Yes you're completely right. The abandoned, condemned, and dangerous homes being demolished are tooottallyyyyyy inhibiting people's ability to settle in Cleveland. Nailed it.

 

So let's see, what else could be done with many of those homes and at price? Try to answer without a lazy blanket statement. And who might live in them at the reduced-rate prices they would likely command? Again, try to answer without a lazy blanket statement.

 

One more suggestion -- go to a homeless shelter like the one at St. Malachi Center in Ohio City and survey those requesting its services as to how many have jobs. The answer may surprise you (scratch that, it will surprise you). And ask the volunteers working there if the number of working homeless is on the rise (I'll help you with that because I know you won't go -- it's on the rise 20 percent so far this year).

 

Until then, kindly refrain from offering your unearned opinions.

I met a guy a few weeks back who works 60 hours a week at two jobs, one pays $10.20, the other $11 an hour. He pays his widow’s family $300 a month to keep his two kids, and he stays at shelters or on the street 5 nights a week

So many tragic stories. It's why we need greater numbers of affordable homes to be built, like thousands of units. Build them with small grocers/markets/drug stores/dollar stores/goodwills/etc on the ground floors. And put them within walking distance of stations/stops on high-frequency transit lines. It will make a tremendous difference for the region and, especially, for those who need a low-cost lifestyle that means not having to depend on a car.

 

 

Yes you're completely right. The abandoned, condemned, and dangerous homes being demolished are tooottallyyyyyy inhibiting people's ability to settle in Cleveland. Nailed it.

 

Is it at all possible for you to comment on this forum without sarcasm, condescension or rudeness?  If you disagree, provide a thoughtful answer, don't go all aggro. 

 

Why join this forum if, in your massive 16 posts, 14 of them are negative/pointless/rude/etc.  You haven't earned the right to be sarcastic yet.

Interesting historical chart.....

 

 

Are cities ( and specifically Cleveland) actively campaigning to bring new immigrants in to their communities?  I know that newcomers tend to settle near family and friends so the migration process may be organic to a large extent.  Just wondering how and what is being done to rebuild the population  by infusing immigrants  that would  love to find and create opportunities and build a future in a more affordable city such as Cleveland. If we look at history, we know that new immigrants can make dynamic contributions to the energy and cultural richness of a city.  

PS - after posting in the population trends thread, I discovered the immigration thread, which has a lot of interesting info dealing with the question I had raised - but I left my original post here in case others came to this thread first - they, too, can find more information with the same next step within UrbanOhio. 

Looking at County-to-County migration patterns for Cleveland from the Census Bureau, 2012-2016:

 

The top 10 counties and number of people--net--to which Cuyahoga lost people—all Ohio:

 

Lorain County             2187

Franklin County         1254

Summit County          989

Portage County           788

Geauga County           675

Butler County             572

Athens County           538

Wood County             393

Lake County               391

Medina County          383

 

….so with the exception of Franklin, the biggest counties are still in the region.

 

The top 10 counties and number of people from which Cuyahoga GAINED people--net:

 

Mahoning County, OH            293

San Juan Municipio, PR         291 (San Juan)

Erie County, NY                     227 (Buffalo)

Knox County, KY                  195***

Bell County, TX                     177

Trumbull County, OH            175

Hamilton County, IN             175  (next to Indianapolis)

Bexar County, TX                  167  (San Antonio)

Washington County, PA        164 (next to Pittsburg/Allegheny County)

Wayne County, MI                144 (Detroit)

 

 

Overall, county to county, Cuyahoga had a net loss of about 10,000 net.  On the international front, Cuyahoga gained (not net) 6,000 people (4200 from Asia, 771 from Europe, 560 from Africa), but the data doesn’t show how many we lost to international.  But looking at domestic patterns which we do have, its interesting that the top places of outflow are mostly local (Lorain, Summit, Portage, etc.), but the largest gainers are from out of the region, so we’re gaining new ideas/perspectives. This is good. 

 

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/demo/geographic-mobility/county-to-county-migration-2012-2016.html?eml=gd&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

 

***WHY???? This is a rural county in SE Kentucky with a population of 32,000.  Is this a data error or one big family or company moved to CLE?

Edited November 27, 20186 yr by Pugu

Bexar County is San Antonio, FYI.

^Ah, that's right, thanks. I made the correction.

 

I should also note that Pittsburgh is net positive for Cleveland:  (ranks #11 for Cleveland gains):

 

From Allegheny to Cuyahoga:   506

From Cuyahoga to Allegheny:    373

 

Net gain:  133

 

 

15 minutes ago, Pugu said:

But looking at domestic patterns which we do have, its interesting that the top places of outflow are mostly local (Lorain, Summit, Portage, etc.), but the largest gainers are from out of the region, so we’re gaining new ideas/perspectives. This is good. 

 

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/demo/geographic-mobility/county-to-county-migration-2012-2016.html?eml=gd&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery

 

I suspect that rate of incomers from other regions is pretty small compared to other regions, though.  Which is not good.  

 

Thanks for posting this, by the way. Fun stuff to pour over. And a good reminder that the net bleed from Cuyahoga County is mostly due to sprawl, not other big cities. 

By comparison, Cincinnati net loss (domestic) of only 160 people. Biggest contributing county:  Clermont, Ohio 576 people and biggest loss to: Kenton County, KY at -502.

 

For Columbus, net domestic gain of 5983 people. Biggest contributor was Cuyahoga at 1254 people. Biggest loss to Delaware County, Ohio at -1399.

I'll be interested to see the data for 2017 and afterwards. I believe the local economy picked up some momentum starting in 2017.

Edited November 27, 20186 yr by KJP

I agree re the momentum from 2017. As the Census bureau just released 2012-2016 county move patterns today, we may have to wait til Nov 2019 to see the 2013-2017 data.

 

....And then til November 2023 to see the 2017-2021 data. Hey, that's only five years from now.

Edited November 27, 20186 yr by Pugu

"Looking at County-to-County migration patterns for Cleveland from the Census Bureau, 2012-2016..."

 

Are the values in the five-year ACS data (like 2012-2016) the total of the five years---or the average of one typical year within that range?

They are the average over the five years

1 hour ago, CbusTransit said:

They are the average over the five years

 

I also was wondering about that. Thanks.

"$30.41 million from tax collections that exceeded [Cleveland's] 2018 projections."  says https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2018/12/cleveland-city-council-sets-aside-millions-in-budget-surpluses-for-paving-demolition-in-2019.html

 

Another sign of population growth?

How much of that is from the income tax increase?

Except the city budgeted for the tax increase.

$30M could pay for a lot of cameras on streets and analytics to address all the wild west shootings of late.  Or pay for most of a new immigration facility at Hopkins (tagged at $43M). Or support economic development programs to fund more growth. Actually there are a lot of good uses of a new surprise pot of money.

Or use a couple dollars to repave the Detroit Superior bridge?!  I almost had my car swallowed up yesterday.  Asphalt patches aren't working!! 

8 hours ago, Pugu said:

$30M could pay for a lot of cameras on streets and analytics to address all the wild west shootings of late.  Or pay for most of a new immigration facility at Hopkins (tagged at $43M). Or support economic development programs to fund more growth. Actually there are a lot of good uses of a new surprise pot of money.

 

How much is the lakefront multi-modal center? ?

Maybe $60 million to do whole thing. More if you add enclosed walkways to the north and south sides of it. Federal government has some new funding resources that can pay more than 50 percent of the total cost.

^^They repair the Detroit Superior bridge every year. And every single year those damn dump trucks tear it up. They need to be relegated to the flats instead of coming up through Ohio City. They can take Center St to Canal and then come up the new E 9th St Extension instead of destroying one of the main east-west arteries into town

The Flats Truck Road was planned by ODOT 10-20 years ago to address that, but it never got any political traction. It was going to be built on a former railroad right of way -- the same one where the Towpath Trail is now being built.

^The idea to move the port to E55 made sense for so many reasons.....

But you can't move the Cargill salt mines or Ontario Stone, which is where many of these trucks are traveling to/from with heavy loads.

2 hours ago, KJP said:

But you can't move the Cargill salt mines or Ontario Stone, which is where many of these trucks are traveling to/from with heavy loads.

MINNEAPOLIS – Cargill today reported $3.2 billion in adjusted operating earnings for the 2018 fiscal year, one of its best performances.

 

Seems to me the most sensible thing would be to charge the companies to repair the damage. They can afford to. But, I know that's not going to happen. 

The Cargill mine can't move, but couldn't Ontario Stone move anywhere with lake shipping access?  Unless they've sold it, Ontario Stone has another riverfront site near West 3rd and newly built highway access roads. If they haven't already, would be swell if they could move as much of their operations there. Would even justify some major public bulkhead investment, to get those trucks off the roads near the mouth of the river, away from Lakeview, downtown, and Ohio City. 

On 12/3/2018 at 10:53 PM, Dougal said:

"$30.41 million from tax collections that exceeded [Cleveland's] 2018 projections."  says https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2018/12/cleveland-city-council-sets-aside-millions-in-budget-surpluses-for-paving-demolition-in-2019.html

 

Another sign of population growth?

I'm not sure if that's $30mil excess from Income Tax alone, but at a 2.5% rate, that indicates $1.2billion in taxable earnings above whatever was budgeted, which would translate to a significant number of New Jobs in the city and/or New Residents. 

The 2017 one-year population estimates for cleveland came out. It shows the city with a population of 385,552. This is a loss of 258 residents from 2016 when the population was 385,810.

 

Consider that in 2012 the estimated population was 390,923, a loss of 2,881 people from the 2011 population of 393,804.

 

Consider also that the total number of households in the City has been INCREASING steadily since 2012. (Smaller households is the major reason for the difference). In 2012 the city had 162,717 households. Today it has 171,717.

One day... the city I live in will see a jump in population for the first time in my life...

258 residents is equivalent to any number of single projects going on in the city right now. Add one more building to the Edison, and that would have been break even - two and it would have been an increase. I think when you consider the sunbelt level job growth we've had this year, and the increasing number of new residential projects, they city is growing again, and we just need to wait for the estimates to catch up.

6 hours ago, CbusTransit said:

The 2017 one-year population estimates for cleveland came out. It shows the city with a population of 385,552. This is a loss of 258 residents from 2016 when the population was 385,810.

 

Consider that in 2012 the estimated population was 390,923, a loss of 2,881 people from the 2011 population of 393,804.

 

Consider also that the total number of households in the City has been INCREASING steadily since 2012. (Smaller households is the major reason for the difference). In 2012 the city had 162,717 households. Today it has 171,717.

 

Didn't the city estimates come out like 6 months ago?

19 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

Didn't the city estimates come out like 6 months ago?

 

Yes they did. In fact sometime this month the state populations for 2018 (July) will be released. 

Here I am patiently waiting for 5-year ACS data to come out (which was December 6), and I report back on 1-year estimates. haha

In the late aughties, and until the 2010 census results came out, everyone was touting that Cincinnati had started gaining population again. Then instead of close to 340k, as the estimates had shown, the 2010 census put the city under 300k for the first time since the 1800s. Just saying, these estimates can be wildly inaccurate and we'll have to wait to see where things stand when the 2020 results come out. And even then, we'll never really know what happened on an annual basis between 2010 and 2020.

 

They have improved the methodology for estimates over the past decade, but you just never really know.

2 hours ago, Robuu said:

In the late aughties, and until the 2010 census results came out, everyone was touting that Cincinnati had started gaining population again. Then instead of close to 340k, as the estimates had shown, the 2010 census put the city under 300k for the first time since the 1800s. Just saying, these estimates can be wildly inaccurate and we'll have to wait to see where things stand when the 2020 results come out. And even then, we'll never really know what happened on an annual basis between 2010 and 2020.

 

They have improved the methodology for estimates over the past decade, but you just never really know.

 

For 2010, there were really only a few cities in the country where the estimates showed the complete opposite of where they were heading.  Cincinnati was one of them.  Atlanta was another example, but even with them, the estimates were on the correct side of 0, just that they were far overestimated.  But those examples were definitely the exception.  Columbus and Cleveland were much closer to the actual census.  Most Ohio cities were at least in the ballpark.  One of the reasons Cincinnati's were off is because the city challenged the estimates from the Census as being too low, so the Census corrected them to what Cincinnati claimed.  It wasn't that the Census was wildly off, it's that the city itself inflated the total.  Cincinnati is now estimated to be growing again, but this is entirely based on the Census, not on any city numbers, so I think it's okay to have some confidence in at least the direction of the numbers- meaning that it's very likely that it's accurate that Cincinnati is actually on the rise again after so many years.

 

Something to remember in terms of the estimates as well... when cities are growing quickly, estimates are usually too low, and when cities are declining quickly, estimates are usually too high, but when there is a more gradual growth/decline, the estimates tend to be in a pretty good position.  So in that case, I expect the 2020 results to show Columbus with more population than estimated, and both other 2 Cs about where they were estimated to be.  So Cincinnati with a gain somewhere between 5,000-15,000, Cleveland with a loss between 15,000-30,000 and Columbus with a gain of between 150,000-200,000.   All those figures would be improvements over the 2000-2010 period, and really the best in decades.   

Edited December 19, 20186 yr by jonoh81

This is not necessarily a census question, but more a neighborhood definition question:

 

**Cross-posted from "Cleveland: Random Quick Questions"**

 

For the City of Cleveland, are the official city neighborhood designations simply known as Statistical Planning Areas (SPAs)?

 

If so, I noticed a shift in both neighborhood names and borders since the 2010 census vs what the city posts as its SPAs (2014 the most recent):

 

2010: http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/2010census/downloads/SPAs.pdf

2014: http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/2010census/downloads/All_SPAs_2014.pdf

 

Some neighborhoods completely drop off (Corlett).

Some neighborhoods are added (Lee-Harvard).

And many names and borders shift, especially on the east side.

 

My question -- what is the gospel that defines the present day Cleveland neighborhoods?

 

(I was trying to create wiki pages for remaining Cleveland neighborhoods that didn't have pages, and I noticed the shift.  The main Cleveland wiki page is based off of the 2010 borders). 

Edited December 30, 20186 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

^ BUMP!   So who can speak to (or guess) on SPA / neighborhood definitions?

 

Is "Hopkins" a neighborhood now and not "Riverside?"

SPAs are comprised of census tracts i think so the data can be analyzed.  So if part of a "neighborhood" in the traditional sense is divided into two census tracts, a section of that part of the neighborhood would be excluded OR a section of the adjacent area that is not part of the neighborhood would be included.

^ Thanks Pugu.

 

It's all coming together for me ... many boundaries / names did change, since the 2010 census.

 

Here is the current SPA guide:  http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/2010census/factsheets.php

 

And I found the specific change referenced:

 

In 2000 the City Planning Commission aggregated the Census Tracts into 36 Statistical Planning Areas (SPA). Each SPA is equivalent to a traditional neighborhood. A Neighborhood Fact Sheet compiles some of the most basic demorgraphic information for a certain neighborhood. The census tracks and SPA's changed in 2014. http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/census/factsheets/cpc.html

 

A few other notables:

 

"Industrial Valley" is now "Cuyahoga Valley"

"Downtown" is defined as cleanly to the I-90 border

"Ohio City" seems to have tighter boundaries

"North Broadway" and "South Broadway" have been combined into "Broadway-Slavic Village"

"Forest Hills" has been merged into "Glenville"

 

I guess I'm just surprised I never noticed the changes, since it is currently 2019 and they were done in 2014.   I like the new borders and definitions much better.

 

Also, a TON of content online continues to reference the 2010 SPA borders. 

 

Edited January 2, 20196 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

I had always wondered what made Corlett distinct, and now it is no more.

My Census Bureau friend pointed out another interesting feature of Cleveland's demographics. The non-farm jobs number exceeds the availalbe workforce by a consistent and comparatively HUGE number. This means the Cleveland MSA is attracting workers who live outside it; necessarily there will be some lure to move closer to work. This lure, of course, can be offset by other factors (family ties, taxes, etc.), but it is persistent and to some degree effective.

 

The number of non-farm jobs minus the available workforce for regional cities (positive means more jobs than people, negative more people than jobs). Using November data:

Cleveland  -   positive 60,000

Milwaukee -  positive 60,000

Columbus -  positive 30,000

Indianapolis -  positive 28,000

Cincinnati  -  positive 9,000

Pittsburgh  -  negative 4,000

Kansas City -  negative 23,000

StLouis -  negative 60,000

Detroit  - negative 70,000

Chicago -  negative 100,000

 

She says you can't make a lot of this, but it is a real factor.

Could this be due to people commuting from Summit county? Might be interesting if this same stat is available at the CSA level.  

The data by itself doesn't say what's causing this but it is very interesting and worth looking into and analyzing over an extended period.

 

EDIT: while persons commuting from the Akron, Canton and Youngstown MSAs is probably the biggest source, could some be the result of people relocating here for jobs but not yet updating their residency (driver's licenses, tax records, utility bills, etc.) information?

Edited January 6, 20196 yr by KJP

10 hours ago, Dougal said:

My Census Bureau friend pointed out another interesting feature of Cleveland's demographics. The non-farm jobs number exceeds the availalbe workforce by a consistent and comparatively HUGE number. This means the Cleveland MSA is attracting workers who live outside it; necessarily there will be some lure to move closer to work. This lure, of course, can be offset by other factors (family ties, taxes, etc.), but it is persistent and to some degree effective.

 

The number of non-farm jobs minus the available workforce for regional cities (positive means more jobs than people, negative more people than jobs). Using November data:

Cleveland  -   positive 60,000

Milwaukee -  positive 60,000

Columbus -  positive 30,000

Indianapolis -  positive 28,000

Cincinnati  -  positive 9,000

Pittsburgh  -  negative 4,000

Kansas City -  negative 23,000

StLouis -  negative 60,000

Detroit  - negative 70,000

Chicago -  negative 100,000

 

She says you can't make a lot of this, but it is a real factor.

probably a lot of factors. many of these cities arent 'comparable' in the same way. those cities with the highest positives likely mean that the city itself is not an attractive place for employees to live. those with smaller negs/positives suggests a balance; those with high negatives either means that the city is more attractive than the suburbs (chicago), physically very large so that the urban/suburban divide is moot (kc, indy), or high concentrations of poverty (stl, det). 

These are MSA figures, not municipal numbers.