Why I am moving to Cleveland
coreysnipes.com
coreysnipes.com
>clean, vibrant downtown area, ... good transit (including lightrail), a diverse economy
The city is extremely dirty and constantly has a very bad smell, and the RTA (public transit) is a disaster. The direct downtown area is essentially just a massive parking lot. The economy also consists entirely of the Cleveland Clinic and a few other large health care corporations. Not exactly what I'd call diverse.
Other than that it's pretty average, there are fun things to do but you're going to run out fairly quick.
Real estate is also very cheap because no one wants to live there (few jobs, violence) and people struggle to upkeep the very large houses from the times when Springfield was actually prosperous.
Regarding the cleanliness, (parts of) the flats and public square have gotten better but that's only two small areas and is the extent of the cleanup. I drive past the steel yard every day for my commute and you can not have your windows down or let any outside air in all along 77 because the smell is so disgusting.
You might already know this but you're also driving past a wastewater treatment plant, and through a pretty sparsely populated area. It's not representative of the metropolitan area as a whole.
The fun part was when the electricity began to arc and we could see a bit of fire on the top, but also couldn't leave the train because we might have gotten electrocuted, so our choices were to sit around and wait, potentially burning alive, or make a run for it and potentially get electrocuted.
I think I was too tired to care at that point in the morning (5am?) so I just sat annoyed that I'd miss the bus to work and read up on IBM Websphere. Not sure if that had anything to do with my lingering distaste for IBM Websphere, but I'm sure it didn't help.
Parking takes up space and costs money to build, which could have been used for something else. There is always a balance between having parking and having an abundance of bars, restaurants, offices, and living spaces within any given area.
Cleveland seems to have all of the drawbacks of living in Columbus or Cincinnati without any of the benefits those cities provide, such as the much lower crime rate in both Cinci/Columbus and the more walkable neighborhoods/downtown area in Columbus.
I don't know if I'd say that Cincinnati offers much over either one.
Honestly I just wanted to complain about RTD. I used to live in the midwest, it was nice. Cheap housing!
The kinds of industries that dominate in NE Ohio are either advanced chemical manufacturing and medicine through the Cleveland Clinic.
Other comments both positive and negative:
The RTA is pretty bad, but it isn't bad at all by American public transportation standards.
The city has amazing opportunities within the arts for a city of it's size, the museums are really great and free. Additionally, the Cleveland orchestra is relatively cheap to attend and they are one of the best orchestras in the world. Lastly, big acts and shows do come to playhouse square.
Cleveland has some really great public events, Bright Winter and Ingenuity Fest are absolutely amazing. It has an amazing food scene that is constantly expanding, where waiters at top restaurants can also afford a home in the city.
Lastly, for a city that is constantly ranked as one of most out of shape cities in the country, people are so incredibly passionate about this place. In bigger, more global cities, there is less of a desire among the general population to improve the community at large. In Cleveland, everyone is on the same team.
Overall, if you are a person who likes small cities (I personally am not), Cleveland is a pretty great choice overall, especially if cost of homeownership is an important factor in the city you choose to live in.
Jokes aside, it's odd that OP is lumping Cleveland in with other 'mid-west' cities. They all have their own very different characters.
Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh...all very different.
Also most of the top 30-40 American cities have similar minimum amenities. A theatre, downtown with restaurants, light rail. I don't think that should surprise anyone. It's just the breadth/depth of options they offer that differs.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/63/a9/e0/63a9e09cbfdf63f869d2...
As an outsider (I'm from NC) I have always thought of Cleveland as a "rust belt" city first and foremost. I tend to assume Cleveland has more in common with, say, Pittsburgh, Charleston WV, Detroit, etc., than what I think of as a more stereotypical "mid-west" city like Kansas City, St. Louis, or even Chicago.
But of those, Chicago is the only one I've spent any significant time in, so I may be way off. Anybody from one of those areas care to comment? Is the "rust belt" identify meme a strong factor to locals? More or less so than being considered "mid western"?
I imagine the "rust belt" moniker is something people identify with - or reject as being derogatory, which always struck me as funny - more than the "midwestern" label, which people in Cleveland probably regard more as a mere geographical distinction. That's just a guess, though.
I don't think it's odd that the OP was lumping Cleveland in with other midwestern cities, though. I would say that Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh (and why leave out Detroit? or even Buffalo?) all share some DNA in the same way Boston, Philadelphia, New York, and Baltimore do.
Cleveland is a blue collar town with its roots in industrial manufacturing and oil.
Chicago has always been a diverse metro area focussed on finance, technology, academia.
[0] http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/eternal-silence
> I really see nothing in common with Chicago and Cleveland.
I assume you haven't spent much time in both. (edited down a longer comment since, really, who cares...)
They're midwestern American cities on the Great Lakes with the same climate and roughly the same geography and ethnic makeup. It's not like you're comparing Florence and Reykjavik, for heaven's sake. I'm fascinated by your reaction to this comparison.
(If you're interested in a less information-free exchange on the topic: my reaction the first time I visited Chicago years ago was roughly "so this is how Cleveland might have ended up if they'd had their shit together 100 years ago." It's not really accurate - there are some economic reasons why Cleveland's decline was predestined - but feel free to explain to me why it's a completely crazy reaction.)
> I think most Chicagoans would be offended if you said 'oh chicago and cleveland are so similar!'
That's not exactly what I said... although, seriously, most of my friends in Chicago aren't quite so easily offended.
Nothing negative to add, it's absolutely not a bad town and we enjoyed our time there, but at the end became VERY bored.
On the healthcare front, Cleveland can compete with anywhere in the world. On the cultural institution front, Cleveland is one of the best non-New York cities in the U.S., particularly with its orchestra, museums and plays.
If you can get a good job, why not? That's essentially the rub. I'm from Cleveland, and I live in DC, because the job market is much better. A lot of the older cities in the U.S. have good neighborhoods and cultural institutions. They need to find creative ways to get modern jobs.
Woo remote workers?
Pass laws banning non competes?
There is also no reason that Ohio doesn't have the best Internet in the country (or any other state). It's there for the taking for any governments that don't want to bow down to cable donations. Governments looking to woo startups (or get more home grown ones), would be wise to provide blazing fast and cheap Internet.
Cleveland, for instance, has Case Western Reserve University and is close to Ohio State, Pitt, Carnegie Melon, Notre Dame and more. Surely, there is a way to form partnerships and programs to harness that knowledge and talent.
You will notice two things pretty quickly if you work here. First, and I don't know why more people don't mention this, the public libraries (in Cleveland and statewide in Ohio) are infinitely better than you are accustomed to. Second, while walking around downtown you will miss the human poop, humans pooping, and general human poop-related concerns that you might have grudgingly folded into your daily routine in SF. (I find the "dirty" comments below amusing)
Other than that, probably the best concise way to characterize it is: an extremely small version of Chicago with less distinguished architecture and a less developed waterfront (but better public parks and easier traffic), a couple of museums and a classical orchestra that are on par with NYC, food and theatre that is good but limited in scope, and hospitals that are as good as anywhere in the world. All the sort of postindustrial stuff you can read about the midwest applies to one degree or another to the larger metropolitan area. All the major league sports if you're into that sort of thing.
Now, living in Cleveland is more outre than living in SoMa, for a certain college-educated set. However the opportunity is immense as world population keeps growing and cities like Cleveland have great bones. Sure you have to trade some insider status to get a piece of these cities, but that's a plus for me.
* other job opptys (either remote or local, if the current job doesn't work out)
* quality of life (schools, recreation, weather, etc)Regarding crime, I recently saw a map that showed a horrific level of lead poisoning in the urban Cleveland area children , most likely due to old housing stock.
A musician friend from Denver moved there last year and I didn’t notice. But this summer, she posted something on Facebook along the lines of “I expected to tolerate it, but I actually love it.” My interest was piqued. And the more I looked into it, the better it sounded.
The older people I met who lucked out with massive appreciation on their properties just bought houses/condos in cheaper areas with decent locations (commuting distance to the city center), then lucked out when gentrification passed over. At the time they were very bland areas.
Plus LeBron is leaving next year.
I've rarely seen a few articles(actually they exist) which talks in terms of data, verifiable facts, empirical evidence, and a forecast based on these.
You will drive yourself nuts trying to understand the essence of a place based on that stuff. It's an extreme example, but can you imagine trying to convey the character of Venice by discussing crime rate, property values, taxes, commute times, and so on?
Jokes aside, it's odd that OP is lumping Cleveland in with other 'mid-west' cities. They all have their own very different characters. Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh...all very different.
Also most of the top 30-40 American cities have the same level of amenities. A theatre, downtown with restaurants, light rail. I don't think that should surprise anyone.