Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Meh. It's pretty ridiculous to give failed cities (ie Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, etc...) a pass for what they once were. Yes, they once stood out among a small group of "major" cities / metro areas, but that was a long time ago and options for people and businesses were limited. It's getting to the point where these cities have been struggling longer than they were prospering. Honestly, they haven't been able to compete with the vast majority of major cities / metros for the past 40 - 50 years.
"failed cities"? That's pretty harsh. We all know the problems of de-industrialization, poverty, and population loss in these cities. But all 3 you listed have been making a comeback on many levels.
"failed cities"? That's pretty harsh. We all know the problems of de-industrialization, poverty, and population loss in these cities. But all 3 you listed have been making a comeback on many levels.
This is a good point. Not to mention that even if these cities weren't reinventing themselves, they are still population centers of note, and still have a place in this discussion per the OP. I think it's absurd to suggest that only cities that aren't struggling should be discussed.
Meh. It's pretty ridiculous to give failed cities (ie Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, etc...) a pass for what they once were. Yes, they once stood out among a small group of "major" cities / metro areas, but that was a long time ago and options for people and businesses were limited. It's getting to the point where these cities have been struggling longer than they were prospering. Honestly, they haven't been able to compete with the vast majority of major cities / metros for the past 40 - 50 years.
I shouldn't speak for Market St El but I imagine he's referring to things that still remain as remnants of the legacy city. Transit infrastructure. Dense housing stock. Arts and cultural legacy institutions that wouldn't be as strong as they are if not for the previous peak/golden age. So yes, you're right, it is important to separate the past from the present, but at the same time it is very possible for a city that was strong in the past to have attractive qualities as a result that wouldn't be present in a newer, less historically significant, city. For me, Cleveland is a prime example of this. Browns, Indians, Cavs, RTA, the Cleveland Orchestra, Cleveland Institute of Music, Cleveland international piano competition (yes I am a classical musician so these stand out for me lol), etc likely wouldn't all exist in a metro Cleveland's size if not for the history.
It's a bit more connected than just a satellite IMO. The screenshot below(from census reporter) clearly shows the statistical/imaginary separation between the urbanized portions of Detroit, and Ann Arbor. The southwest corner of Detroits UA is cut out and added to AA's. I would think it's only a matter of time before AA is added back into Detroit's MSA. Should that happen Detroit would be the clear number 2 MSA in the Midwest.
I believe there are also school districts such as Belleville/Van Buren and Plymouth-Canton that actually crossover into both metros. so, there is a lot of connectivity between the Ann Arbor and Detroit metro areas.
you did a great job of filling in for me all the same.
The funny thing about my hometown, which we all agree should share Tier 3 with Indy and Columbus, is that it has many of those legacy-city trappings too, but thanks to its ability to annex land liberally post-WWII, it doesn't get slapped with shady "failed city"-type comments.
And the funny thing is: You could say the same thing about KC too, for the pre-World War II city has experienced exactly the same sort of hollowing-out that Cleveland, Detroit and St. Louis have all experienced. This also sets it apart from tier-mates Indianapolis and Columbus for sure, and maybe even Milwaukee (I haven't been there so can't comment on its physical appearance).
Were KC confined to its pre-1944 city limits, we'd be talking about yet another Midwestern city whose population peaked in 1950 and declined after that. (Or maybe 1960: its population fell sharply in the 1970s, from its peak of just over half a million in 1970 to just above its 1940 population of ~441,000 in 1980. It's only now inching back to within shouting distance of 500k.)
And I can put the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art up against its St. Louis, Cleveland and Detroit counterparts; in some areas, especially Asian and now African art, it surpasses all three. (When it opened in 1931, it had a bigger endowment than any other art museum in the country save one: New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art.) Its symphony orchestra isn't up to Detroit's level, and it has even further to go to match Cleveland's, and it is a phoenix that rose from the ashes of the Kansas City Philharmonic (another 1930s addition to KC's cultural mix along with the 1934 concert hall in which it performed). But it is a decent symphony, and it performs in a showstopper of a performing-arts center, a facility Indy and Columbus would love to have someday.
Actually, at least on the arts-and-culture scale, when you add the city's role in the history of jazz in America* to the foregoing, you could make a case for Kansas City belonging in Tier 2.
*Perhaps interesting tangent: The last artistic director of the Kansas City Philharmonic Orchestra, Maurice Peress (1930-2017), was also a great lover of jazz. He conducted the symphony orchestra that backed up the Modern Uazz Quartet on its farewell album, "In Memoriam"; that album came out in 1974, the year he picked up the baton at the Philharmonic after leading the orchestras in Corpus Christi and Austin. One of his sons, Paul, is a jazz composer and drummer; we spent many a Saturday together listening to Gil Scott-Heron albums after he enrolled at Pem-Day in the class behind mine.
III.
St. Louis, Cleveland, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Milwaukee
IV.
Omaha, Grand Rapids, Dayton
V.
Madison, Des Moines, Toledo, Wichita, Lansing, Youngstown
This is going by the general areas rather than city boundaries.
Listing MSAs by 2019 estimate size with one '>' representing a more than 10% difference from the next one down:
Chicago >>>> Detroit > Twin Cities >> St. Louis >> Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, Cleveland >> Milwaukee >>> Grand Rapids, Omaha > Dayton > Akron, Des Moines, Madison, Toledo, Wichita, Lansing, Youngstown
Listing CSAs by 2019 estimate size with one '>' representing a more than 10% difference from the next one down:
Chicago >>>> Detroit >> Twin Cities > Cleveland >> St. Louis > Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati > Milwaukee >> Grand Rapids >> Dayton, Omaha > Des Moines, Toledo, South Bend > Wichita, Youngstown
Obviously Chicago is a separate tier and larger in many ways in population size for MSA and CSA and the location of large institutions and corporate headquarters, a very large economy, etc.
Detroit and Minneapolis are one tier down due to their significantly larger MSA and CSA populations than the others that aren't Chicago and their very large economic output with the Twin Cities having a smaller population but punching slightly above its weight to make it a bit more in line with Detroit in terms of total economic output. Twin Cities also includes St. Paul which is a state capital so that boosts its profile a bit.
The next tier is tougher in terms of internally ranking them. Cleveland has the most populous CSA and St. Louis the most populous MSA. By MSA population size, it's St. Louis, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Milwaukee with St. Louis substantially ahead and Milwaukee in the back. By CSA population size, it's Cleveland, St. Louis, Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee with Cleveland substantially ahead and Milwaukee in the back. Milwaukee is obviously the least populous of these, but seems to deserve more of a place in this tier than the ones below in regards to population size for both metrics. Columbus and Indianapolis both have the additional boosts from being state capitals and Cincinnati has a somewhat outsized corporate headquarters boost.
Omaha, Grand Rapids and Dayton are of similar MSA and CSA population sizes and Grand Rapids leads the group in size for both counts. None of them are state capitals nor do they have the leading major research university in the state or greater general area. Though Grand Rapids leads the group in population for both counts, Omaha's very significant major corporation headquarters and employment base and being the largest city for the state and quite a bit of the surrounding area puts it on top.
The next tier down, though population-wise Des Moines leads in population, fellow state capital Madison has the much more prominent large research institution and seemingly greater name recognition overall.
Though they're not Midwestern cities, I think Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville are pretty good for comparison.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 01-20-2021 at 05:25 PM..
III.
St. Louis, Cleveland, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Columbus, Indianapolis, Milwaukee
IV.
Omaha, Grand Rapids, Dayton
V.
Madison, Des Moines, Toledo, Wichita, Lansing, Youngstown
This is going by the general areas rather than city boundaries.
Listing MSAs by 2019 estimate size with one '>' representing a more than 10% difference from the next one down:
Chicago >>>> Detroit > Twin Cities >> St. Louis >> Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, Cleveland >> Milwaukee >>> Grand Rapids, Omaha > Dayton > Akron, Des Moines, Madison, Toledo, Wichita, Lansing, Youngstown
Listing CSAs by 2019 estimate size with one '>' representing a more than 10% difference from the next one down:
Chicago >>>> Detroit >> Twin Cities > Cleveland >> St. Louis > Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati > Milwaukee >> Grand Rapids >> Dayton, Omaha > Des Moines, Toledo, South Bend > Wichita, Youngstown
Obviously Chicago is a separate tier and larger in many ways in population size for MSA and CSA and the location of large institutions and corporate headquarters, a very large economy, etc.
Detroit and Minneapolis are one tier down due to their significantly larger MSA and CSA populations than the others that aren't Chicago and their very large economic output with the Twin Cities having a smaller population but punching slightly above its weight to make it a bit more in line with Detroit in terms of total economic output. Twin Cities also includes St. Paul which is a state capital so that boosts its profile a bit.
The next tier is tougher in terms of internally ranking them. Cleveland has the most populous CSA and St. Louis the most populous MSA. By MSA population size, it's St. Louis, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Milwaukee with St. Louis substantially ahead and Milwaukee in the back. By CSA population size, it's Cleveland, St. Louis, Columbus, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Milwaukee with Cleveland substantially ahead and Milwaukee in the back. Milwaukee is obviously the least populous of these, but seems to deserve more of a place in this tier than the ones below in regards to population size for both metrics. Columbus and Indianapolis both have the additional boosts from being state capitals and Cincinnati has a somewhat outsized corporate headquarters boost.
Omaha, Grand Rapids and Dayton are of similar MSA and CSA population sizes and Grand Rapids leads the group in size for both counts. None of them are state capitals nor do they have the leading major research university in the state or greater general area. Though Grand Rapids leads the group in population for both counts, Omaha's very significant major corporation headquarters and employment base and being the largest city for the state and quite a bit of the surrounding area puts it on top.
The next tier down, though population-wise Des Moines leads in population, fellow state capital Madison has the much more prominent large research institution and seemingly greater name recognition overall.
Though they're not Midwestern cities, I think Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Louisville are pretty good for comparison.
This is a solid list. But are you counting Ann Arbor in with Detroit and Akron (and Canton) in with Cleveland? I'm assuming yes, since they aren't listed on your tiers. On its own, Ann Arbor is Tier V (University of Michigan is a beast and it's a metro that way punches above its belt economically). Akron, on its own, also easily makes it (Canton too if you're including Youngstown).
Anyway, I'll add some numbers to this old thread that got kicked back up. With these, I can see why at the more interior level why Detroit/Minneapolis are considered a tier ahead (which they are). But people are aren't giving Cleveland (and Cincinnati) enough credit, but what's new, lol.
Minneapolis is close to Detroit here than St. Louis is to Minneapolis. This seems to be the easy answer, but look at the differences in size (and people per square mile). Cleveland and Milwaukee are miniscule size wise in MSA, but can keep they keep up the density moving out??? Let's see.
This is using Cleveland's MSA boundary as a control (1,996 square miles), here is what each would look like there:
At 2,000 square miles (or as close as I could get):
1. Detroit: 3,880,899 (1,959 square miles ... 1,981 people per square mile)
2. Minneapolis: 2,882,098 (2,075 ... 1,388)
3. Cleveland: 2,048,449 (1,996 ... 1,026)
4. Milwuakee: 1,943,749 (2,060 ... 943)
5. Cincinnati: 1,942,216 (2,132 ... 910)
6. St. Louis: 1,920,870 (1,787 ... 1,074)
7. Columbus: 1,860,369 (2,162 ... 860)
8. Kansas City: 1,767,521 (2,343 ... 761)
9. Indianapolis: 1,709,239 (1,823 ... 938)
At this point, yeah, Detroit and Minneapolis still way out in front in population. Outside of Cleveland, which doesn't change, everybody gains in density by shrinking the numbers down to Cleveland MSA levels ... well Milwaukee goes down but that's because had to add Racine County (outside the MSA) to get it to roughly 2,000 square miles.
But this is where all MSA's aren't created equal. Two counties that border Cuyahoga County aren't included (Summit and Portage). Adding them would push "Cleveland" up to about 2,900 square miles. Here's a look if everyone was also around that same mark:
I kind of cheated for Cincinnati because I included Montgomery County (Dayton), which is not even in the same CSA, but maybe percentages say otherwise (the 10-or so tiny Kentucky/Indiana/other Ohio counties have more there), but in terms of peer number of people who are intertwined between the two metros, easily puts it here. For Detroit, I added Ann Arbor (again same scenario) and left out a couple MSA counties. At this metric, this would be the combined Cleveland-Akron MSA (since both "Akron counties" border Cuyahoga). For Milwaukee, I added Kenosha (while in Chicago's area, it's still Wisconsin and closer to Milwaukee ... that's another one where Chicago gets credit by a couple of commuter percentage points ... just as easy can be Milwaukee).
Since Cleveland, even adding Akron in the mix, would still be smaller than any other MSA in land (sans Milwaukee), lets add Canton (which is in the Cleveland CSA and media market). Stark County pushes "Cleveland" to 3,470 square miles (still would be the smallest in MSA area, outside of Milwaukee). But at roughly 3,500 square miles, this is what we are looking at:
You can take the population out further ... say 4,500 square miles and "Cleveland," which no doubt is the cultural/entertainment hub of Northeast Ohio, would surpass Minneapolis in population (and density) while still being under Minneapolis' actual MSA square mileage.
Btw, not saying the Cleveland (Northeast Ohio more specifically) is above Minneapolis, either. Yeah, Minneapolis has a huge economy. But it's closer than people are giving credit for. Though here it comes ... blah blah, homer; Cleveland people sensitive ... whatever the talking points are from people who probably never been here nor understand that Northeast Ohio (well maybe not Youngstown, they do their own thing) is a singular region where Cleveland is the hub ... lol, you can catch a SARTA express bus (Canton transit) to Cleveland every morning/back to Canton in the evening ... or take SARTA and connect to Metro (Akron transit) and take one of the Metro express buses that run hourly from the downtown Akron transit center to downtown Cleveland and back. Metro and RTA also overlap local service.
Surprised no one compared urbanized areas, which would be the most accurate measure of apples to apples in terms of how big a city/metro actually and practically feels:
2010 Midwest Urbanized Areas
3 Chicago, IL–IN–WI 8,608,208
11 Detroit, MI 3,734,090
16 Minneapolis–St. Paul, MN 2,650,890
20 St. Louis, MO–IL 2,150,706
25 Cleveland, OH 1,780,673
30 Cincinnati, OH–KY–IN 1,624,827
31 Kansas City, MO–KS 1,519,417
33 Indianapolis, IN 1,487,483
35 Milwaukee, WI 1,376,476
36 Columbus, OH 1,368,035
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
