by Aaron M. Renn » Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:32 pm
Regarding Chicago: As with any big city, if you don't take advantage of the things you can only get there, then you are overpaying, both in money and inconvenience. If you are just going to live a suburban lifestyle, Chicago is probably not the best place. You have to value things like luxury shopping, the opera, urban living (i.e., no car), etc. Or work in an industry like hardcore financial services (such as commodities trader) that requires you to be in such a locale. Or have strong roots/family there. Otherwise, get out.
Regarding Cincinnati. I'm surprised Ron Johnson didn't like it. I'll admit to having less exposure there. The geography and architecture are the among the best for a city of its size I've seen in the US. It has a formidable collection of assests, such as the Cincinnati Symphony and its strong Fortune 500 corporate base. It has retained a lot of local culture, such as Cincinnati-style chili. Clearly, there must be something seriously wrong with Cincinnati as it is one of the all time great decline stories in the US. From Porkopolis to just another midwestern burg. With the collection of assets it has, Cincinnati should be one of America's elite cities. I just don't understand it, but the arch-conservatism and inward focus may be part of it. I'd be interested in understand any impressions.
Regarding Indianapolis. Whatever one may think of this city, people are voting with their feet. It has the highest population growth rate of any million-plus metro in the Midwest and is actually outpacing the national average. Twenty-five years ago Louisville and Indy were probably close to the same size. While they are probably still in the same size class, Indy is now marked larger and the divergence increases by the day.
It is worth paying attention to Indy and Cincinnati, because I believe they hold a cautionary tale for the future of Louisville. Both central cities/counties are suffereing under the onslaught of collar county booms, which are attracting not just residents, but corporate headquarters and the like. When Jefferson County is full, and there are millions of square feet of office space in Oldham County, Louisville will have a challenge on its hand. I estimate this situation starst to hit in 10-15 years.
As someone who has lived in Louisville and elsewhere, what I really find compelling about the city is the strong neighborhoods with lots of character, as well as the focus on quality over quantity. I've always been of two minds about the idea that Louisville needed to shoot for the typical American vision of "world class city" as typified by downtown convention centers and 4th Street Live. Rather, I think of Louisville more like a Geneva than a New York City. Louisville is actually bigger than Geneva, incidentially. Focus on being a middle-sized, high quality place that marches to its own drum-beat, not a mindless imitator of elsewhere. In that regard, slow population growth is not a bad thing. I think this is something that appeals to a lot of the "underground" artists and such who have called people home. The average joe has no idea who Will Oldham or Janet Bean are, never listened to bands like Rodan or Slint, but people like that are worth any number of touring Broadway shows.
Quality, locally owned restaurants. Strong artists who follow their own path. Visionaries with a passion for world class architecture. Blocking and tackling like the old city parks, and now the City of Parks. Wrap it up in what is basically Southern cultural sensibility and lack of pretension. And of course for me the rolling hills of Southern Indiana. This is what makes Louisville great.
