You should never have posted this in the Cleveland population thread to begin with.  There is a Cleveland crime thread. It should not be discussed here, it should be moved there. Shame on the mods here(okay, maybe not since I did not even bother to report it or complain about it.  :oops:  ).

 

That post was in response to a question. Thanks for your concern.

You should never have posted this in the Cleveland population thread to begin with.  There is a Cleveland crime thread. It should not be discussed here, it should be moved there. Shame on the mods here(okay, maybe not since I did not even bother to report it or complain about it.  :oops:  ).

 

That post was in response to a question. Thanks for your concern.

 

The question(and the discussion itself about crime) had little if anything to do with population. It should have never been in that thread. It should have been moved or pruned as off topic, especially since other cities were dragged into the crime(not population) discussion.

 

And thanks for your response.

Disagree. Trends in crime affect trends in population.

Disagree. Trends in crime affect trends in population.

 

lol ok I will just let it drop. I have had really bad insomnia lately and have been crabby and nutty as hell. Maybe I was just being too sensitive or critical.

 

*Damn I wish I could fall asleep*

Disagree. Trends in crime affect trends in population.

 

I'm not so sure, between metro areas.  Within them, absolutely.

^Agreed.

 

The perception of neighborhoods within a metro area can become self-fulfilling.  When homeowners who can afford to move do so based on not wanting to deal with an increase in crime, the perception of the neighborhood keeps people who could afford to become homeowners from moving to that community.  Furthermore, it keeps renters who could afford to live where they choose from choosing that particular neighborhood.  That drives up vacancies, which drives down home prices.  The vacancies become magnets for crime, further pushing existing residents away.  The crime keeps folks with potential disposable income from both living in and spending in the neighborhood, which impacts the neighborhood's buying power, impacting businesses along commercial strips which further impacts the perception of a community.  For proof- look at some of main corridors on the east-side.  What is the general perception of St. Clair, Superior, Quincy, Central, Cedar, Kinsman, Union, Miles, Harvard, E. 131st, or E. 93rd, Woodland, and so on?  These corridors not only held businesses, but were also very dense in population at one point. 

 

The Cleveland region can (and will) grow in population again.  It's certain neighborhoods which will continue to fall in population, further dragging the overall population of Cleveland down.  Some of these neighborhoods will see even more demolitions and loss of vacant structures before becoming a blank slate to work with (Central comes to mind, which was pretty much decimated before new construction came about).  The amount of residents who are choosing to live in growing neighborhoods (with better perceptions) will have to increase even more in order to offset the loss of residents in the hardest hit portions of the city.  Cleveland will face another loss during the next census- but 2030 may be the census where the city finally begins to gain population again.  Not being a Debbie Downer- it's just the reality the city faces.   

 

I missed this one. Article also gets into immigration, minorities moving out to the suburbs, and more...

 

Cleveland's millennial brain gain fuels its national resurgence

RALUCA BESLIU | THURSDAY, OCTOBER 08, 2015

 

In the past year, Cleveland’s rapid urban renewal has been in the forefront of the media’s attention, with key outlets, including the Daily Beast, The New York Times and US News, covering its revival. Many immigrants choosing to relocate to Cleveland come from bigger cities, like New York and Chicago.

 

The city's current resurgence is in part driven by an increasing number of young high-skilled professionals moving to Cleveland for better employment opportunities, while also escaping the substantial living costs, taxes and regulations that come as the inherent burdens of living in big cities.

 

These young professionals are part of a migration pattern that is currently reurbanizing cities that experienced outmigration and disinvestment in previous decades.

 

According to a recent report by the Center for Population Dynamics at Cleveland State University, Mapping Adult Migration in Cleveland, Ohio, through the arrival of these millennial high-skilled professionals, Cleveland is experiencing a nascent brain gain and increasingly diverse neighborhoods. The latter trend stems from the fact that while African Americans and Hispanics are moving into historically white neighborhoods, white immigrants are moving into areas of color.

 

MORE:

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/MillenialBrainGain100815.aspx

According to the most recent DCA Quarterly Market Update, downtown Cleveland is now over 13,000 residents. The Leader Building will be the next larger building to come online followed by Corning Place. We need some major construction to start. This 300-500 units a year isn't cutting it. On top of that, condos are selling nearly as soon as they are listed. Clearly, there's demand. I just want to see someone stick their neck out a little to prove that the market is there. Obviously it's not my neck, but if I had the money, I would. Price per square foot is increasing each quarter in both sales and rentals. Rehabs opportunities are slowing which will lead the way to new builds and higher PSF. It can be so frustrating being in Cleveland sometimes but we're getting there!

Study findings. Appears to be a nonprofit, non-copyrighted blog...

 

http://journalistsresource.org/housing/a-look-at-low-income-housing-and-property-values

 

Low-income housing tax credits: Impact on property values

Last updated: November 23, 2015

 

Urban gentrification and its impacts have become controversial topics as housing prices rise and new developments in low-income areas attract younger, higher-earning professionals and push out low- and middle-income families. A variety of government programs and tax incentives, including the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, were created to help these families cope with financial challenges and high rents by providing quality housing at below-market prices. Through state and local agencies, the LIHTC program makes nearly $8 billion available annually to investors via tax credits for the “acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing targeted to lower-income households,” according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) website.

 

Support for these programs is backed by research demonstrating the importance of neighborhood and environment in preparing low-income children for success and social mobility. These types of programs, however, can meet local resistance. This reflects a common perception of affordable, subsidized housing: that its presence in a neighborhood will drive down housing prices in surrounding buildings.

 

A 2015 study published in Urban Studies by researchers at Texas A&M University, titled “Unpacking the impacts of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program on nearby property values,” questions this perception. It looks at changes in housing prices before and after the introduction of LIHTC subsidized housing. Researchers examined data from Cleveland, Ohio and Charlotte, North Carolina from 1996 to 2007, classifying properties based on the proximity to LIHTC developments.

 

The study’s findings include:

 

+ In general, LIHTC housing developments had negative impacts on housing prices in Charlotte but had positive impacts on nearby housing prices in Cleveland.

+ Charlotte housing prices were already 5.4 percent lower in areas where LIHTC housing developments were constructed, as compared to the prices in control areas. This gap widened by 1.2 percent to 6.6 percent after LIHTC units were developed.

+ Cleveland housing prices were 8.1 percent lower in areas before LIHTC housing were built. After LIHTC units were constructed, however, nearby housing prices were 7.3 percent higher than in control areas.

 

In addition, the authors also looked at how impacts of LIHTC developments vary across submarkets in low-, middle-, and high-income neighborhoods in each of the two cities. The findings for this part of the study include:

 

+ In low-income neighborhoods in Charlotte, a one-unit increase in the number of LIHTC housing was associated with a 0.03 percent decrease in housing price. The corresponding price increase in Cleveland was 0.01 percent.

+ In middle-income neighborhoods in Charlotte, installation of the first unit dramatically reduced housing prices, but housing prices increased as additional units were built. LIHTC housing had no statistically significant impacts in similar Cleveland neighborhoods.

+ A one-unit increase in LIHTC housing increased housing prices in Charlotte’s high-income neighborhoods by 0.05 percent.

 

The authors observed from their findings that the common perceptions of the impact of low-income housing on housing markets needs to be examined in a more nuanced way. For example, they attribute the variations in LIHTC impacts on housing prices in Charlotte and Cleveland partially to differences in the cities’ preexisting markets and the neighborhood needs in each city. In Charlotte, LIHTC developments brought down nearby housing prices. Cleveland, on the other hand, used LIHTC subsidized housing as a tool with which to stimulate its stagnant housing market and to revitalize distressed communities where “disamenities,” such as dilapidated or vacant buildings, reduced property values and neighborhood safety.

 

Related Research: A 2010 working paper (http://www.nber.org/papers/w16237) from The National  Bureau of Economic Research looks at how the price of housing  grows across neighborhoods within cities during “city wide housing price booms.” Also, see more from JR in this research roundup about gentrification, urban displacement and affordable housing.

Cleveland, on the other hand, used LIHTC subsidized housing as a tool with which to stimulate its stagnant housing market and to revitalize distressed communities where “disamenities,” such as dilapidated or vacant buildings, reduced property values and neighborhood safety.

 

That's really the key.  In fact, when I was doing LIHTC stuff, we never conceptualized our purpose in the terms the first paragraph set forth.  Maybe in OC or Tremont they do today, though.

Cleveland and Akron Lose Population in Latest Census Numbers

Sunday, December 6, 2015 at 4:51 pm

by Nick Castele

 

Northeast Ohio’s two biggest cities have continued to lose residents over the last decade. That’s one trend evident from Census numbers released last week.

 

This release allows us to compare two periods of time: the years leading up to the recession, from 2005 to 2009, and the years coming out of it, from 2010 to 2014. Over those years, Cleveland lost 10 percent of its population. The decline in Akron was more modest, at five percent.

 

Both black and white residents have been leaving Cleveland, but the city held steady among people who identify as Hispanic or Latino. Meanwhile, the suburbs in Cuyahoga and Summit counties are home to more black, Hispanic and Asian residents than before.

 

MORE:

http://www.ideastream.org/news/cleveland-and-akron-lose-population-in-latest-census-numbers

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

You bring up an interesting point. Should a city fight to retain poverty level residents who would otherwise be moving away?

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

That's going to be tough to do under the current CERCLA laws.  The vast majority of potential manufacturing sites in convenient transit range come with potential huge liabilities. 

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

That's going to be tough to do under the current CERCLA laws.  The vast majority of potential manufacturing sites in convenient transit range come with potential huge liabilities. 

There are plenty of liability transfer companies out there that are willing to take that liability over for owners so they can clean up, then re-purpose the property.  Current owners will pay them to take the site, and companies will given that there are end users willing to locate there.  The end-user part, in Cleveland, has been a struggle since the recession.  In addition, insurance markets are willing to assume a portion of the risk also.  In New Jersey, Florida, California, Pennsylvania, along with many other states, these kind of transactions are completed on a daily basis.  That is, if you are referring to sites with historical environmental impacts.

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

You bring up an interesting point. Should a city fight to retain poverty level residents who would otherwise be moving away?

In my opinion, a large percentage of those residents, especially the younger ones, would love the opportunity to make $15/hour to work in a manufacturing facility with advancement opportunities.  I think a lot of folks believe that many people in the inner city are lazy, un-educated, and un-willing to work.  That's not true.  Many just don't have opportunity simply because, in my opinion, the city caters to growing high-skilled, white collar jobs in the medical and software industry versus manufacturing/blue collar jobs.  I understand that this boils down to a state and federal issue with regard to legislation and tax burdens.  However, at the same time, I don't think the region has been "generous" enough, within their power, to retain manufacturing. 

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

You bring up an interesting point. Should a city fight to retain poverty level residents who would otherwise be moving away?

In my opinion, a large percentage of those residents, especially the younger ones, would love the opportunity to make $15/hour to work in a manufacturing facility with advancement opportunities.  I think a lot of folks believe that many people in the inner city are lazy, un-educated, and un-willing to work.  That's not true.  Many just don't have opportunity simply because, in my opinion, the city caters to growing high-skilled, white collar jobs in the medical and software industry versus manufacturing/blue collar jobs.  I understand that this boils down to a state and federal issue with regard to legislation and tax burdens.  However, at the same time, I don't think the region has been "generous" enough, within their power, to retain manufacturing. 

 

Agree that many in the inner city are quite the opposite of lazy, uneducated and unwilling to work. Regarding lack of opportunity, I guess my question is, at what point does personal responsibility dictate moving to where there is a better chance for employment? And what realistic effort can or should the city employ to retain residents?

Cities can't do much to actively retain residents as most of the opportunities or lack thereof are due to macroeconomic trends with causes and effects legions above what a City government can even hope to control for.  If people are moving, we can assume that it is for a good reason - to find greener pastures elsewhere because their current situation isn't working out.  That is actually a good thing.  Population loss looks bad on paper but we can assume that the people who moved have traded up, not down.

I've said it for a long time, Cleveland needs to promote and identify companies that are willing to manufacture things here.  It's what the city was built off of, and as you can see in the numbers, non-college degreed individuals in the city are living below the poverty line.  A lot of successful regions have many folks without college degrees, but at the same time, there are jobs there for them to do whether it's in service or manufacturing.  The loss of manufacturing during the recession will continue to drive the inner city residents to poverty, eventually leading them to no other choice but crime, or moving away.  The new white collar jobs are great, but it is essentially "gentrification" of the job market while the lower skilled workers are flushed out. 

 

That's going to be tough to do under the current CERCLA laws.  The vast majority of potential manufacturing sites in convenient transit range come with potential huge liabilities. 

There are plenty of liability transfer companies out there that are willing to take that liability over for owners so they can clean up, then re-purpose the property.  Current owners will pay them to take the site, and companies will given that there are end users willing to locate there.  The end-user part, in Cleveland, has been a struggle since the recession.  In addition, insurance markets are willing to assume a portion of the risk also.  In New Jersey, Florida, California, Pennsylvania, along with many other states, these kind of transactions are completed on a daily basis.  That is, if you are referring to sites with historical environmental impacts.

A lot of the current owners are bankrupt or otherwise unavailable.  As things stand, it's cheaper and less risky to build in the suburbs.  Therefore there's a multitude of vacant buildings or lots that simply aren't attractive to manufacturing employers.

 

The Winners and Losers of the U.S. Creative Class

 

http://www.citylab.com/work/2015/12/the-winners-and-losers-of-the-creative-class/411040/?utm_source=nl__link1_120715

From the latest report from CSU's Center for Population Dynamics:

 

 

Cleveland ranks 8th in U.S. in growth rate of college-educated millennials, study says

By Steven Litt, The Plain Dealer

on January 19, 2016 at 8:05 AM, updated January 19, 2016 at 9:22 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio – The city ranks eighth in the nation in the growth rate of college-educated millennial residents aged 25 to 34, placing it in a three-way tie with Miami and Seattle.

 

That's just one of the findings in "The Fifth Migration," the latest report from the Center for Population Dynamics at the Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs at Cleveland State University.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2016/01/cleveland_ranks_8th_in_us_in_g.html

 

Why is that middle portion of Lakewood so oddly void of millennial college grads?

Interesting Map.

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

Why is that middle portion of Lakewood so oddly void of millennial college grads?

 

Probably "Downtown" Lakewood and the park to the north diluting the pattern?

Interesting Map.

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

A lot of millenials work at Progressive and some of the other companies located in the business parks in the area. That Intersection of Mayfield and 271 has a lot of rental properties near the jobs in the biz parks.

Interesting Map.

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

Pepper Pike kids moving back in with their parents with a degree in Byzantine Pottery.    :-P

Interesting Map.

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

Good question, maybe apartment complexes around Progressive? I've always assumed and told others relocating to this area that the hotspots for college-educated millenials were Lakewood/Detroit-Shoreway, Downtown/Tremont/Ohio City, and University Circle/Cleveland Heights.

Interesting that the largest amount of people come from Brooklyn and they consider Cleveland the next Brooklyn.

A lot of 20-somethings who work in the restaurant industry live in that part of Mayfield Hts too

Why is that middle portion of Lakewood so oddly void of millennial college grads?

 

Lakewood Park, two large school properties with athletic fields, more expensive housing that's owner-occupied.

 

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

It's where many, many apartment complexes are located -- Gates Mills Towers, Gates Mills Place, Arbor Court, Marsol Towers, Coppertree, The Drake, The Drury, Pepper Hollow, need I go on??

 

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

It's where many, many apartment complexes are located -- Gates Mills Towers, Gates Mills Place, Arbor Court, Marsol Towers, Coppertree, The Drake, The Drury, Pepper Hollow, need I go on??

 

As someone who spent part of their childhood growing up in Mayfield Hts, the thought of living there now at this point in my life sounds real depressing.  Although, if I were to pick a suburb to undergo a "suburban retrofit", I'd pick Mayfield Hts. This map reinforces that idea. There are evidently a good amount of young people there, it is relatively dense, and has a lot of dining and retail options. It could be a walkable and transit friendly place, but the current built environment there isn't conducive to that.

Lots of young Russians and Eastern Europeans in that area. I lived for 11 years four houses from Lyndhurst in Highland Heights and had several friends in the Eastgate area. Can't tell you how many times we rode our bikes to Puff n Stuff to giggle at pot paraphernalia and racy t-shirts...

Maybe I am wrong but aren't most of the apartments in that Mayfield area still from the 60s and 70s. It's not really that urban compared to UC or Downtown. Is it cheaper to live there? That area always seemed kind of depressing to me too. Surprised how many younger people are there.

 

I am surprised to see how many college educated and young people in total people live within the confines of the Parma City School District. It though for sure there would be fewer green dots.

Maybe I am wrong but aren't most of the apartments in that Mayfield area still from the 60s and 70s. It's not really that urban compared to UC or Downtown. Is it cheaper to live there? That area always seemed kind of depressing to me too. Surprised how many younger people are there.

 

I am surprised to see how many college educated and young people in total people live within the confines of the Parma City School District. It though for sure there would be fewer green dots.

 

Yes, it is cheaper to live there and the apartments are all a few decades old. Speaking completely anecdotally, every "millennial" that I know who lives in Mayfield lives there because either rent is cheap and/or it is closer to their job located in the suburbs. They all have expressed their preference for living in the city or Lakewood.

The apartments around Mayfield/I-271 are older but in decent condition and, like I say, popular with young immigrants from the old Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc. The apartments kinda look like commie blocks! As for rents, see: http://www.apartmentguide.com/apartments/Ohio/Mayfield-Heights/

 

Anywhere with a concentration of apartments and shopping, restaurants, etc. nearby is going to be popular with young people who can't afford to buy houses and don't want to live high-mileage lifestyles. Some want urban lifestyles, some don't, some are afraid of city living and some don't even know it exists in places in Cleveland other than downtown if all they do is drive the freeways in/out of downtown.

Interesting how quickly the comment section became a debate over the limitations of Hopkins airport.

Maybe I am wrong but aren't most of the apartments in that Mayfield area still from the 60s and 70s. It's not really that urban compared to UC or Downtown. Is it cheaper to live there? That area always seemed kind of depressing to me too. Surprised how many younger people are there.

 

I am surprised to see how many college educated and young people in total people live within the confines of the Parma City School District. It though for sure there would be fewer green dots.

 

There are a lot of high rises at Mayfield/271 and quite a few clustered throughout Parma.  Those may be spiking the density numbers.  Plus, some people prefer high rise living and will seek it out, but in Cleveland proper they're almost all CMHA. 

 

Parma as a whole is relatively dense, inexpensive and in decent shape.  Not a bad combo.

Interesting Map.

 

What's the deal with the tract south of Mayfield and east of 271? Why is that a educated Millennial hot spot?

 

Good question, maybe apartment complexes around Progressive? I've always assumed and told others relocating to this area that the hotspots for college-educated millenials were Lakewood/Detroit-Shoreway, Downtown/Tremont/Ohio City, and University Circle/Cleveland Heights.

 

Hillcrest is right there too. 

 

As for downtown Lakewood, note that there's not a lot of grey dots there either.

Lots of young Russians and Eastern Europeans in that area. I lived for 11 years four houses from Lyndhurst in Highland Heights and had several friends in the Eastgate area. Can't tell you how many times we rode our bikes to Puff n Stuff to giggle at pot paraphernalia and racy t-shirts...

 

The much more recent trend is non former USSR immigrants from Asia. Lots of folks from India, the Middle East, etc. Quite a boom going on now

Lots of young Russians and Eastern Europeans in that area. I lived for 11 years four houses from Lyndhurst in Highland Heights and had several friends in the Eastgate area. Can't tell you how many times we rode our bikes to Puff n Stuff to giggle at pot paraphernalia and racy t-shirts...

 

The much more recent trend is non former USSR immigrants from Asia. Lots of folks from India, the Middle East, etc. Quite a boom going on now

True, especially if there was a cluster of green dots in Solon.  The map does not go that far south.

the target on SOM center seems to be one of the most international places in greater cleveland

Euclid is kind of a pleasent surprise, along the lake

What's so fast fascinating about that Cleveland map is how much is centered downtown and on the west side. Most of the city is getting nothing. This means gentrification pressures in Cleveland will remain low for quite some time. East side slums aren't even close to booming.

 

I bet this map looks almost exactly the same in Detroit, Toledo, and Buffalo. All these Lake Erie cities have similar patterns and the same core economic problems. You see a few neighborhoods growing with millennials while most of the city is stagnant or still declining. I really hope we start seeing city-wide growth patterns in the Rust Belt like what is happening on the West Coast. Otherwise, you're going to see even more demolitions of historic landmarks. :cry:

 

It's time to start poaching companies from other states! Ohio has long been a victim of other state's tax breaks, so it's time to turn the tables around. Texas would be a good place to start...that should be an easy sell for young people. Cleveland, Cincinnati, and even Toledo all have better urban stock than Texas cities for a fraction of the price. The weather in Texas is also terrible in many unexpected ways. If I could go back to 27 (which would be awesome since I think the late 20's are the real golden years in America!), the major Ohio cities all look better to me than Texas cities. The urban parts of Austin are hella weak compared to Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Toledo (though Austin obviously has better nightlife). Dallas has strong culture, but it's sprawled to hell. Houston is ridiculous. San Antonio is cute, but loses out by being near Austin. I guess El Paso is kind of cool...

 

Cleveland's challenge is that its millennial population overall is still only 23.7 percent, below the national average of 26.2 percent and well below the hottest millennial enclaves including Austin, Texas; San Diego; and Los Angeles.

I hope so too.  It isn't that hard to discern what separates the greener areas from the less green ones.  To varying degrees, the deep green areas feature transit access, abundant apartment stock and walkable storefront districts.  Conversely, the areas most lacking in these features are the ones being shunned by educated millenials. 

 

Note that this shunning includes large areas of the city which have been torn down and rebuilt in a suburban format, recently and at great cost.  Nobody who has choices is choosing that, it isn't marketable, so we need to quit wasting land and resources on it.     

^Agreed. Rust Belt cities that suburbanized former urban neighborhoods will not be able to market those areas.

Euclid is kind of a pleasent surprise, along the lake

 

Get close enough to the lake and even Cleveland isn't so bad.  I was pleasantly suprised by Villa Angela and the neighborhood at the east end seemed at least okay.

 

The thing to remember about east vs. west can easily been seen on Google Maps, much less demolition in the latter.  There's some virtual prairies to the east.

^Edgecliff between East 204 and East 219 is pretty amazing.  Spent a couple years as a kid on E214th.

^Edgecliff between East 204 and East 219 is pretty amazing.  Spent a couple years as a kid on E214th.

 

My brother lives on E.156th north of Lakeshore.  Neat old houses there if you don't mind street parking, limited at that.  There's some nicer houses off the lake to his west.

^Agreed. Rust Belt cities that suburbanized former urban neighborhoods will not be able to market those areas.

 

Except to middle-class African Americans who don't feel comfortable in moving to suburban areas that have new, larger homes.

That does not call for ripping down the city and replacing it with segregated suburbs.  No one's problems are solved that way and new problems are created.