Can Cleveland Become A '15-minute City'? Experts Say It's A Real Possibility

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Crime obviously isn't a primary reason HNWI don't live in Cleveland proper. There are plenty of cities with comparable crime rates where a high share of regional HNWI live in city proper, such as New Orleans, Memphis, Washington DC, Miami and Atlanta. It's really more for historical reasons, where there aren't favored quarter neighborhoods in city proper (same general issue for Detroit).

Criminals mostly affect poor neighborhoods, and don't respect city boundaries anyways.

actually that is completely incorrect. historically from the mid 1800s to the early 20th century cleveland's euclid avenue was on a par with nyc fifth avenue for being a wealthy mansion row:




Only a few of the Millionaires' Row homes still exist today in Cleveland. But back when the city was the sixth largest in the country, in the early 1900s, Euclid Avenue was one of the most stunning places in the world. Here's a peek back at the past.

Only a few of the Millionaires' Row homes still exist today in Cleveland. But back when the city was the sixth largest in the country, in the early 1900s, Euclid Avenue was one of the most stunning places in the world. Here's a peek back at the past.

Photos courtesy of the Cleveland Memory Project


https://www.clevescene.com/cleveland...eshow/38342626

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

I hate to rain on everyone's parade, but Cleveland will not undergo an urbanist renaissance with trendy coffee shops and pop-up galleries until they can get their crime rate under control, particularly violent crime.

i hate to rain on your parade, but like every city crime isn't spread equally all over town.

however, the cle galleries and coffee shops are -- here's a few:

https://wanderlog.com/list/geoCatego...s-in-cleveland

https://www.cleveland.com/entertainm...g-to-yelp.html

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

actually that is completely incorrect. historically from the mid 1800s to the early 20th century cleveland's euclid avenue was on a par with nyc fifth avenue for being a wealthy mansion row:

I'm talking about recent urban history, not the Civil War. Yes, a long time ago every city's wealthy lived in the city core. There were no suburbs. There was nothing that wasn't easily accessible by foot or at least carriages.

Cleveland had significant and very early wealth flight. Shaker Heights became the dominant wealth center very early. The Jewish middle class had fled Glenwood, on the East Side, by the 1950's, which is very early in the postwar wealth/race flight cycle. Even in Detroit, there were heavily Jewish public high schools until about 1970. In Cleveland, places like Cleveland Heights and University Heights served the same role as many in-town neighborhoods, they were just technically suburbs.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm talking about recent urban history, not the Civil War. Yes, a long time ago every city's wealthy lived in the city core. There were no suburbs. There was nothing that wasn't easily accessible by foot or at least carriages.

Cleveland had significant and very early wealth flight. Shaker Heights became the dominant wealth center very early. The Jewish middle class had fled Glenwood, on the East Side, by the 1950's, which is very early in the postwar wealth/race flight cycle. Even in Detroit, there were heavily Jewish public high schools until about 1970. In Cleveland, places like Cleveland Heights and University Heights served the same role as many in-town neighborhoods, they were just technically suburbs.

except you said for historical reasons there weren't favored quarters in places like cleveland, but historically there actually were. and it wasn't just during the civil war era, just like the nyc gilded age fifth avenue, cle millionaire's row lasted until the 1920s-30s:



In 1910, Cleveland was the sixth largest city in the country. With the increase in population and new developments encroaching, Euclid Avenue experienced a drastic rise in taxes and land costs. These rises were just the first step in the downfall of Millionaires’ Row.

Millionaires' Row gradually shifted eastward as commercialization claimed some of the older homes near downtown. By the 1920s, a suburban exodus to "the Heights" east of the city illustrated that the very prosperity created by the denizens of Euclid Avenue ultimately displaced their grand homes. A number of the luxurious homes were demolished in the 1920s and 1930s to make way for commercial buildings and parking lots. In the 1950s, more homes were destroyed to make way for the Innerbelt Freeway. Today, only a handful of homes still exist, giving us just a glimpse of the splendor that once was considered the wealthiest address in the nation.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I have to say the long-term homeowners have been way, way more irritating than Section 8 tenants to me, given the latter tend to cycle in and out within a few years, but if you have a bad homeowner next to you you're stuck with them till they die or get put in a nursing home.

Especially if they have a pain-in-the-ass dog

[mhays]

The idea of getting stuck near a barking dog in a SFR is the #1 reason I prefer a condo.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

The idea of getting stuck near a barking dog in a SFR is the #1 reason I prefer a condo.

the same can happen in condos too.

back when we were living in a west loop highrise condo, one of our neighbors down the hall got a dog who would yelp NON-STOP every time his owner left him.

it was so bad that the condo association had to get involved and eventually forced the owner to get rid of the dog, but that process still took a couple months.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Especially if they have a pain-in-the-ass dog

Yeah, my next-door-neighbor on one side has this aggressive pitbull which has repeatedly tried to knock down the fence to kill us, to the point that we needed to reinforce the fence with additional bolts. It has never gotten used to us, but we've lived here for eight years and it seems to be an elderly dog now, and is - finally - quieting down. Her new pup is also a pittbull, but it just seems playful, not psychotic.

She's an irritating neighbor though for other reasons. Her idiot son punches old guys in the face, they decided to cut off half the branches on the street trees in front of our home because they didn't like them for some reason, etc.

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

The USDA partially moved to Kansas City and has struggled with both retention and hiring.

Sure.

But on the flip side, maybe there wouldn't be so much animosity toward the Federal Government if people had large portions of the Federal Government in their backyards.

I'd argue one reason why there's so much love for the military in the South is because most military bases are there and people see the economic boosts they provide to their regions. And over the years, through the military re-alignment and base closing commissions, the federal government has been purposeful in closing said bases in the north, for reasons cloaked in logic but clearly political in nature.

And today, there's much less support for the military up north.

Anyways. It's all related. Sure, interim change will be disruptive but over the long haul, there's no reason why DC has to be the beneficiary of all of those jobs.

[C.]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

Sure.

But on the flip side, maybe there wouldn't be so much animosity toward the Federal Government if people had large portions of the Federal Government in their backyards.

I'd argue one reason why there's so much love for the military in the South is because most military bases are there and people see the economic boosts they provide to their regions. And over the years, through the military re-alignment and base closing commissions, the federal government has been purposeful in closing said bases in the north, for reasons cloaked in logic but clearly political in nature.

And today, there's much less support for the military up north.

Anyways. It's all related. Sure, interim change will be disruptive but over the long haul, there's no reason why DC has to be the beneficiary of all of those jobs.

I agree with this.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by 3rd&Brown

I'd argue one reason why there's so much love for the military in the South is because most military bases are there and people see the economic boosts they provide to their regions. And over the years, through the military re-alignment and base closing commissions, the federal government has been purposeful in closing said bases in the north, for reasons cloaked in logic but clearly political in nature.

And today, there's much less support for the military up north.

Is that really it? California has a large military presence but I don't think the overall attitudes towards the military are much different than places in the northeast and upper Midwest. Maybe there's more affection in San Diego County and southern Orange County, but I doubt it's much different than any other center right suburb of any major US city.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

The USDA partially moved to Kansas City and has struggled with both retention and hiring.

I mean that's pretty much expected whenever you uproot an organization. You're going to lose people and many wont want to move. Given time they should recover, hire new people and return to a normal state. I'm sure the pandemic didn't help either. This article is a year old, wonder what's the status now.

[mhays]

But usually an organization that moves wants to KEEP as many people as possible. These were designed to get rid of as many as possible.

[Steely Dan]

According to the ranking at the bottom of the link below, the cities that truly get cheated out of their "fair share" of federal jobs are the very largest metro areas. NYC, LA, and Chicago are all bottom 5 by percentage, along with Houston and Minneapolis.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...deral-workers/

[C.]

Originally Posted by mhays

But usually an organization that moves wants to KEEP as many people as possible. These were designed to get rid of as many as possible.

This is true. But from a strictly selfish point of view, I’m sure Kansas City officials were ecstatic, as would any city, at a Federal agency relocating there along with the high paying positions that come with it.

[Klippenstein]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

According to the ranking at the bottom of the link below, the cities that truly get cheated out of their "fair share" of federal jobs are the very largest metro areas. NYC, LA, and Chicago are all bottom 5 by percentage, along with Houston and Minneapolis.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...deral-workers/

Well, in that case, the federal government should move some of their operations to the Century and Consumers buildings in Chicago and stop trying to demolish them.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columni...crapers-safety


Image by Anthony Vazquez/Sun-Times

[3rd&Brown]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Is that really it? California has a large military presence but I don't think the overall attitudes towards the military are much different than places in the northeast and upper Midwest. Maybe there's more affection in San Diego County and southern Orange County, but I doubt it's much different than any other center right suburb of any major US city.

I grew up in the Philadelphia area. I have distinct memories of the Federal Government closing the Philadelphia Naval Yard and Willow Grove Air Base in Pennsylvania and Fort Dix and Fort Monmouth in New Jersey.

At the time, there was a massive amount of support for these institutions.

From what I recall, all of the Naval Jobs were moved to Virginia (which was reliably Republican at the time) and Mississippi.

The decisions seemed exacting and punitive.

I don't know why people feel the way they feel but I guarantee you that if those facilities were still ensconced here, there would be a lot more support from local politicians for their funding.

Similarly, if the largess of the federal government were dispersed across a broader array of locales nationally, the same thing would occur. I guarantee you that go forward, the USDA will have full support of the Congressional contingent from Missouri and Kansas regardless of party when it comes to funding, etc. That sentiment will trickle through the local populace.

[jmecklenborg]

Wright-Patterson AFB is still alive and well and employs something like 30,000 people. It single-handedly kept Dayton, OH from shriveling up and blowing away like Youngstown or any number of third-tier Great Lakes/Midwest cities.

It's also home to the museum of the United States Air Force, which is an incredible institution with probably the greatest collection of aircraft in the world. The only major airplanes it doesn't have are a Concorde or a space shuttle. It's a shame that it's not in a higher profile location where it can be visited by more people.

[BigDipper 80]

The Air Force Museum gets plenty of visitors. I don't think they release total visitor numbers but it's estimated it's somewhere in the top 20 most visited museums in the country.

[The North One]

We pay federal taxes we deserve our share of federal jobs. I doubt the Trump administration had good intent when they moved stuff around but I honestly don't really care. I like the decision and in the long run the orgs will be fine. No reason DC should be allowed to suck up all federal dollars.