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

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

This is deceiving because the wealthy never abandoned the city limits of Cincinnati, and also the city is laid out in such a way that extremely wealthy people often live just 2-3 blocks from extremely poor people.

Same thing in Detroit and probably in any other older northern city. I think what sets apart the NYCs, DCs, and Chicagos, from the Detroits, Clevelands, and Cincinnatis is that there are just a lot more wealthy in the city to balance it out. But the wealthy tend to be in close proximity to the poor in older cities.

This the wealthy neighborhood of Indian Village in Detroit: https://goo.gl/maps/BJkveEFKiQAii1yNA
This is literally the next block over: https://goo.gl/maps/1jk2dfipjWCYVUPg8

[Crawford]

I mean, sorta, yeah. Indian Village is a pretty small enclave, though. And it isn't really a regional wealth center, analogous to say, Squirrel Hill in Pittsburgh, Hyde Park in Cincy, or CWE in St. Louis. Palmer Woods area is larger and has more wealth, but it's on the city fringe, and still not a major regional wealth center.

Detroit (and even moreso, Cleveland) have very few of the region's HNW households in the city proper. Doctors, law firm partners, auto execs and the like are unlikely to live in city proper.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I mean, sorta, yeah. Indian Village is a pretty small enclave, though. And it isn't really a regional wealth center, analogous to say, Squirrel Hill in Pittsburgh, Hyde Park in Cincy, or CWE in St. Louis. Palmer Woods area is larger and has more wealth, but it's on the city fringe, and still not a major regional wealth center.

Detroit (and even moreso, Cleveland) have very few of the region's HNW households in the city proper. Doctors, law firm partners, auto execs and the like are unlikely to live in city proper.

There aren't a ton of $100k+ households in Detroit, and there's no big concentration of them in a single census tract other than Palmer Woods and Sherwood Forest. That said, there are $100k+ households in other areas of the city, but the places where they tend to be concentrated now are right next to extreme poverty.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Same thing in Detroit and probably in any other older northern city. I think what sets apart the NYCs, DCs, and Chicagos, from the Detroits, Clevelands, and Cincinnatis is that there are just a lot more wealthy in the city to balance it out. But the wealthy tend to be in close proximity to the poor in older cities.

This the wealthy neighborhood of Indian Village in Detroit: https://goo.gl/maps/BJkveEFKiQAii1yNA
This is literally the next block over: https://goo.gl/maps/1jk2dfipjWCYVUPg8

I mean, every city can say this to some degree. In Pittsburgh the wealthy neighborhoods also happen to have a lot of college/grad students, which causes the average household income to be far lower. The neighborhood of Shadyside, for example is well known as having mostly yuppies, old money, and the like as its full-time residents, but it also has a ton of dated mid-20th century apartments (and chopped-up homes) which cater to students. Squirrel Hill South has really student-heavy sections which bring down the average income. Even Oakland has a very rich sub-neighborhood (homes go for millions) which is drowned out by student housing and a few condo highrises which cater to retirees. There's also tiny wealthy enclaves I could point to elsewhere, like Allegheny West, or the ugly 1990s condo development on Herr's Island, which get drowned out due to being in poorer census tracts.

The more middle and upper-class people are within city limits, the more of these you'll get - and eventually it will register on the census tract level as well.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

This is probably why there aren't more $100k tracts in the city. A lot of the areas with high incomes are located in tracts with high rates of poverty.

Yeah, looking at that map, that's clear to me for Pittsburgh (and other cities) too. Though in the case of Pittsburgh, the "poverty" within those considered-wealthy tracts is due to a high concentration of students in dorms and rental housing and senior living/assisted living.

For instance, portions of Shadyside show up as the second darkest shade of red... yet a high percentage of residents are millionaires many times over.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Same thing in Detroit and probably in any other older northern city. I think what sets apart the NYCs, DCs, and Chicagos, from the Detroits, Clevelands, and Cincinnatis is that there are just a lot more wealthy in the city to balance it out.

California has a huge number of millionaires because so many homes have appreciated by $500,000 or more. Also, trust funders from the interior move there, Florida, or the East Coast. Trust Funders from the higher-profile places don't move to Ohio.

The Midwest is different because primary residences typically haven't appreciated more than $200,000. That means if you're a millionaire here, you really understand stocks and business.

Cincinnati, specifically, still has many very large privately-held companies. There is still a functioning old-school blueblood class. The Cincinnati Reds, for example, have been under local ownership for their entire 150~ year history. Same for The Bengals, although they're only about 55 years old. But there are also numerous large insurance companies and all sorts of under-the-radar businesses that are still held by the families who founded them.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

This is deceiving because the wealthy never abandoned the city limits of Cincinnati, and also the city is laid out in such a way that extremely wealthy people often live just 2-3 blocks from extremely poor people. There are many examples of this, not just one clear line of demarcation.

The wealthiest people in the Cincinnati metro aspire to live in Indian Hill, which is an ultra-low density village which consumes much of the eastern half of Hamilton County: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian...ighlighted.svg.

This village succeeded in stopping the Blue Ash Airport (this is why Cincinnati's airport is in Kentucky) and forced the circle freeway to be built beyond its borders, which is why Cincinnati has the longest loop highway in the United States (and one of minimal use as a bypass). It also stopped construction of Cross-County Highway at its borders, so there is no lateral expressway across it to the above-mentioned circle freeway.

That said, because the population of the village is so low, most of the region's wealthy live elsewhere, and many still live within the city limits. This is a big reason why Cincinnati didn't completely collapse like Detroit, Cleveland, etc.

lol @

“Prior to 1970, Indian Hill was incorporated as a village, but under Ohio law became designated as a city once its population was verified as exceeding 5,000. The municipality then changed its name to add "Village" into the official name; legally it is "The City of The Village of Indian Hill" …”

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Same thing in Detroit and probably in any other older northern city. I think what sets apart the NYCs, DCs, and Chicagos, from the Detroits, Clevelands, and Cincinnatis is that there are just a lot more wealthy in the city to balance it out. But the wealthy tend to be in close proximity to the poor in older cities.

This the wealthy neighborhood of Indian Village in Detroit: https://goo.gl/maps/BJkveEFKiQAii1yNA
This is literally the next block over: https://goo.gl/maps/1jk2dfipjWCYVUPg8

Are cities usually healthier if high and low income individuals live close to each other in more dense residential and mixed use development?

[The North One]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Detroit does have at least one census tract with $100k+ median household income: https://censusreporter.org/profiles/...5382-wayne-mi/

The data on these tracts are so botched/dated. Brush Park has dozens of million+ dollar homes with documented closings, and census claims that tract has zero...

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Detroit (and even moreso, Cleveland) have very few of the region's HNW households in the city proper. Doctors, law firm partners, auto execs and the like are unlikely to live in city proper.

Palmer Woods and that area of Detroit in general has exactly that kind of money. Previous GM exec Dan Ammann lived there. It's basically Bloomfield Hills but inside the city. Indian Village and West Village too. Brush Park has exploded with high earners the last 5 years and that's the center of the city. I wont be surprised if whenever data is accurately updated that'll have the highest average income in Detroit. Price per square foot is also getting nearly higher than Birmingham.

Edit: Boston Edison is another one.

[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. Cleveland has a higher crime rate than 99% of all US cities by most metrics. You're also not going to attract a lot of independent/local retailers when you have intractable property crime. Big-box retailers can afford more sophisticated anti-theft countermeasures and write off the losses to an extent, but eventually they will exit the market if there isn't a profit to be made (this is a major contributing factor to the "food desert" phenomenon - grocery stores are extremely low-margin, and in Chicago at least, many have to exit markets that have too much theft). With mom-and-pop stores theft and shoplifting literally takes food out of people's mouths, not earnings out of shareholder portfolios.

[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.

[pj3000]

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...

Pretty sure Cleveland already has plenty of trendy coffee shops and pop-up galleries.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by jd3189

Are cities usually healthier if high and low income individuals live close to each other in more dense residential and mixed use development?

Probably. It's easier to deliver services, easier to give people access to amenities, and easier to gain access to employment opportunity when people are closer together.

[Steely Dan]

A tract with a median income of $150K right next door to a tract with median of $15K is probably a better arrangemt than those tracts being separated by miles, but an even better arrangement is the tract with a median of around $ 75K where those income groups are mixed together intra-tract.

But the real world doesn't often play out that way with modern zoning.

"The large lot houses will go over here, the small lot houses over there, then we'll put a townhouse development just down the road, and for that weird left over piece of land between the train tracks and the industrial park, a giant garden apartment complex!"

[DePaul Bunyan]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

A tract with a median income of $150K right next door to a tract with median of $15K is probably a better arrangemt than those tracts being separated by miles, but an even better arrangement is the tract with a median of around $ 75K where those income groups are mixed together intra-tract.

But the real world doesn't often play out that way with modern zoning.

"The large lot houses will go over here, the small lot houses over there, then we'll put a townhouse development just down the road, and for that weird left over piece of land between the train tracks and the industrial park, a giant garden apartment complex!"

Spoken like someone who has never lived next to Section 8 tenants. "Mixed-income" developments and housing assistance don't class up poor people or make them desirable neighbors.

I've been there. Never again.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

Spoken like someone who has never lived next to Section 8 tenants.

I actually have, so your assumption is wrong.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

Spoken like someone who has never lived next to Section 8 tenants. "Mixed-income" developments and housing assistance don't class up poor people or make them desirable neighbors.

I've been there. Never again.

Your experience may be true, but it’s only one part of the greater reality. And the greater reality shows that even the low-income section 8 tenants are still human in the way well-to-do landlords and people like yourself are human.

I wouldn’t mind living next to poor people or rich people. What matters is that I want to live in a community, which contains people from all walks of life, all income levels. Living in a bubble is limiting psychologically. Kudos to those who like that. But I rather see more mixed communities. Those places are also the best ones on an urban level.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by DePaul Bunyan

Spoken like someone who has never lived next to Section 8 tenants.

I've been there. Never again.

I own land next a Section 8 building. Give those people an inch and they take a mile.

[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.