Where Is The Rust Belt?

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Centropolis

st. louis is kind of like this too, with a massive spooge-out of 80s-00s sprawl that goes on and on. theres areas that feel like the fringes of atlanta or nashville with one road mcmansion subdivisions hacked out of ozark ridgetops.

the eastern rustbelt doesnt seem to have this nuclear blast of the same era development to the same extent and feels older on the fringes.

In the Pittsburgh area, I think it's different because of:

- the many old towns which comprise the Pittsburgh metro (newer sprawl has connected them all together, so you find 1990s to present cul-de-sac McMansion-ville off of endless stretches of arterial strip plaza development, interspersed here and there with older towns)

- the extremely hilly terrain and broken-up development pattern; i.e., you don't notice it as much unless you seek it out, because there is no gridded development whatsoever outside of a small part of the very core of Pittsburgh proper

But there's a shitload of sprawl from the 80s to present day that could easily double for a sunbelt sprawl-topia. A winding, seemingly-endless maze of it connects the whole region together.

[Docere]

"Rust belt" doesn't necessarily mean bleak and hopeless. Windsor is a manufacturing center that's still holding up well. 19.9% work in manufacturing according to the 2016 census.

[iheartthed]

I understand Kitchener has developed a bit since then, but it felt rusty when I was last there about 10 years ago.

[Docere]

How is Toledo holding up? I don't hear much about it (good or bad).

[Crawford]

Toledo might be the rustiest-looking U.S. metro. Maybe Youngstown tops it.

It feels much more blue collar and parochial than Metro Detroit, though the economic base (autos) is largely the same. The kind of place with a lot of Poles and Ukranians in simple little homes and Catholic churches and smokestacks in the background.

Though there's legacy wealth. The art museum, zoo, concert halls and civic buildings are outstanding for a city of its size.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Toledo's mostly stagnant.

For some unexplained reason, my gf did a cost of living comparison with Flagstaff and Toledo a few weeks back. We could live like royalty there but I've no desire to move to NW Ohio...

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by pj3000

In the Pittsburgh area, I think it's different because of:

- the many old towns which comprise the Pittsburgh metro (newer sprawl has connected them all together, so you find 1990s to present cul-de-sac McMansion-ville off of endless stretches of arterial strip plaza development, interspersed here and there with older towns)

- the extremely hilly terrain and broken-up development pattern; i.e., you don't notice it as much unless you seek it out, because there is no gridded development whatsoever outside of a small part of the very core of Pittsburgh proper

But there's a shitload of sprawl from the 80s to present day that could easily double for a sunbelt sprawl-topia. A winding, seemingly-endless maze of it connects the whole region together.

yeah, i dont have a good feel for pittsburgh but cincinnati certainly doesnt have the absurd extent of solid 70s+ sprawl that goes for 45 minutes past the urban core like detroit or even st. louis. new development is variegated and irregular like glue between older areas instead of the reestablishment of entire economic areas. the illinois side of the st louis metro is more like the eastern rustbelt in this way except flatter.

kansas city is straight up north dallas in its sw burbs. even metro chicago has huge areas like this.

[Docere]

So the "deep rust belt" seems to fall in western PA and Ohio. Even Michigan's status is debatable.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Docere

So the "deep rust belt" seems to fall in western PA and Ohio. Even Michigan's status is debatable.

Flint is deep rust. Metro Detroit is macro level rusty, but there is plenty of exurban development that is less than 20 years old. But that is directly linked to near total collapse of neighborhoods in the inner city, as well as very noticeable decline of some inner ring suburbs in Metro Detroit.

[eschaton]

Toledo is isn't falling-down awful, but I think it has nothing going for it. The city-wide population is a bit deceptive because city limits continued to expand through at least the 1960s - so lots of the city is functionally suburban. Downtown has a handful of impressive blocks, but a lot of parking craters as well. There's really no functional urbanity left outside of downtown either. Not even a nice block of a traditional urban main street with some bars and restaurants. No student enclave, no yuppie enclave, no artist enclave - nothing. Just poor white folks and poorer black folks until you get out to the more suburban neighborhoods.

The best of Ohio's mid-sized cities is Dayton, and it's not even close. But Dayton is really only passable because Oregon District is a legitimately nice little neighborhood unlike anything in Toledo (or Akron).

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Flint is deep rust. Metro Detroit is macro level rusty, but there is plenty of exurban development that is less than 20 years old. But that is directly linked to near total collapse of neighborhoods in the inner city, as well as very noticeable decline of some inner ring suburbs in Metro Detroit.

Yeah. So much of what makes Detroit unique is the almost total white flight (and later black flight) of the inner city, which meant there was this gigundo demand for exurban sprawl even though the metropolitan area as a whole was fairly stagnant.

[Crawford]

Michigan, economically, is total Rust Belt, but it doesn't quite have the industrial feel of the Ohio or Western PA cities, largely because the auto industry suburbanized by the Great Depression. Auto factories, for nearly a century, have been sprawling, lowrise affairs, and they don't have the giant smokestacks. The idea of walking to a neighborhood auto factory is about a century outdated. The WW2 factory boom consisted of gigantic complexes in cornfields.

Also, Detroit's boom was a bit more recent, and its white flight was unprecedented, so it was almost like an entirely new postwar city was created, from scratch, north of 8 Mile. Not just the giant factories, but all the suppliers and tool & die shops were already suburbanized in autotopia by mid-century or so.

[westak]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Toledo is isn't falling-down awful, but I think it has nothing going for it. The city-wide population is a bit deceptive because city limits continued to expand through at least the 1960s - so lots of the city is functionally suburban. Downtown has a handful of impressive blocks, but a lot of parking craters as well. There's really no functional urbanity left outside of downtown either. Not even a nice block of a traditional urban main street with some bars and restaurants. No student enclave, no yuppie enclave, no artist enclave - nothing. Just poor white folks and poorer black folks until you get out to the more suburban neighborhoods.

The best of Ohio's mid-sized cities is Dayton, and it's not even close. But Dayton is really only passable because Oregon District is a legitimately nice little neighborhood unlike anything in Toledo (or Akron).

Akron has several nice urban neighborhoods(Wallhaven, Merriman Valley, Fairlawn Heights) which radiate from Highland Square which would be it's equivilent of the Oregon District. I have yet to see this in Toledo when I've visted and I've looked for it.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by Docere

So the "deep rust belt" seems to fall in western PA and Ohio. Even Michigan's status is debatable.

I would say western NY could be considered "deep" rust belt too.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by westak

Akron has several nice urban neighborhoods(Wallhaven, Merriman Valley, Fairlawn Heights) which radiate from Highland Square which would be it's equivilent of the Oregon District. I have yet to see this in Toledo when I've visted and I've looked for it.

I admit I don't know Akron well, but looking online, it doesn't seem comparable. Highland Square seems to be basically a "streetcar suburban" strip. There's not even a cohesive street wall. And the other neighborhoods you list seem to be straight-up suburbia - even if it's "yuppie-track" as far as Akron goes.

Oregon has a legitimately nice little Victorian business district, and an impressive stock of old-urban housing on the back streets. It's small, but it's quite nice regardless.

[samne]

I dont consider Western New York total deep rustbelt. Its rooted in heavy industry and its still definitely present. But there was and is white collar in Rochester/Buffalo. Colleges, tech and health that attract from outside the region in WNY. Also alot recreational. The stretch of Lake Ontario from Fort Niagara to the St Lawrence is barely touched by industry compared to L Erie.

[BigDipper 80]

Originally Posted by eschaton

I admit I don't know Akron well, but looking online, it doesn't seem comparable. Highland Square seems to be basically a "streetcar suburban" strip. There's not even a cohesive street wall. And the other neighborhoods you list seem to be straight-up suburbia - even if it's "yuppie-track" as far as Akron goes.

Oregon has a legitimately nice little Victorian business district, and an impressive stock of old-urban housing on the back streets. It's small, but it's quite nice regardless.

Yeah Dayton is a lot more impressive and varied in its building stock than any other mid-sized Ohio city. the Oregon District obviously steals the spotlight but South Park and St Annes Hill have come into their own recently with neighborhood-wide renovations and nascent business districts. Akron is mostly the same wood frame houses you find in most of northern Ohio, and outside of the West End, Toledo is much the same.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by samne

I dont consider Western New York total deep rustbelt. Its rooted in heavy industry and its still definitely present. But there was and is white collar in Rochester/Buffalo. Colleges, tech and health that attract from outside the region in WNY. Also alot recreational. The stretch of Lake Ontario from Fort Niagara to the St Lawrence is barely touched by industry compared to L Erie.

Just because a place has white collar jobs, a now "eds and meds-driven economy", and natural areas for recreation does not mean it's somehow not rustbelt.

Buffalo, like Pittsburgh and Cleveland areas, is about as rusty as an historically large city can get. And even though those two regional cities are a bit further along in revitalization than Buffalo is, they're still "deep rustbelt". The fucking term was basically invented to describe the triumvirate of Buffalo, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh.

These cities, largely due to the riches gained from their industrial might, have always been major centers of technology, education, and healthcare. Now, those attributes are what remains after the manufacturing downfall, and they are what have been capitalized on to help revive economies.

Also, most of the stretch of the Lake Ontario shore, as you describe, is certainly not what I would consider western NY.

Buffalo metro, Niagara Falls, Dunkirk, and Jamestown in western NY are pretty damn rusty overall... meaning loss of thousands of good-paying manufacturing jobs, declining population, loss of tax base, decreased spending on public infrastructure, disinvestment in the urban core, aging housing stock, etc. etc. etc. all occurring over the past 50 years+; i.e., deep rustbelt.

[MolsonExport]

If Western New York State isn't Rustbelt, then I don't know what the rustbelt is.


beltmag

https://beltmag.com/mapping-rust-belt/

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by samne

The stretch of Lake Ontario from Fort Niagara to the St Lawrence is barely touched by industry compared to L Erie.

the US lake ontario shore was never terribly relevant to US great lakes commercial shipping because of niagra falls, and because of the erie canal shortcut down to NYC and it's magnificent harbor.

canada, with it's main atlantic port in montreal, has always been much more focused on the st. lawrence, and thus lake ontario became much more heavily developed on the canadian side (toronto/hamilton).

from the US perspective, why build big steel mills on lake ontario that would necessitate the big ore boats going through the welland canal when you can just build those mills on lakes erie and michigan (and their connecting waterways)?