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.
Great question by the OP, and based on the answers I've seen so far, it sounds like the answer is "no". However, "major revitalization" is a relative term, so cities like Cleveland or Detroit that are experiencing a "renaissance" right now are growing MUCH more slowly than the "it" cities on the coasts and in the Sun Belt, but relative to where these cities were for the past 40 years, the growth is probably MORE robust than almost any of the aforementioned cities.
So, in short, it seems like there are no major cities that are not experiencing a major revitalization, when relativity is factored in.
To me, revitalization and population growth are not mutually exclusive. A city can begin the revitalization process in hopes to spur growth. Or simply because the local residents want it.
Milwaukee has lots of projects going on downtown but I don't think the population is changing much. I don't really care if the population grows. Besides apartment/condo buildings downtown the only room for growth would be sprawling suburbs. I don't consider sprawl a good thing.
To me, revitalization and population growth are not mutually exclusive. A city can begin the revitalization process in hopes to spur growth. Or simply because the local residents want it.
Milwaukee has lots of projects going on downtown but I don't think the population is changing much. I don't really care if the population grows. Besides apartment/condo buildings downtown the only room for growth would be sprawling suburbs. I don't consider sprawl a good thing.
Agreed, they are not mutually exclusive. From what I've witnessed one has to happen before the other. In Detroit's case especially, the city is not going to see population growth until it continues to revitalize.
I'd argue that cities like Detroit and Cleveland, although experiencing a revitalization, are not experiencing a major one, insofar as redevelopment of Downtown to include more residential elements and gentrification of the inner ring of neighborhoods is not yet enough to offset the decline in population in outer neighborhoods.
Yes, this is a true statement. Cleveland's downtown and 5-6 neighborhoods are 'hot' with new development. But there are still many neighborhoods of blight and population loss. Cleveland was ground-zero for the mortgage crisis of 2008 and there's a huge inventory of vacant, foreclosed houses that banks can't sell. The County has had a program for the last several years of tearing these houses down rather than letting them rot or become drug dens or places ripped off for copper piping and the like. This has left a lot of empty lots, though.
Yes, this is a true statement. Cleveland's downtown and 5-6 neighborhoods are 'hot' with new development. But there are still many neighborhoods of blight and population loss. Cleveland was ground-zero for the mortgage crisis of 2008 and there's a huge inventory of vacant, foreclosed houses that banks can't sell. The County has had a program for the last several years of tearing these houses down rather than letting them rot or become drug dens or places ripped off for copper piping and the like. This has left a lot of empty lots, though.
I thought Las Vegas and Florida were ground zero for the mortgage crisis.
I've heard nothing but good things coming out of Cleveland lately. I need to get back there soon. My mom is from Euclid.
I thought Las Vegas and Florida were ground zero for the mortgage crisis.
I've heard nothing but good things coming out of Cleveland lately. I need to get back there soon. My mom is from Euclid.
Vegas, Florida and Cleveland were the three national examples I remember always being referred to. In Cleveland, it was Slavic Village and Mount Pleasant that were the go to neighborhoods for news agencies, but it was region wide.
You’re kind of proving his point. “A Building here, Renovation there” is relatively major for Cleveland. There are cities like Charlotte or Austin where you notice what was there 15 years ago, not what has changed in 15 years.
I'm missing your point. And it seems like you are making his point. Yeah there are cities that are visually booming because whatever inventory that is added has to be new construction. Then there are places like Cleveland and Detroit where it's not as obvious because both those cities have/had so many existing buildings (in some cases like 925 Euclid could never be built today in 99 percent of cities due to what it would cost) that are getting new life. And it's more than one here or there, it has been consistently 3-4 at any given time redeveloped on top of the one new tower here or there.
From an optics standpoint, you only see the couple new buildings and don't see the dozens of existing buildings that have been renovated so it appears that Detroit or Cleveland is lagging compared to the solely new construction cities.
Even with that, I agree with his/her overall point that even say $1 billion of investment in a city like Cleveland or Detroit is more meaningful, at this time, than $1 billion in say Charlotte or Austin. Those two its expected because they are it cities. In Cleveland or Detroit, not only does it fly under the radar because it's not something new popping up, but it's more revitalizing in those places because both have suffered from decades of abandonment.
Plus, and maybe I'll be wrong on this, but I think both Detroit and Cleveland are primed to kick up the new construction once the inventory of existing buildings dries up. In Cleveland's case, it is getting close.
Though, I am focusing on downtown areas and both cities do have a lot to do to stabilize the majority of their neighborhoods. But that has at least started to happen and both now have places that 20 years ago were no-gos that are now seeing redevelopment... both rehab and new construction. It's still a work in progress and probably still decades away, but if they can continue to build the 5-6 hot neighborhoods without letting the others go into further decline, eventually it will bleed over. Though I guess that's the juggling act for now ... how to continue to invest the in in spots without completely neglecting the other areas further, which goes back to the original point of a dollar being spent in Cleveland/Detroit meaning more than a dollar being spent in a Sun Belt boom town.
I didn't perceive any kind of revitalization in San Antonio or Albuquerque when I was there a couple years back. They weren't dying by any means, but it seemed like the growth was happening at the fringes.
In SA with the extension of The River Walk (Museum Reach) there is many new apartments and office buildings being built or already built on Broadway. Broadway and the vicinity especially around The Pearl from downtown to the Mahncke Park area is slowly being transformed. Southtown is another area with considerable revitalization taking place.
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.
