Doughnut Syndrom

[Toxic Toast]

Originally Posted by dave.dawsn

My point was that the OP makes Indy out to be pointless and boring outside the mile square

I sincerely believe that was not the OP's intent.

[Colts]

The merger is what prevented inner city Indy from becoming Cleveland or Detroit. Half of the county's population still lives in the pre-Unigov boundaries, so that's roughly 400,000 or so in 71 square miles. That's a density of about 5,500 per square mile--a little more dense than a certain river city southeast of Indy.

And there's no sprawl two miles from downtown in ANY direction, I don't know where that came from. There are empty areas, what post-industrial Northern city doesn't have them? We sure as hell do here in Fort Wayne. The urbanity argument is silly. While it's no St. Louis or Cincinnati, Indy's urbanity is on par with Toledo, Detroit, and Columbus--detached multi-story frame houses on narrow lots.

[Beavercreek33]

Cleveland?

Seriously, I am sorry. I am tired of people comparing Cleveland to Detroit on this forum. Cleveland's problems don't even compare to Detroit's. Maybe if people would do a little research or actually take trips they would see that Downtown Cleveland has one of the fastest growing downtown populations in the country, has amazing city neighborhoods like Tremont, Ohio City, Coventry, Little Italy, Uptown, University Circle, Downtown, Slavic Village and more. Not to mention Cleveland is connected to its suburbs by light rail, something Detroit AND Indy do NOT have. Recently named North America's best transit system, and Brookings Institute best emerging downtown. Cleveland has a national park 30 minutes from downtown, an extensive and diverse metro parks system, a diverse economy, and has been voted America's most livable city twice in the 21st century.

Cleveland is home to 13,000 people living downtown, and soon to be over 20,000 in three years. Cleveland is home to some of the best hospitals in the world, one of the best art museums in the world, one of the best orhestras in the world, and home to the second largest performing arts district (Playhouse Square) in the country after Broadway.

Cleveland has restored and taken advantage of what it has to offer. Not let it sit and decay like Detroit. Yes, East Cleveland has its problems, but what major city doesn't have its "shady" area? Cleveland realized in the 70s and 80s it needed to diversify its economy so it wasn't so dependant on one industry. If you come to Cleveland today you will see University Circle is filled with construction cranes building new hospitals, East 9th Street and Superior are nothing but banks and home to the Federal Reserve of Cleveland, and a beautifully restored Warehouse District and so much more. Cleveland now has an unemployment rate below the national average, and has much diversity in its economy. Home to companies like Progressive Insurance, Sherwin Williams, Jones Day, Eaton Corp., Key Bank, the Cleveland Clinic, University Hospitals and more.

Cleveland has an unemployment rate of 8.3%, Indy 7.7%, Detroit 17.3%. Detroit is too dependant on one industry... CARS!

Seriously, I am not picking an arguement here, but Cleveland probaly has the best cultural institutions in the Midwest outside of Chicago. Its just underrated, and I like that. Cleveland is a true gem, and once the new convention center, medical mart, Flats East Bank, and casino projects get finished, Cleveland will be a city competing with the best in the country; and in most aspects, already is. Downtown Cleveland alone is going to see over 2 billion dollars in development in the next two years. Check out the new casino, Flats East Bank project and convention center just to give you an idea.

Unemployment Rates for Metropolitan Areas

[austiNati]

Originally Posted by Colts

Half of the county's population still lives in the pre-Unigov boundaries, so that's roughly 400,000 or so in 71 square miles. That's a density of about 5,500 per square mile--a little more dense than a certain river city southeast of Indy

I really didn't think that Indy had 400,000 in its original city limts. 5,000 per square mile is decent, but Cincy is still more dense with 4200 per square mile. The reason so is because alot of the Cincinnati Proper's land are on hills and cliffs that simply can't be built on, so that automatically lowers the density per square mile in the city proper. And my cousin lives about a 2-3 miles from downtown Indy and has a HUGE front and back yard with woods in the backyard. Nice neighborhood, but really close to downtown. I can literally see where the city stops.
Indy no doubt has its nice areas, but most are in and around the sprawl. (Like Keystone on the Crossing) I'm asking if there are any plans to re-juvenate the CENTER CITY. I've noticed there's a monorail in the medical district, it'd be nice if that extended all the way downtown.

And i agree Beavercreek33, that Cleveland is not like Detroit. Detroit is a one of a kind. Cleveland has serious issues and is kind of ****ed up, but it's the midwest, most of us are. Cleveland just can't catch a break. At least they're not completely doomed like Detroit

[Ravekid]

Indy shot themselves in the foot as well. There was a rule/law/ordinance that stated buildings so far from downtown couldn't be over a certain height. IUPUI has suffered because of this. The recent rumor going around is that Indy knows it shot itself in the foot in regards to downtown with this rule. I strongly believe that if this is true, a few of the taller buildings up at 86th and Keystone, then up in Carmel, might have been built downtown, making our downtown core a little bit bigger. What we are seeing now isn't good for downtown. Many businesses are relocating to the suburban counties. Others initially located in those areas.

As far as an urban feel, I don't know what you are talking about. Plenty of urban feel in the older city limits. Not only that, even the outlying areas are trying to go back to a more urban feel (street lamps, trying to create village areas where neighborhoods are placed near small merchant areas so people can walk to the stores, retail establishments, etc.).

I think old school urban building/planning isn't going to come back. Narrow streets cause traffic issues. Building buildings right up to the sidewalk means you have to aware where you bury utilities. The list goes on and on. To me, the new "urban" is exactly what you see in Indy's suburban counties. The former farm fields and county roads are widened and stuff is built based on a set-back. The smaller existing old city/town limits are redeveloping to get that old village feel back. If you had an area where you could have 800K people move into what is now a vacant field the size of Marion Co, you would have a similar look to the suburban areas. Now if you had that many people in 1/4 of the space, then you would obviously have to have smaller set-backs, much taller buildings/housing units, etc..

[MikiJayne]

I learn so much from all of you!

[chalcedony]

Originally Posted by austiNati

I really didn't think that Indy had 400,000 in its original city limts. 5,000 per square mile is decent, but Cincy is still more dense with 4200 per square mile. The reason so is because alot of the Cincinnati Proper's land are on hills and cliffs that simply can't be built on, so that automatically lowers the density per square mile in the city proper. And my cousin lives about a 2-3 miles from downtown Indy and has a HUGE front and back yard with woods in the backyard. Nice neighborhood, but really close to downtown. I can literally see where the city stops.
Indy no doubt has its nice areas, but most are in and around the sprawl. (Like Keystone on the Crossing) I'm asking if there are any plans to re-juvenate the CENTER CITY. I've noticed there's a monorail in the medical district, it'd be nice if that extended all the way downtown.

And i agree Beavercreek33, that Cleveland is not like Detroit. Detroit is a one of a kind. Cleveland has serious issues and is kind of ****ed up, but it's the midwest, most of us are. Cleveland just can't catch a break. At least they're not completely doomed like Detroit

Great discussion folks...very worthwhile. One other thing to consider with Indy is that it is a much, much younger city than Cincinnati--the oldest big city in the Midwest. Cincinnati had matured long before the automobile, where as the majority of Indianapolis' growth has occurred since 1950. Cincinnati has largely been flat in population growth for much of the twentieth century; Cleveland boomed up to the Depression and fell off by the 1950s. Thus, the majority of Indianapolis' development took place after the automobile, which is why it is a much more suburban-oriented by today's standards. Same with Columbus. Cincinnati was at its peak in the middle of the 19th century, which is how neighborhoods such as Over the Rhine came into being.

People in the 1940's would have never dreamed that Indy and Cincinnati would be considered peer cities, even though today their metros are almost the exact same in population. Back then, Indy's peer cities were Dayton, Toledo, and Lansing, and it was a fairly parochial small town (think "India-no-place"). But while Dayton's economy remained stuck in a rut after deindustrialization, Indy's took off (as did the economy of Columbus). Today Columbus and Indianapolis are still the growth leaders in the Midwest, but it comes at the price of a much smaller "urban" feel before turning suburban quickly. Who knows? Des Moines is booming these days as well--in thirty years it too may be on par with Indy, Cincy, Milwaukee, Kansas City, etc. It's equally possible that the most stagnant of those cities, such as Cleveland (sorry) or Detroit, will drop to a lower tier and have different peer cities of their own. But if Des Moines continues to grow, it will probably have a very small "urban" center with even more suburbia around it than Columbus and Indianapolis do.