Cleveland Renaissance?

[biker]

Did not get to those, but I did keep their CVB brochure which mentions them. Sometimes they seem to think you're very familiar with the area. A big ad for "Hudson's at Main& First". Asked the waitress where it was and she had never heard of it. Turned out it's in a twn about fifteen miles away.

[Linda_D]

Here are some demographic demographic comparisons between Buffalo and Cleveland:

Population---------- Buffalo 292,648 ----- Cleveland 478,403
Area (sq mile) ----- Buffalo 40.6 ----- Cleveland 77.6

% chg,
1990/2000 -------- Buffalo -10.8% ----- Cleveland -5.4%

Pop/sq mile -------- Buffalo 7,205 ----- Cleveland 6,166
Housing Units/
sq mile ------------ Buffalo 3,584 ----- Cleveland 2,782

Household income:
% < $15,000 ------ Buffalo 32.5 ------ Cleveland 30.7
% $15,000-
$35,000 -------- Buffalo 32.1 ------ Cleveland 32.5
% $35,000-
$75, 000 -------- Buffalo 26.2 ------ Cleveland 28.5
% > $75,000 ------ Buffalo 09.2 ------ Cleveland 08.3

Median Hsehold
income ---------- Buffalo $ 24,536 -- Cleveland $ 25,928

This info is from the 2000 US Census using the Hometown Locator (HTL ) to find data on each city.

[biker]

I also did some thinking about the theater scenes in Cleveland and Buffalo. They have three our four Shea's in Cleveland. And they may even be run by the same volunteer org that sparked their renovation.

But I got to thinking. We have Shea's, Studio Arena, Irish Classical, Alleway, Kavinoky and others I'm forgetting. This weekend, there will be at least four performances going.

From what I could see from their schedules, they'll be running one or two.

So things may not be as they first appear and Buffalo may be a little stronger on this score than I first thought.

[biker]

Interesting LInda.

With all those corporate headquarters, I would've thought Cleveland would've done better on the income scales. Or, rather, the distribution at the high end.

But then, those folks probably live outside the city proper.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Originally posted by biker
Interesting LInda.

With all those corporate headquarters, I would've thought Cleveland would've done better on the income scales. Or, rather, the distribution at the high end.

But then, those folks probably live outside the city proper.

bingo.
And the schools are in terrible shape in Cleveland from what I've read.

[biker]

Originally posted by LHardy
I have visited Cleveland at least twice a year for the last 16 years. Over that time I have watched a dramatic investment from the State and corporations go into the city. Guitar R/R Hall of Fame. The water front usage of green space and water sports.
Renovation of the infrastructure. The city has improved very well over the last 16 years I have been traveling to Cleveland.

The still have several run down sections as in Buffalo. They just have moved forward from their past.
WNY can not even move out of its' own way.

Levi:

Yes, Cleveland has made strategic investments in its downtown. I could see where the new baseball and football stadiums are and assume the Cavaliers arena is close by. There were no games on while we were there, but they have to have a big impact.

Along with the Rockn Roll Hall of Fame, they are all clustered close to downtown.

I am not a fan of public sponsorship of professional sports venues. If politicians generally are dumb, their willingness to spend anything to attract sports franchises looks like a bunch of teenage boys in charge of the cash register.

But it you must use tax dollars to build the sports venues, Cleveland seems to have done it to maximum benefit to their city. The businesses that might benefit from the traffic flow (hotels, restaurants, shops) are located in the middle of these venues so that they will have a customer flow from more than one theme/sport.

Saturday night we walked by their Federal Reserve branch. It looks like they have a museum. I’d definitely like to see that, although the missus was not as excited by that idea.

[biker]

Another overall impression I got from Cleveland is that it looks old and shabby. They seem to have more of the buildings from the early 20th century. A lot of old bank buildings with those big fat columns. And---along and around Euclid Avenue---they are mostly empty or underutilized.

I thought about our downtown. HSBC straddling Main St., Main Place Mall & Tower, the Rath Bldg and the white M&T building were all part of an early 1960s master plan (IIRC). We may joke about the many MPs that just get shelved, but that one got executed (don't wish for.....).

Then in the early eighties, the subway, Key Towers, the Norstar/Fleet/whateveritsnameisnow building and the new Goldome building caused another surge in building.

The upshot is that a lot of Buffalo looks newer and a lot of Cleveland looks older. Even the Key Bank headquarters in Cleveland looks like it was made to look older (or updated extensively).

Those buildings in Cleveland may be renovated. The empty retail storefronts may be rehabbed individually or in small groups.

But right now, as I said, it looks a little shabby.

[Linda_D]

Originally posted by biker
Interesting LInda.

With all those corporate headquarters, I would've thought Cleveland would've done better on the income scales. Or, rather, the distribution at the high end.

But then, those folks probably live outside the city proper.

I believe that the suburb of Shaker Heights is consistently among the top ten in per capita wealth (ie, "richest town in America" lists). The rich folks from Cleveland and its environs have flocked to Chautauqua County to buy up lake front property to the point that they are squeezing out the locals, some of whom have owned their cottages for generations but can't afford the taxes, and others who always wanted to buy a lakeside cottage when they'd "made it" but now can't afford to buy at the inflated prices. Peek 'n Peak has long been a favored ski resort of well-heeled Clevelanders. You can come up either Friday night or Saturday morning and ski and party until Sunday afternoon and be home well before the 11 o'clock news.

I think that Cleveland -- and Pittsburgh and Detroit -- demonstrate that Rust Belt cities can be sitting smack in the middle of wealth, and be poorer than the proverbial church mouse. (There was a very eye-opening and unflattering piece on MSN.COM this morning about Detroit and its Super Bowl if you want to read it.) I think they also demonstrate that all the investment in "economic development" in downtown doesn't turn a city around. It makes the downtowns nice places to visit but doesn't make many people want to live in the cities themselves.

[John B]

Here's an interesting 2004 article about Cleveland's dubious distinction as the poorest big city in the US: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04270/385601.stm

[Linda_D]

A very interesting read, John. Thanks.

I think that Detroit has once again taken the crown for this year. I don't know where Buffalo stands on it, but at least it's not first!

When you compare these Rust Belt cities, you see that the similarities are striking and the only real differences are in degree. The solutions that have been or are being tried are also strikingly similar in both their concept (ie, "fix" downtown) and lack of success (ie, the prosperity of downtown never spreads).

I think that we all recognize what the solution for Rust Belt cities is: create lots of decent paying jobs for people without college degrees to replace the manufacturing jobs that used to support the bulk of the cities' people. The problem is that in our current economy, just about every decent paying non-manufacturing (and many in manufacturing as well) job requires some kind of college degree.

[biker]

I can't disagree more, Linda.

"Decent-paying jobs that don't require college degrees" is an oxymoron. A dangerous oxymoron.

There is no logical reason for those jobs to exist.

There was a fluke in history (called the destruction of WW II) that created an artifical demand for US-made goods. The prosperity of the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s in the US was an aberration.

If you wanted to buy manufactured goods of almost any type anywhere in the world in 1945, chances are it was made in the US. That extreme position was then corrected over the next 30 years. Think about it.

Anecdotally, Disney put out a movie in the early sixities called "Emil and the Detective. One of the scenes was shot in the rubble still remaining from WW II in the German city where it was filmed. The devastation from WWII was so pervasive that it was a background, matter of fact part of life into the 60s.

[biker]

If there is no demand for those types of jobs (or said another way, no one is going to pay $40,000/year for unskilled, manual labor), any public policies aimed at "attracting" or "creating" those types of jobs are doomed to failure.

Or a complete waste of time and money. The politicians can waste their time if they want. Might even be harmless. But I'll be damned if they waste my money.

As to the cities, they will never be the hubs they were in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries. They were a creation of the conditions which gave rise to them.

Pretty much, transportation networks funnelled people downtown. Before trolleys, people needed to live witihin walking distance of work. Which is why people concentrated in cities, near rivers, lakes and, later, railroad lines. The transportation brought in raw materials and people worked on them.

Later (late 19th century), trolleys provided the cheap transport that allowed people to live far from work. But they still funnelled everyong "downtown."

The auto freed people from the contraints of fixed transit lines. Any policy trying to force people into living/working/shopping habits they don't want is also doomed to failure.

[moonshine]

Can anyone give me some recommendations on places to stay and eat in Cleveland (flats area)? I'm planning on going to a show at Wilberts at the end of the month.

Thanks!

[Linda_D]

Originally posted by biker
If there is no demand for those types of jobs (or said another way, no one is going to pay $40,000/year for unskilled, manual labor), any public policies aimed at "attracting" or "creating" those types of jobs are doomed to failure.

I'm not saying that there's a way to create decent paying jobs for the uneducated and unskilled, but those are the kinds of jobs that are needed if poor people, not just in cities but elsewhere, are going to be "helped".

This is a real, and growing, problem in this country because in addition to the millions of people who are middle aged or older who have been cut out of manufacturing jobs, there are large numbers of young people who do not understand -- or refuse to accept -- the fact that without a college degree or some kind of special training to get a skill, they are locked out of about 90+% of the jobs that pay a living wage. A lot of these young people come from homes where their parents didn't go to college, either, and don't offer much incentive for them to get more education to better themselves.

[Linda_D]

Originally posted by biker
As to the cities, they will never be the hubs they were in the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries. They were a creation of the conditions which gave rise to them.

Pretty much, transportation networks funnelled people downtown. Before trolleys, people needed to live witihin walking distance of work. Which is why people concentrated in cities, near rivers, lakes and, later, railroad lines. The transportation brought in raw materials and people worked on them.

Later (late 19th century), trolleys provided the cheap transport that allowed people to live far from work. But they still funnelled everyong "downtown."

The auto freed people from the contraints of fixed transit lines. Any policy trying to force people into living/working/shopping habits they don't want is also doomed to failure.

My sentiments exactly.

The only reason that "cities" didn't start shrinking and "suburbs" start growing in the very late 19th and early 20th centuries was because most cities had expanded their boundaries into the countryside in the second half of the 19th century and still had lots of land to fill up. Buffalo expanded its boundaries out to the current size in 1854, although even by the 1890s, most of the area north of east of Grant Street and north of Delevan was more country than city. I believe the Buffalo Street Railway only went out about as far as Delevan in the 1890s.