An Urban Revival in the Rust Belt

[hudkina]

Originally Posted by Jelly Roll

Do you have any numbers to show Detriot has had more investment versus the other three cities cited? I would think the new PNC building would give Pittsburgh the edge but I am interested to see how much investment these cities have and maybe compare it to Baltimore and Philadelphia?

Wikipedia lists the PNC Tower to be a $400 million investment. The new Red Wings arena/mixed-use entertainment complex is a $650 million investment that just broke ground last month and should be completed by 2017.

[dc_denizen]

recently sold homes in Detroit:

link

[Centropolis]

i'd like to hear more about Cleveland. what does the geography of reinvestment look like, what kind of role does the heavy rail play? etc. i know little of Cleveland.

[Austinlee]

Originally Posted by hudkina

Wikipedia lists the PNC Tower to be a $400 million investment. The new Red Wings arena/mixed-use entertainment complex is a $650 million investment that just broke ground last month and should be completed by 2017.

Ugh. It's silly to compare these two cities. We know Detroit is a much bigger metro.
By the way, Pittsburgh has built a new football, baseball, hockey AND basketball (Univ. of Pittsburgh) and soccer stadium in the last 12 years for somewhere close to a billion dollars. These apples to oranges comparisons are silly though.

[MayDay]

If you want more specific details, just let me know - it's hard to nail it all down with an overview like this. The focus of significant reinvestment is currently downtown and University Circle on the east side where the cultural institutions and medical facilities are clustered (although technically the Cleveland Clinic is located adjacent to the official border of University Circle). Aside from the big-ticket projects like the convention center hotel and the Flats East Bank mixed-use project, the notable projects in downtown are mostly redevelopment of historic and/or obsolete office buildings into residential use.

On a secondary but still substantial level, the inner core west side neighborhoods of Ohio City, Tremont and Detroit-Shoreway and then North Collinwood on the east side. The western neighborhoods have been rebounding for quite some time but the pace has picked up significantly. For example, in Tremont, it used to be a handful of new townhomes infilling lots here and there but it's now spilling over to adjacent areas as well as the redevelopment of large industrial buildings that have been abandoned for as long as I can remember. The redevelopment in North Collinwood is the result of a focused effort to target artists and entrepreneurs. It's a neat area with a lot of history but somewhat distant from other upcoming areas.

Cleveland hasn't had too many "hey, this is a TOD project!", but there are quite a few of the new developments that clearly play up their proximity to the Red Line (heavy rail line), especially in Ohio City near the West Side Market and in Little Italy on the east side where they are relocating a station so it's more accessible to the University Circle population. The problem is the Red Line shares the ROW (not rails, just the ROW) with freight trains which ran through areas which were historically not desirable for residential.

What I can tell you anecdotally is that for the first time since I've lived here - the change in attitude is palpable.

[hudkina]

Originally Posted by Austinlee

Ugh. It's silly to compare these two cities. We know Detroit is a much bigger metro.
By the way, Pittsburgh has built a new football, baseball, hockey AND basketball (Univ. of Pittsburgh) and soccer stadium in the last 12 years for somewhere close to a billion dollars. These apples to oranges comparisons are silly though.

I agree. All the cities have seen massive amounts of development.

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by MayDay

If you want more specific details, just let me know - it's hard to nail it all down with an overview like this. The focus of significant reinvestment is currently downtown and University Circle on the east side where the cultural institutions and medical facilities are clustered (although technically the Cleveland Clinic is located adjacent to the official border of University Circle). Aside from the big-ticket projects like the convention center hotel and the Flats East Bank mixed-use project, the notable projects in downtown are mostly redevelopment of historic and/or obsolete office buildings into residential use.

On a secondary but still substantial level, the inner core west side neighborhoods of Ohio City, Tremont and Detroit-Shoreway and then North Collinwood on the east side. The western neighborhoods have been rebounding for quite some time but the pace has picked up significantly. For example, in Tremont, it used to be a handful of new townhomes infilling lots here and there but it's now spilling over to adjacent areas as well as the redevelopment of large industrial buildings that have been abandoned for as long as I can remember. The redevelopment in North Collinwood is the result of a focused effort to target artists and entrepreneurs. It's a neat area with a lot of history but somewhat distant from other upcoming areas.

Cleveland hasn't had too many "hey, this is a TOD project!", but there are quite a few of the new developments that clearly play up their proximity to the Red Line (heavy rail line), especially in Ohio City near the West Side Market and in Little Italy on the east side where they are relocating a station so it's more accessible to the University Circle population. The problem is the Red Line shares the ROW (not rails, just the ROW) with freight trains which ran through areas which were historically not desirable for residential.

What I can tell you anecdotally is that for the first time since I've lived here - the change in attitude is palpable.

Thanks for the "executive summary!"

[dc_denizen]

Cincinnati's OTR restoration seems a model for the region and rust belt cities in general. Imagine if we had more private sector capital directed to this type of project across other cities. The US is flush with cash w/ the strong dollar, it's up to urban advocates to try to pump some of these funds to urban projects.

link

"adopting" buildings

[Crawford]

Detroit has barely any new development. There are some renovations, and some small-scale, heavily subsidized new construction projects, but very little has been built in decades. The only major buildings I can think of are two casinos and a hospital.

I'm less familiar with Cleveland, but it didn't seem that different. Pittsburgh is still shrinking, so it's hard to imagine there's some huge boom.

These aren't growing areas. Notwithstanding the "urban revival" hype, there are only a few U.S. central cities really seeing large-scale transformation.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Detroit has barely any new development. There are some renovations, and some small-scale, heavily subsidized new construction projects, but very little has been built in decades. The only major buildings I can think of are two casinos and a hospital.

I'm less familiar with Cleveland, but it didn't seem that different. Pittsburgh is still shrinking, so it's hard to imagine there's some huge boom.

These aren't growing areas. Notwithstanding the "urban revival" hype, there are only a few U.S. central cities really seeing large-scale transformation.

eh, no and yes. depends what you mean.

cleveland is at an all-time peak in downtown residential population and it is completely transformative. there are few older structures left to be converted and large scale all new development projects are happening, such as east bank flats, or on-deck. its moved from a traditional 9-5 business neighborhood towards a 24hr neighborhood. residential occupancy is currently at 98.3% and there is a lot of interest and excitement. cleveland seems a bit ahead of the other midwestern cities in that regard, but it is similar everywhere. so that's not hype, its very real.

more:
http://www.crainscleveland.com/artic...l-time-high-in

otoh - it is true the city and metros are not growing, but the bleeding has definately slowed or hopefully stopped. so that part is relative because that is a huge sea change from the recent past. as for the city itself, yes, i would bet poor and outlying neighborhoods are still losing population, but even that is transformative, albeit in a different, not so positive way.

imo we have yet to see how this all plays out.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

cleveland seems a bit ahead of the other midwestern cities in that regard

i don't know about that. from my cursory observations, i would place chicago (duh), minneapolis, milwaukee, and perhaps some others ahead of cleveland in terms of recent downtown/urban core development. not that what's happening in downtown cleveland isn't great to see (it is!), i just don't agree with the assertion that cleveland is leading the way in the midwest in terms of urban core development and rejuvenation.

[jpdivola]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Detroit has barely any new development. There are some renovations, and some small-scale, heavily subsidized new construction projects, but very little has been built in decades. The only major buildings I can think of are two casinos and a hospital.

I'm less familiar with Cleveland, but it didn't seem that different. Pittsburgh is still shrinking, so it's hard to imagine there's some huge boom.

These aren't growing areas. Notwithstanding the "urban revival" hype, there are only a few U.S. central cities really seeing large-scale transformation.

Seems the general rule for the rest belt is stable MSA populations, slowly declining central city populations, but a few small growing/gentrifying hip urban neighborhoods. Just as these cities saw lots of new suburban sprawl in the 80s/90s even as the region stagnated, now they are starting to see a little urban infill or more likely renovations in targeted areas.

Yeah, it's not like Seattle or DC which are truly undergoing urban transformations. But, the trends are better than they have been for a long time.

Perhaps Baltimore is the model. Baltimore has growing/gentrifying core areas, all the while it has lots of outer neighborhoods that continue to decline.

That was probably also a good description of Philly 15 years ago, but the growth in CC has spilled over and now the city is growing (although many areas still struggle).

Chicago is somewhat similar with a booming downtown, stable/affluent north side and declining south and west sides. Not sure about Milwaukee, but maybe like Baltimore (i.e. where Chicago was 15 years ago on a smaller scale).

Of course, Philly and Chicago never saw their downtowns die the way they have in the rest belt. But, who knows we may get lucky. The cores may reemerge as regional destinations even as much of the out neighborhoods continue to struggle.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by MayDay

What I can tell you anecdotally is that for the first time since I've lived here - the change in attitude is palpable.

the same can be said for Buffalo

[Dr Nevergold]

Regarding Buffalo, I certainly think the last several years has been a huge turnaround for the city. Downtown is converting into a cohesive neighborhood again all the way from a park oriented lakefront to an active, connected downtown. When I left town in June, Main Street was under total reconstruction, the waterfront area parks have mostly been completed, and the new developments connecting downtown to the Arena are well underway. It is certainly giving the city and the people a rejuvenation and its about time that it happened.

Ironically, what hurts Buffalo from an image perspective is that I-190, the route most visitors take to transverse through the city proper, goes through the East Side roughness and industrial areas before it connects to downtown. You'd never realize that downtown northward is an endless cohesive urban area that is still middle class. Image means everything, and that still hurts people's views as they arrive into town.

[jcchii]

chicago a different animal altogether these days due to scale alone, but exciting to hear about cleveland. planning a trip there this NBA season

[Wigs]

from the article:

All three cities have followed a similar path: They've developed their waterfronts, appealing to young people, and they've also fostered new areas of industry, especially centered around the growing health and medical research arena. Buffalo is getting the new Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, a $375 million facility set to open in 2016.

This is just poor journalism. Buffalo already has the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, anchored by Buffalo General and Roswell Park Cancer Institute, among others.
What is under construction on the campus is a new $375M UB Medical School, $270M Children's Hospital, $110M medical office building (Conventus), and a $40M expansion to Roswell Park Cancer Institute.

12,000 people work on the campus today and that is set to rise to ~17,000 by 2017.

[Dr Nevergold]

^A journalist is a jack of all trades, master of none.

Most people actually don't know Buffalo has a history of medical innovation. Roswell Park was among the first - if not the first - cancer research center in America, designed to come up with a cure for cancer instead of just passively treat it. It was founded in 1898. There is certainly a history there that isn't reflected in the article.

[dc_denizen]

too many cities, especially in the midwest but even philly and dc, still have homeless shelters and other ineffectual charity-industry infrastructure downtown. seriously, how the @$%@#$ are these guys allowed to destroy or impair billions in economic activity and revitalization with prime-location homeless shelters...in St. Paul:

link

Across from the Xcel Center on Old Sixth Street, Catholic Charities plans to replace the existing Dorothy Day Center -- an overcrowded drop-in shelter for the homeless -- with a two-building, $65 million project to be constructed in phases. Fundraising is ongoing.

Location of Dorothy Day center: link

[mrnyc]

^ well, that's where those organizations have owned the property and thats where the need is. or was. remember, they were there long before the nouveau yunnies!

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

i don't know about that. from my cursory observations, i would place chicago (duh), minneapolis, milwaukee, and perhaps some others ahead of cleveland in terms of recent downtown/urban core development. not that what's happening in downtown cleveland isn't great to see (it is!), i just don't agree with the assertion that cleveland is leading the way in the midwest in terms of urban core development and rejuvenation.

i meant the rustbelt. but as for downtown developments, if any of those cities have a bigger downtown mega-project under construction than cleveland's massive $1B+ underground convention center/hotel/med market/bridge project i'd like to hear about it. that is non-residential and transformative in and of itself.

[hudkina]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Detroit has barely any new development. There are some renovations, and some small-scale, heavily subsidized new construction projects, but very little has been built in decades. The only major buildings I can think of are two casinos and a hospital.

Considering you said decades, that implies that we're going back to at least 1994, correct? You don't think the Greater Downtown area has seen a fairly decent amount of new construction since 1994??

There have been literally dozens of projects built in the last two decades in the Greater Downtown area, ranging from single-family homes to the Compuware Building, the stadiums, the casinos, etc. Sure we may only be talking about three or four projects per year, but considering that the priority has been renovating existing structures, I would say the new development story hasn't been too shabby. And that's not even counting infrastructure improvements like the streetscaping, Campus Martius, streetcar, Rosa Parks bus terminal, Riverwalk, Dequindre Cut, etc.