretty much identical resumes.

 

What's this based on?  Hearsay?

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban. 

I totally agree with this.  I would agree that the people of Solon are really nice and probably some of the smartest and most diverse in the exurbs.  This does not excuse how atrocious Solon's Mcmansions and car-centric infrastructure and shopping districts are.  It is as mindless as it gets.  For me it is not even so much the architecture that is the problem.  These suburbs have become so generic and filled with many chain stores instead of independent stores like in Cleveland or inner-ring suburbs.    They are cultural wastelands compared to Cleveland or inner-ring suburbs.  There is no sense of place and as previous comments have mentioned this could be almost anywhere in America.  Why somebody would want to live like this is beyond me.  And yes I grew up in Chagrin Falls so I do have some perspective on this. The only place I would ever live out that way is the old town in Chagrin.  Beyond that it is just mostly 60's,70's,80's,90's anywhere in America exurbia.

 

AMEN!

^^and at one time the inner ring suburbs were the craze - think about how great the Heights and Euclid schools were 40 years ago. Probably among the country's best, certainly Heights High. Would you have been so angry that parents moved their families from Cleveland or are inner ring suburbs somehow more Cleveland than outer?

Communities change and people move. And I think it's silly to vilify people jut because they have the resources to live the life that they want. Being pro urban does not mean anti suburban.

 

Yes, but the difference is that much of the Heights area was built up at a time when quality and character were important.  And a lot of the remnants of that era have stood the test of time.  These areas were and are unique.  The same cannot be said of Solon and other nearly-identical cookie-cutter suburbs.  There is very little offered in Solon that one cannot find in about two dozen other suburbs in Greater Cleveland.

 

Character and quality are great...until after a generation or two it stops getting maintained.  See Glenville.  And you're starting to see it in parts of Cleveland Heights.  I hope you realize there's a huge population of people living in Solon that moved from the Heights area because they got sick of dealing with what was/is going on there. 

 

At some point you want to stop fighting to keep your city a great place to live and just live there.

 

Of course I realize that.  However, if most people had stayed and fought, things would be much better.  But that's okay, because the same types of people that ran from the Heights to Solon will be running from Solon to Auburn Township or Streetsboro when changes start taking place in Solon.  And don't kid yourself, the changes are already starting to creep in.  Solon is just the current stop on the Exurban (Sprawl) Express...

 

And as I mentioned above, though, there are still large chunks of both CH and SH that are in great shape, certainly better than anything you'll find in Solon.

EDIT: and the fact that different people like different things kind of suggests that generalized rankings of "best places to live" are always going to be kind of meaningless.

 

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

^Speak for yourself, champ.  BTW, we get our fair share of exurbanites too who are 'sick' of living out there.

 

Juding by populations trends and property values in Cleveland Heights vs. Solon, I'm not speaking for myself. 

 

I was responding to your last sentence.... about people who just stop trying to make their community a better place to live.  Sure, the inner ring has more challenges (as do all non-white picket fence communities that have any sense of density and urbanity).  But don't suggest that there aren't people here who care about their neighborhoods.  That is the view from beyond the 271 loop, but it is not reality.

 

That's not what I am saying.  I'm saying most people don't want to make that much effort.  Even living in my condo building downtown where we had issues, 5% of the people were the problem, the other 95% of the people were botherd by it and wanted it to stop, but only a handful actually wanted to work to make things better.  The rest just wanted someone else to take care of it.  I'm pretty confident that's pretty representative of society.  Most people want life to be easy and not have to work so hard at keeping their community from going downhill.  So instead of fighting, they move out.

 

^^That really depends on the college.  Personally, I will take the straight A student from Heights or Shaker over the the straight A student from Solon.  IMO, those A's speak a great deal towards the student's discipline and focus when coming out of a school system that does not have the resources to hold the student's hand along the way.  Of course, it's not so black and white and there would be various factors to consider, but the more obstacles that were overcome the more impressive the application is going to be.

 

You should let the students at Heights and Shaker know you're giving them a nod when they apply to Hts121 University.  The accredited colleges and universities around the country - particularly in the region - do give preferential treatment to certain districts (and to be fair, Shaker is one of them...but so is Solon).

 

In terms of what?  Are you saying a C student at Solon will recieve preferential treatment over a C student from Heights?  Perhaps, but I would guess that has more to do with the college simply guessing that the financial aid needs of that student would be far less than any other factor.  Personally, I would frown upon a student who had a silver spoon in his/her mouth and still only managed a C average.

 

As for top level students, I would definitely disagree.  The top students from the worst districts usually have their pick of schools.  The top students from Solon and the private schools probably not so much because there are simply way more 'top' students from those systems and, like I said above, colleges like to spread their demographics as much as possible.

 

For example, you may have 10 Solon student with 4.0 gpa's and 1500 on the SAT and 2 kids from Heights with the same resume.  If all of those student apply to Harvard, I would bet that Harvard takes both Heights kids before they take all 10 students from Solon..... even though every student has identical credentials on paper.

 

As for this...I don't have a scientific study or any data to prove it either way.  I only have personal experience to base it off of.  Talk to a Harvard or Princeton alum and they will tell you high school matters - not just your grades and activities, but reputation of the school.  Talk to guidence counselors or college admissions people and they will tell you the same thing. 

 

That line of thought makes sense to me, so I'm sticking to it.  Companies recruit out of specific colleges because students from those schools have done well for them in the past.  Based on ym observations and general discussions, I feel it works the same for colleges and universities too.  Elite students are going to get in regardless.  It's the bordeline ones where it can make a difference.

 

And If I'm wrong, I don't think I'm putting my kids at a disadvantage by living in a school district with a good reputation.

^Speak for yourself, champ.  BTW, we get our fair share of exurbanites too who are 'sick' of living out there.

 

Juding by populations trends and property values in Cleveland Heights vs. Solon, I'm not speaking for myself. 

 

I was responding to your last sentence.... about people who just stop trying to make their community a better place to live.  Sure, the inner ring has more challenges (as do all non-white picket fence communities that have any sense of density and urbanity).  But don't suggest that there aren't people here who care about their neighborhoods.  That is the view from beyond the 271 loop, but it is not reality.

 

^^That really depends on the college.  Personally, I will take the straight A student from Heights or Shaker over the the straight A student from Solon.  IMO, those A's speak a great deal towards the student's discipline and focus when coming out of a school system that does not have the resources to hold the student's hand along the way.  Of course, it's not so black and white and there would be various factors to consider, but the more obstacles that were overcome the more impressive the application is going to be.

 

You should let the students at Heights and Shaker know you're giving them a nod when they apply to Hts121 University.  The accredited colleges and universities around the country - particularly in the region - do give preferential treatment to certain districts (and to be fair, Shaker is one of them...but so is Solon).

 

In terms of what?  Are you saying a C student at Solon will recieve preferential treatment over a C student from Heights?  Perhaps, but I would guess that has more to do with the college simply guessing that the financial aid needs of that student would be far less than any other factor.  Personally, I would frown upon a student who had a silver spoon in his/her mouth and still only managed a C average.

 

As for top level students, I would definitely disagree.  The top students from the worst districts usually have their pick of schools.  The top students from Solon and the private schools probably not so much because there are simply way more 'top' students from those systems and, like I said above, colleges like to spread their demographics as much as possible.

 

For example, you may have 10 Solon student with 4.0 gpa's and 1500 on the SAT and 2 kids from Heights with the same resume.  If all of those student apply to Harvard, I would bet that Harvard takes both Heights kids before they take all 10 students from Solon..... even though every student has identical credentials on paper.

 

I sort of agree with this.  I just called 5 of my cousins to confirm, one the reason Heights was and is still highly regarded is that that have a high percentage of teachers with PhDs.

 

The learning curriculum and faculty play a large part, post high school

Any success that Solon or other outer-ring suburbs has comes directly at the expense of older communities.  In a no-growth region, being pro-urban absolutely means being anti-suburban.  And, even more so, being pro-suburban and making the choice to live in the suburbs means being anti-urban.  Creating school districts, fire departments, city halls, and retail centers in new areas inevitably makes those same services worse in the old areas.  Everyone should live wherever they chose, but should also be willing to accept that a decision to live in the Solons, Brecksvilles, and Weslakes of the world directly leads to the creation of the Kinsmans, Lexingtons, and Storers of the world.  And I hate that.

 

That's BS.  Solon, like most of the suburbs, were their own incorporated village/city with their own fire department, school system, etc 100 years ago.  Solon was a small farm town when my parents moved there.  The fire department and police station were in 1 building and there was no retail when I was a kid.  The people started moving there - mostly because they got sick of what was going on in their old neighborhood - and the city was developed around it.  422 didn't exist - it was built to keep up with the traffic demand.

 

People saw Kinsman, Lexington, and Storer becoming what they have become while they lived there and moved out while they could.  And those who stayed to try to fight it out?  They were often left with a house they couldn't sell or something bad happened to them, like being vandelized or worse.  I'm not sure when it became acceptable to blame the people who moved out for not wanting to put up with bad neighbors instead of blaming the people actually causing the problems, but I think it needs to stop. 

 

My grandmother gutted it out in the home my dad grew up in until the mid 90's.  My dad, aunts/uncles kept urging her to move - but she had raised a family there, lived there for 50 years - it was her home!  Ultimately after the house was broken into for the second time - this time while she was home - she had no choice to move.  And that's the smae story for most of the people who tried to stay.  And for those who moved prior to this, that you're blaming for everything, they have similar stories but they just made their decision before they felt it was forced upon them.

 

So enough with blaming people who moved out.  Some moved because they wanted a bigger house or whatever.  Just as many, if not more, didn't want to move, they just felt they had to.  I don't know why they get any of the blame.  They weren't the ones making it a bad place to live.

I am blaming the people who caused the problems.  Concentrated poverty breeds crime and other social ills.  Poverty becomes concentrated when wealth is removed.  I'm not making any moral judgements, but there is a pretty simple cause and effect.

Springfield ranks #5 for economic development in populations between 50k & 200k in Site Selection Mazagine.

I think they came in 1st & 2nd the last 2 years.

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/springfield-news/city-named-top-in-economic-development-1232654.html

List doesn't appear to be up at Site Selection site.

http://www.siteselection.com/

Cheap Places to live.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlj45elli/8-springfield-ohio-2

Ohio gets 2

1. Sandusky

8. Springfield

Perhaps Forbes should move their office to Springfield.

Cheap Places to live.

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/mlj45elli/8-springfield-ohio-2

Ohio gets 2

1. Sandusky

8. Springfield

 

Sandusky is an affordable and attractive place to live; if you can find a job :(

You know that top 100 list is garbage when McWalmartville #487 makes the #3 spot (why bother naming them as though they're really that different from one another?) and as far as Louisville, CO being the best small town to live...just look at it. We can all list some top-notch Ohio towns which blow that little burg out of the water.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44359546/ns/local_news-cleveland_oh/

Cleveland one of most manly cities

 

Take pride, Cleveland men.

 

Cleveland has earned the distinction as one of the manliest cities in the country, according to the third annual “America’s Manliest Cities” study from Combos. (Yes, this is a real study).

 

Cleveland ranks sixth on the list, up nine spots from its place in last year’s rankings. That ranking is good enough to make Cleveland the manliest city in the Midwest, better than state counterparts Cincinnati (14), Columbus (18) and Dayton (26).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44359546/ns/local_news-cleveland_oh/

Cleveland one of most manly cities

 

Take pride, Cleveland men.

 

Cleveland has earned the distinction as one of the manliest cities in the country, according to the third annual “America’s Manliest Cities” study from Combos. (Yes, this is a real study).

 

Cleveland ranks sixth on the list, up nine spots from its place in last year’s rankings. That ranking is good enough to make Cleveland the manliest city in the Midwest, better than state counterparts Cincinnati (14), Columbus (18) and Dayton (26).

 

Now that's a list I can agree with. Proud to be manly Clevelander!!! :-D

I always thought Dayton was really manly. Large military presence, very blue collar, lots of strip joints, guys working on cars and sports bars. Hara Arena, smokers, wood paneling, metal concerts. Sears.

Hara Arena LOL!

I thought the Sears comment was better.

Manly is as manly does.

Columbus is a top 5 city for playgrounds according to USA Today/Weekend. I don't know if this means anything, but apparently cities with large gay populations have good playgrounds. Cities are listed by city proper population.

 

San Francisco (pop. 805,235)

Columbus, Ohio (pop. 787,933)

Hartford, Conn. (pop. 124,512)

Orlando (pop. 238,300)

Auburn, Wash., (pop. 70,180)

 

http://www.usaweekend.com/article/20110902/HOME02/110902001/Where-playgrounds-are?odyssey=tab|topnews|img|Frontpage

 

 

Springfield gets another #5 from Business Facilities Magazine for job growth in a <250k city.

 

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/springfield-news/springfield-cited-for-job-growth-1245092.html

We're #2, We're #2

 

The 10 Best Cities For Recent Grads

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/12/the-10-best-cities-for-re_n_958178.html#s357929&title=Cleveland

 

 

Nice to get some love.

We're #2, We're #2

 

The 10 Best Cities For Recent Grads

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/12/the-10-best-cities-for-re_n_958178.html#s357929&title=Cleveland

 

 

Nice to get some love.

 

It's an advertorial, so I wouldn't take this serious, not that any of these list should be taken serious.

 

It's an advertorial, so I wouldn't take this serious, not that any of these list should be taken serious.

 

True. The rise in advertorial content of newspapers is one of the reasons why I left the newspaper as a staff writer, because I could not refuse any assignments by my editors. Now, as a correspondent, I can.

Both advertorials and "Special Advertising Sections" give me the yucks. The difference between them is easy to spot for the educated and the suspicious, but others have a hard time making the distinction.  I'm starting to see them a lot more in generalist magazines (ones that don't get into the nuts and bolts of things too deeply) such as Popular Mechanics and Motorcyclist than in the past.

Top 10 magazines with bogus/pointless lists: 1. Forbes

So maybe someone smarter than me can determine if this world city ranking by the GaWC (Globalization and World Cities) actually means anything. But I always find it interesting how we (Cleveland) is looked upon from outside of the U.S. All I know is that this world city listing has us ranked above Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh etc. And anytime we are listed above Pittspuke in anything I sleep much better, just sayin.

 

Here is the link>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html

^

Cleveland is still somewhat of a corporate center, no? (and has an international airport?)

Top 10 magazines with bogus/pointless lists: 1. Forbes

 

Nice job! :-D

 

I hear BusinessWeek just published a list with Cleveland ranked at the bottom. But I didn't share it or even open the article to give the page an undeserved "hit."

So maybe someone smarter than me can determine if this world city ranking by the GaWC (Globalization and World Cities) actually means anything. But I always find it interesting how we (Cleveland) is looked upon from outside of the U.S. All I know is that this world city listing has us ranked above Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh etc. And anytime we are listed above Pittspuke in anything I sleep much better, just sayin.

 

Here is the link>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html

 

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17033.900.html#ixzz1YmlQDahB

 

It's a specialized list created by a firm in London using a certain set of criteria.  Jacksonville in the same tier as Brazilia and Omaha, Palo Alto, Honolulu, and Nanjing in the same suffiency is a hint on the absurdity.

 

In other words, it means nothing but it's still fun to look at.

So you mean it is just like all of these other dumb-a&% lists.  Sounds about right.

That's why this thread exists! :D

So maybe someone smarter than me can determine if this world city ranking by the GaWC (Globalization and World Cities) actually means anything. But I always find it interesting how we (Cleveland) is looked upon from outside of the U.S. All I know is that this world city listing has us ranked above Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Portland, Phoenix, Pittsburgh etc. And anytime we are listed above Pittspuke in anything I sleep much better, just sayin.

 

Here is the link>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2010t.html

It's sad that we have to rely on International outlets for objective, factual, reliable data.  Understandable I guess since they're not trying sway investment $$'s, political views and opinions and other agenda's that U.S. based outlets are driven by..

 

Cleveland would rank even higher with some direct European (and Asia) flights, and better Hotel options.  I would think the new Convention Center, Casino & maybe even the Aquarium would help as well.  Will be interesting how this list looks in a few years.