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.
How much of Detroit's "comeback" is real? I had a conversation with an older woman from Detroit who was around for the 12th St riots. She said that outside of the theme park-like downtown, Detroit is still pretty much a giant slum
How will St Louis fare in the next 1-2 decades? On paper, other than demographics and the bankruptcy, it's nearly a twin City of Detroit, yet is perceived to be in much better shape. Why?
Columbus and Indy, two more twin cities, seen to be doing pretty well. They're perceived as "bland" by a lot of people, but economically they seem to be very solid. I wonder how they will look in the next 10-20 years.
1. Chicago - Well diversified city in the past few decades. Not growing as quickly, but will be leader of the midwest for MANY decades
2. Minneapolis - Again, well diversified, progressive, clean and safe. Everything a city could want except better weather!
3. Columbus - Similar to Minneapolis but a bit smaller. Also has OSU to constantly feed new graduates
4. Indianapolis - A bland city that keeps on growing & with a ton of feeder colleges nearby
5. Madison - Pretty small; but a cool, safe little city with a pretty solid outlook
5 Bleakest (1 is worst):
5. Detroit - Improved downtown a lot recently, got the ball rolling with tech & insurance companies, and a great city identity. I think they'll turn around.
4. St Louis - Similar to Detroit. Turned it around a few years earlier but a bit slower.
3. Cleveland - Most bleak of the major cities, outshined by Columbus and Cinci in recent years, no great story / identity
2. Flint MI - The crime + water issue really aren't great for the future of a city..
1. Gary - Obvious choice. Nothing can really save this town.
How is Cleveland the bleakest major city? It seems like every day a major new development is announced in a previously depressed area. Downtown and University Cirle are growing like never before, and as neighborhoods like Ohio City, Tremont and Gordon Square are continuing to develop with expensive apartments, less expensive neighborhoods like Old Brooklyn, North Collinwood, Asiatown, and Slavic Village are starting to revitalize. Sure, we still have big problems in many urban neighborhoods, but it certainly seems like the city is on the rise.
Also, what do you mean Cleveland has no great story/identity? Cleveland has tons of interesting history, from being part of the Connecticut Western Reserve to being the Silicon Valley of the first Industrial Revolution and home to Millionaire’s Row, to all of the mafia history, and now having some of the greatest cultural institutions in the country (CMA, Cleveland Orchestra, Playhouse Square), and of course the Rock Hall.
Last edited by Cleverfield; 04-30-2019 at 05:57 AM..
How is Cleveland the bleakest major city? I look around and all I see is new development in previously depressed areas. Downtown and University Cirle are growing like never before, and as neighborhoods like Ohio City, Tremont and Gordon Square are continuing to develop with expensive apartments, less expensive neighborhoods like Old Brooklyn, North Collinwood, Asiatown, and Slavic Village are starting to revitalize. Sure, we still have big problems in many urban neighborhoods, but it certainly seems like the city is on the rise.
Detroit and St Louis might be able to leverage the slow growth of the region into the city. Cleveland does not have that ability. It’s very difficult to grow as a city if the metro isn’t growing.
In understated part of Boston or Philadelphia’s revival is that 1) the metros are growing faster than they did in the 80s when the cities are declining and 2) they are taking their share of metropolitan growth. Cleveland is shuffling the chairs around which might be good for the city’s balance sheet but not a real comeback.
How much of Detroit's "comeback" is real? I had a conversation with an older woman from Detroit who was around for the 12th St riots. She said that outside of the theme park-like downtown, Detroit is still pretty much a giant slum
How will St Louis fare in the next 1-2 decades? On paper, other than demographics and the bankruptcy, it's nearly a twin City of Detroit, yet is perceived to be in much better shape. Why?
This thread considers regional outlooks so think of it on a metro scale. Detroit as a city fell much further from an infrastructure standpoint than pretty much any other city. However at a metro level the region overall has been more resilient than some of it's "decline peers". Detroit suffered a huge hit during the great recession, but as the economy recovered, and the auto industry restructured it started growing again pretty quick. I do think St. Louis is more bouyant than Cleveland or PGH, but at the moment it has shown declines at a metro level as well as the city. I would say there's an underlying difference in Detroit if it's metro will grow during good times when these other cities still post declines.
In terms of Detroit's comeback, I'd say it seems to be pretty real. The big argument like you mentioned is that downtown seems to be skyrocketing, while the rest of the city remains incredibly blighted. The problem I have with this logic is that there is no city that recovered without a strong core. If a city doesn't have a strong core there's much less incentive for investment to happen in the neighborhoods. It has to start from the inside out. The other portion that is overlooked is that investment IS starting to happen in the neighborhoods. It's just earlier on in it's roots. Banks are starting to partner with neighborhood associations for financial commitments, investment groups and non profits are investing in entire blocks at a time in Detroit. This is something that even 10 years ago was unheard of. Because of how far Detroit fell it will take longer to manifest big dividends in the neighborhoods. There are news stories of this happening almost weekly. This is something the naysayers often don't consider when making the "only downtown is coming back" argument.
This thread considers regional outlooks so think of it on a metro scale. Detroit as a city fell much further from an infrastructure standpoint than pretty much any other city. However at a metro level the region overall has been more resilient than some of it's "decline peers". Detroit suffered a huge hit during the great recession, but as the economy recovered, and the auto industry restructured it started growing again pretty quick. I do think St. Louis is more bouyant than Cleveland or PGH, but at the moment it has shown declines at a metro level as well as the city. I would say there's an underlying difference in Detroit if it's metro will grow during good times when these other cities still post declines.
In terms of Detroit's comeback, I'd say it seems to be pretty real. The big argument like you mentioned is that downtown seems to be skyrocketing, while the rest of the city remains incredibly blighted. The problem I have with this logic is that there is no city that recovered without a strong core. If a city doesn't have a strong core there's much less incentive for investment to happen in the neighborhoods. It has to start from the inside out. The other portion that is overlooked is that investment IS starting to happen in the neighborhoods. It's just earlier on in it's roots. Banks are starting to partner with neighborhood associations for financial commitments, investment groups and non profits are investing in entire blocks at a time in Detroit. This is something that even 10 years ago was unheard of. Because of how far Detroit fell it will take longer to manifest big dividends in the neighborhoods. There are news stories of this happening almost weekly. This is something the naysayers often don't consider when making the "only downtown is coming back" argument.
To counter that What sparked Boston’s recovery was a tech boom in the Suburbs that soon collapsed onwards towards Boston. San Francisco’s rose to prominence also stared in its suburbs are spilled into the city.
To counter that What sparked Boston’s recovery was a tech boom in the Suburbs that soon collapsed onwards towards Boston. San Francisco’s rose to prominence also stared in its suburbs are spilled into the city.
Are you saying only the tech model applies to city resurgance? The discussion had was city core vs. city neighborhoods, not city vs. suburbs. To counter your statements Detroit's suburbs have always remained light years healthier than Detroit itself. Detroit's suburbs walled the city off politically and sucked away it's jobs and tax base for 60 years. It's one of the reasons the city is almost 70% smaller than it was in the 1950's, while the greater region is 40% larger. Detroit's neighborhoods are never going to recover until people want to move to Detroit. In almost all cases a city won't attract residents to it's neighborhoods without a healthy vibrant core and jobs. This is starting to happen in Detroit. The investments now are causing many long time suburban firms to move back into the city.
What you're referring to is a regional transition. The examples of both San Francisco and Boston do not contain the toxic regional political warfare that accelerated Detroit's decline. Detroit as a region is still attracting residents at large, Detroit as a city has yet to do so. Show me any city(not metro) that went through decline and started growing again without a strong core?
There's no way Chicago could ever collapse the way Detroit did, to even infer so is irresponsible IMO. Detroit's collapse was as much political as it was economic. Social conditions in the current age could not replicate Detroit's collapse, and Chicago is FAR to economically diverse and prominent to ever worry about that future. If Chicago ever got to a point where it was collapsing in such a manner there's a very strong chance the rest of the country would be as well.
Population and economic cycles trend in waves. Whatever the circumstances are now that are suppressing Chicago and it's metro area could cycle into growth quickly, when they are adequately addressed.
Isn't Chicago like the 3rd GDP city of the country?
If Chicago was to go down like Detroit, you would have a massive recession
The so called "revitalization" of Detroit is largely fraudulent. Outside of the small downtown bubble for visiting suburbanites, that is. The underlying problems that caused the city's horrific decline remain unsolved and largely unaddressed.
There's a YouTuber who tours various "hoods" in America called Charliebo313. He lives in and grew up in Detroit, and in one of his video says essentially the same thing, Detroit's "comeback" is mostly hype.
The so called "revitalization" of Detroit is largely fraudulent. Outside of the small downtown bubble for visiting suburbanites, that is. The underlying problems that caused the city's horrific decline remain unsolved and largely unaddressed.
I disagree with this. I don't think Detroit's revitalization is fraudulent, I think it's in its infancy. There's a pretty big difference. Detroit declined, and then basically collapsed over the course of several decades. The huge upswing in investment downtown has really only happened over the last 6-7 years. There's no way to fix these long term issues and abandonment overnight. People who are scoffing and development in Downtown, Midtown, Corktown ect are forgetting the last 70 years. Would they rather no investment happen and the city continue to hemorrhage money?
Revitalization has to start somewhere, if not downtown where should it start? Anyone can drive through Detroit and find severe blight and claim revitalization isn't happening. I absolutely think people should be optimistic for Detroit, especially if they witnessed the last several decades. The only people who are frauds would be those that are claiming Detroit is back. I have yet to meet anyone who is claiming that though.
Redevelopment is starting in Detroit neighborhoods(albeit slowly). Detroit's neighborhoods were gutted, it's going to take a long time to make a shift over all 140sq miles. There are news stories happening like these more and more frequently:
How is Cleveland the bleakest major city? It seems like every day a major new development is announced in a previously depressed area. Downtown and University Cirle are growing like never before, and as neighborhoods like Ohio City, Tremont and Gordon Square are continuing to develop with expensive apartments, less expensive neighborhoods like Old Brooklyn, North Collinwood, Asiatown, and Slavic Village are starting to revitalize. Sure, we still have big problems in many urban neighborhoods, but it certainly seems like the city is on the rise.
Also, what do you mean Cleveland has no great story/identity? Cleveland has tons of interesting history, from being part of the Connecticut Western Reserve to being the Silicon Valley of the first Industrial Revolution and home to Millionaire’s Row, to all of the mafia history, and now having some of the greatest cultural institutions in the country (CMA, Cleveland Orchestra, Playhouse Square), and of course the Rock Hall.
You can find sources for infrastructure spending and projects on cities, and Cleveland is often not even on the lists because they have so few compared to other cities.. I'm sure they have projects and reconstruction going on (every city does), but I'm doubtful it's on the scale of other cities.
And I'm sure you know a ton of Cleveland history as a resident. But to create a compelling city you also need an interesting story/identity for outsiders. I feel like Cleveland's is far weaker than St Louis, Detoit, or even Cincinnati.
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.
