Im just not familiar with any areas of equally high crime that are white areas, unless you are talking about quickly gentrifing areas such as much of DC.

Im just not familiar with any areas of equally high crime that are white areas, unless you are talking about quickly gentrifing areas such as much of DC.

 

I am not sure of the actual crime rate of Buckeye, but I was under the impression it wasn't much different than some gentrifying areas of the west side, but I may be way off.  If I am, my apologies.  No doubt that crime is a big factor and that lack of jobs is a factor in crime as well.

In other news, apparently there's a new ribs place opening on Buckeye.

 

That sounds good--where on Buckeye?

 

Around 125 or so.  Jazzy Jim's, something like that.

 

jam40jeff I think you're right.  I've looked at stats and maps, and the crime rate around here is no worse, perhaps better, than Ohio City and D-S.  It just hasn't seen as much investment as those areas.  Apparently the two factors don't correlate 100%.  But race and full employment correlate pretty tightly too, which I believe has a lot to do with the fortunes of Buckeye vs. Detroit Ave.  Detroit might actually have more crime on it... but it also has more whites, who get more work (which may not be nearby), so it sees more investment than Buckeye. 

 

And given the amount of nearby employment at the Clinic et al, I believe Buckeye as a whole would benefit more from gentrification than from getting more factories to open.  People who could open factories, as well as retail and service businesses, would be more likely to do so around Buckeye if there were a more diverse income base living there and it didn't look so run down.  So I think the best way to help the current residents is to draw in more residents who have higher incomes.  That's why I'm so hot on getting better housing built here.  It's the missing link that will lead to everything else the area needs.   

None of these neighborhoods is really monolithically white or black.  Instead they are all mixed to some degree.  This demographic data is way out of date, but the best we can do.  We also don't know who specifically is committing the crimes, as that data isn't available.  It could be anyone in the neighborhoods, or people from outside the neighborhood.  Make of this what you will.

 

From NEO CANDO:

 

NEIGHBORHOOD         Violent crime rate per 100,000 population, 2008

Buckeye-Shaker         1,146.67

Detroit-Shoreway 2,017.92

Ohio City                 3,089.83

CLEVELAND CITY         1,423.97

 

NEIGHBORHOOD White% Black%  Amer Indian%      Asian/Pac Isl%      Other%    Hispanic%

Buckeye-Shaker 16.38 80.82 0.15                 2.14                   0.51 1.27

Detroit-Shoreway 67.16 18.51 0.86                 1.33                   12.14 24.02

Ohio City         57.54 27.23 0.75                 0.99                   13.48 26.74

CLEVELAND CITY 43.16 51.47 0.33                 1.44                   3.59 7.26

COUNTY         68.69 27.73 0.20                 1.88                   1.50 3.38

 

NEIGHBORHOOD     Poverty rate, 1999

Buckeye-Shaker     26.78

Detroit-Shoreway    35.61

Ohio City             37.85

CLEVELAND CITY     26.27

COUNTY             13.13

 

Also interesting is the CPD's crime maps, which show where crimes are happening specifically.  In Ohio City, you can see a pattern of violent crime clustered along main streets, especially near the two substantial housing projects- the residential portion is very quiet.  Buckeye's violent crime is clustered south of Buckeye and West of Moreland- North towards Shaker Square and Larchmere is very quiet.  Detroit Shoreway is more scattered.

 

http://www.crimereports.com/map/index/?search=+Cleveland+OH

http://neocando.case.edu/cando/fullDataReport/interface.jsp

Fascinating data, even if it is old. I will be interested to see how (or if) it has changed when the new data is released soon.

The area known as "Buckeye-Shaker" is a broad mixture, including sleepy Larchmere and the pricey end of Shaker Blvd.  Note that the city has cut it into two wards, with Buckeye attached to Mt. Pleasant and Fairfax while those nicer parts get their own guy.  I'm told this was all part of the failed anti-Reed effort.  The point was to split Mt. Pleasant, but they had to split Buckeye from Shaker to accomplish that.  And Zack Reed still got reelected.

 

About those stats, clearly we've got some myths floating out there regarding east vs. west safety.  I love the Near West Side but it's as rough as any part of town.  St. Clair can be scary but so is Clark.  Garden Valley sure has a lot of projects but so does West 25th Street.  Once you get all the commonalities out of the equation, you're left with prejudice and terrible freeway access. 

 

I really do think the Opportunity Corridor would do a lot for Buckeye.  If nothing else, it would make my grand residential improvements a lot more plausible.  Say what you will but a lot of people put a high priority on freeway access.  I bet the Near West wouldn't look so rosy without it.  I know people don't want to hear that but I'm sorry, I think it's a much bigger factor than crime in what we're seeing here.       

About those stats, clearly we've got some myths floating out there regarding east vs. west safety. I love the Near West Side but it's as rough as any part of town. St. Clair can be scary but so is Clark. Garden Valley sure has a lot of projects but so does West 25th Street. Once you get all the commonalities out of the equation, you're left with prejudice and terrible freeway access.  

 

You're drawing conclusions from too little data.  I looked at the average of yearly violent crime rates for all SPA's over the decade and while the chart is too large to print here, the Eastside/Westside split is obvious.  Of the neighborhoods with the 10 highest crime rates only 2 are on the Westside, (Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway), Downtown straddles East/West, and then the other 7 are Eastside neighborhoods.  Only 3 Westside neighborhoods have higher than city average violent crime rates(OC/DC, plus the Stockyards).  Of the 10 lowest crime rates, 6 are Westside (including the 5 lowest), Industrial Valley straddles East/West, and 3 are Eastside.  Buckeye is just a bit higher than the 10 best.

 

Of course, some neighborhoods have a lot of visitors and pass through traffic, and this effects their numbers.  Ohio City, Downtown, and Goodrich-Gannett (AKA Chinatown, AKA Art Quarter, AKA Payne-Sterling) suffer from this.  This probably partly accounts for why OC suffers high crime on it's main avenues, but very low crime in it's residential areas.  Industrial Valley, Riverside, and UC all manage to have a lot of pass through/visitors and low crime.

The projects north of Detroit off 25th in OC are a breeding ground for problems. All the time police and ambulance are visiting there. This is an area that if some higher rises were built, would have spectacular views of the lake. Instead, it is what it is...a toilet. 

I really do think the Opportunity Corridor would do a lot for Buckeye. If nothing else, it would make my grand residential improvements a lot more plausible. Say what you will but a lot of people put a high priority on freeway access. I bet the Near West wouldn't look so rosy without it. I know people don't want to hear that but I'm sorry, I think it's a much bigger factor than crime in what we're seeing here.

 

327,  I admire your ambition, but I don't think anything short of a couple hundred thousand new jobs opening up in the City of Cleveland is going to make your grand residential improvements viable.  [And as much as the Clinic and UH have grown, a lot of that just makes up for the losses of St. Lukes and Mt. Sinai.]  I just think you're completely ignoring the broader market.  Why would a homebuyer or renter choose to buy a new house/pay the rent it takes to finance a new apartment building in Buckeye when there are so many affordable options with less crime, better schools and less visible decay with only slightly longer or similar commutes? To enjoy the fabulous retail amenities on Buckeye?  For the thrill of living in a Cleveland double?  At this point, with the huge surplus of housing in our region, you can ask this about any neighborhood.  And the answer hasn't been pretty for many of them.

 

Ohio City, Tremont and Detroit Shoreway all have draws that distinguish them from other places- be it housing stock, neighborhood institutions, lake access, views, proximity to downtown, scale etc.  I actually agree that race would play a role in this if there were nearly all-black neighborhoods with these advantages in Cleveland, but I don't think that's what's going on with Buckeye.  Maybe with Glenville a little, I'm not sure- gentrification is so glacial in Cleveland it will take 20 years to know.

Buckeye neighborhood may be one of the most, if not the most, unaccessible neighborhood in Cleveland, and that is the root of it's problems.  Sure, there is crime, but there is crime in alot of areas in Cleveland.  Face the Fact, it is not accesible.  It is not a convenient place to open a call cneter, or a warehouse, or any other empolyer due to it's access.  Also, for any west-sider, you pretty much have to traverse the worst and most crime ridden area's to get there being Woodland, or Kinsman, or Woodhill.  In essence, it is a beautiful neighborhood that very few south-siders or west-siders even know how to get to.  That is the sole problem.

 

In any event, would OC help.  ABSOLUTELY!!!  Buckeye needs to be made accessible for trucks, for employees, for students.  Who knows, maybe even Benny's enrollment would increase.  I said in the 490 OC thread that I would like to see the land along the ROW zoned industrial simply for the fact that these industries would be surrounded by thousands of people looking for work.  The area is full of homes and possible apartment rehabs already.  It does not need anymore.  It needs jobs that are accessible to Clevelanders and the surrounding community, and that's it. 

 

I do see some strong comparisons between Ohio City and Buckeye, however, the main difference is that Ohio City lies right next to downtown Cleveland, and Buckeye is 116 blocks away.  It is soley accessibiulity, and not so much crime.  Seriously, think about the neighborhood, and it is easy to realize that not only you, but probably many others traverse the neighborhood once a year.  That of cours is if you are a downtowner, westsider or southsider.

Good points, you and 327 are starting to make me think the OC make have a few more benefits than I originally thought.

I think we're conflating the western end of Buckeye Rd in the forgotten triangle with "Buckeye" the neighborhood (east of Woodhill).  Buckeye the neighborhood is more or less fully built out with zero room for industrial or any other large scale development.  I don't think increased access is going to make that vast supply of Cleveland Doubles much more appealing for middle class Clevelanders or help fill the storefronts on Buckeye Rd.  Maybe on the margins.  If we're talking about leveling huge swatch of the neighborhood to reinvent it, which is a total non-starter for many reasons, then yes, improved road access would help.

exactly.  saying that freeway access is going to make buckeye the "neighborhood" better, means that you think urban renewal can and has worked.  If that's your opinion you are entitled to it. It's not mine.

Then what do you think will (or can) make it better, and why are some west side neighborhoods with similar or worse crime rates better off?  There is already great transit access (Green/Blue lines) in this neighborhood, it's close to UC, it's close to Shaker Square, there is an intact retail strip waiting to be rehabbed, etc.

 

I hate freeways being viewed as a necessity as much as most people here on UO, but the fact is that most people won't even consider an area that is "difficult to get to" (meaning that it is more than 5-10 minutes from a freeway).  Even urban dwellers like those in Tremont cried a river when their W. 14th St. exit ramp was closed, saying their neighborhood would be ruined.  Do you really not think being so close to both I-90 and the shoreway hasn't helped Ohio City and Detroit-Shoreway?  Does downtown not benefit from freeway access, both in getting people in there to spend money and for people that live there and reverse commute?  I personally wouldn't choose a neighborhood based on the requirement of being near a freeway, but many people do, or it at least is a pretty big factor for them.

 

I'm not saying that we should tear down neighborhoods to build freeways everywhere, but given that this OC boulevard is likely going to be built, I think the increased accessibility of Buckeye (and Shaker Square for that matter) to the "public transit challenged" (or even those that just drive sometimes) could increase the demand for the neighborhood, at least a little (which can't be a bad thing).

 

Since this road is traveling mostly through what is currently an industrial wasteland full of brownfield sites, I don't see this being anywhere near the same thing as the urban renewal concept of cutting a freeway through the middle of neighborhoods and building a bunch of "towers in the park" near the exits.  As far as Buckeye is concerned, this is more of "the townless highway and the highwayless town" concept (freeway outside of the core with an arterial road leading into the core to provide access) than "the town gutted and the strip" (freeway cutting through the core, causing highway-style development to pop up right on the highway).

exactly.  saying that freeway access is going to make buckeye the "neighborhood" better, means that you think urban renewal can and has worked.  If that's your opinion you are entitled to it. It's not mine.

 

As jam40jeff said, what would make it better.  Like he/she said, there is good transit, UH, CCF.  The problem is, there is not enough employment nearby for people who are looking to make between $9 and $15 per hour.  Thew reason there is not is because this neighborhood is stuck in the middle of freeway accessability.  I am not all for throwing freeways like 422 out to no-mans-land.  But my gosh, a nice feeder road through a depressed area with exit ramps or at least wide roads for trucks to traverse, and employees to use would work wonders.  Similar to Hinckley Pkwy and Spring road off of 176.  176 does not contribute to sprawl, rather it helped with accessibility to Schaff and Jennings and Hinckley Pkwy which can spawn business growth.  That's all.  Also, the more business growth the neighborhood see's, the more the city see's the neighborhood.  The city would no longer turn it's back on Buckeye.  Road and infrastructure improvements would happen more regulary as would streetscaping.  maybe more efficient bus routes would be established.

 

If you think Buckeye is accessible, and does not need an accessibility upgrade, then what is it that is causing it to not grow more rapidly.  We can just wait for develpers to build fanbcy condo's here, that's just stupid.  There's no reason to invest in one.  We need jobs here.  We need people from all over Cleveland to come work in Buckeye daily.  We need people from Buckeye working in Buckeye.  That is truely the only way this neighborhood, or any other neighborhood at that, will go to the next level. 

 

I think on UO we fear using the word "Freeway/Highway" and we mask the actual problem with something else.  Freeway's are not actually bad in some instances, and they are an effective tool to moving goods and services into a nieghborhood. 

exactly. saying that freeway access is going to make buckeye the "neighborhood" better, means that you think urban renewal can and has worked. If that's your opinion you are entitled to it. It's not mine.

 

If you think Buckeye is accessible, and does not need an accessibility upgrade, then what is it that is causing it to not grow more rapidly. We can just wait for develpers to build fanbcy condo's here, that's just stupid. There's no reason to invest in one. We need jobs here. We need people from all over Cleveland to come work in Buckeye daily. We need people from Buckeye working in Buckeye. That is truely the only way this neighborhood, or any other neighborhood at that, will go to the next level.

 

On the money.  Agreed 100%.

Like he/she said

 

he :)

I think we're conflating the western end of Buckeye Rd in the forgotten triangle with "Buckeye" the neighborhood (east of Woodhill). Buckeye the neighborhood is more or less fully built out with zero room for industrial or any other large scale development. I don't think increased access is going to make that vast supply of Cleveland Doubles much more appealing for middle class Clevelanders or help fill the storefronts on Buckeye Rd. Maybe on the margins. If we're talking about leveling huge swatch of the neighborhood to reinvent it, which is a total non-starter for many reasons, then yes, improved road access would help.

 

This is correct.  There won't be any substantial industrial or business development in Buckeye unless we decide to do some serious mass clearance.

I think we're conflating the western end of Buckeye Rd in the forgotten triangle with "Buckeye" the neighborhood (east of Woodhill). Buckeye the neighborhood is more or less fully built out with zero room for industrial or any other large scale development. I don't think increased access is going to make that vast supply of Cleveland Doubles much more appealing for middle class Clevelanders or help fill the storefronts on Buckeye Rd. Maybe on the margins. If we're talking about leveling huge swatch of the neighborhood to reinvent it, which is a total non-starter for many reasons, then yes, improved road access would help.

 

This is correct. There won't be any substantial industrial or business development in Buckeye unless we decide to do some serious mass clearance.

 

Why do we see investment in Lakewood?  There is probably a higher percentage of Cleveland Doubles in Lakewood than in Buckeye.

I think we're conflating the western end of Buckeye Rd in the forgotten triangle with "Buckeye" the neighborhood (east of Woodhill).  Buckeye the neighborhood is more or less fully built out with zero room for industrial or any other large scale development.  I don't think increased access is going to make that vast supply of Cleveland Doubles much more appealing for middle class Clevelanders or help fill the storefronts on Buckeye Rd.  Maybe on the margins.  If we're talking about leveling huge swatch of the neighborhood to reinvent it, which is a total non-starter for many reasons, then yes, improved road access would help.

 

This is correct.  There won't be any substantial industrial or business development in Buckeye unless we decide to do some serious mass clearance.

 

First of all, I am not saying we need a huge warehouse at the corner of Buckeye and 116th.  I am saying along the OC, we need these types of facilities to bring people to this area.  This is really Cleveland's problem.  You are acting like the intersection of E90th and Kinsman is a day trip from the Buckeye neighborhood.  It is a 5 minute drive away. 

 

Secondly, housing stock at 90th and Kinsman (Forgotten Triangle) is shot.  This area could become the business sector while the nighborhood a hop skip and jump to the north up Woodhill and MLK would become the blossoming and gentrifying residential area that is within 2 miles of over 3,000 new jobs.  The same way any other neighborhood or city is promoted. 

 

We really have to stop "nick naming" all of these blocks in Cleveland.  It seems like everytime you drive 5 blocks, you are in a different neighborhood.  It makes Cleveland feel so big and segregated when it really isn't. 

^ Valid points and perhaps a good plan.

I don't know how this discussion got so off track.  I think everyone is just talking past each other here.  This is not a referendum on the opportunity corridor- no one here is arguing against it.  I just think you are going to be very disappointed with what happens (or rather what doesn't happen) to the Buckeye neighborhood once the new road is built.  It will be like Slavic Village or or Clark Fulton: a declining neighborhood with degraded retail strips and wonderful highway access.

 

Why do we see investment in Lakewood? There is probably a higher percentage of Cleveland Doubles in Lakewood than in Buckeye.

 

Well that's kind of the point.  Why would you live in Buckeye if you can find an affordable rental unit in Lakewood?  How much is highway access going to change this?

 

 

First of all, I am not saying we need a huge warehouse at the corner of Buckeye and 116th. I am saying along the OC, we need these types of facilities to bring people to this area. This is really Cleveland's problem. You are acting like the intersection of E90th and Kinsman is a day trip from the Buckeye neighborhood. It is a 5 minute drive away.

 

Right, but I don't see Buckeye as being so far from anything that people don't live there now because there isn't access to jobs.  It's not a day trip to Midtown, University Circle, or Downtown either.  Buckeye is well within a normal commuting range of those areas, yet Buckeye still isn't attracting lots of residential or retail investment.  I don't know that adding 3,000 industrial jobs just down the hill changes that.

Okay fine, I will stop debating my point, and ask you, if it is not accesibility that is the problem with Buckeye/Mt Pleasant, then what is it. 

Also, successful Cleveland black neighborhood- Warrensville Heights, 1950's-1070's

 

I'm not saying that there can't be successful black neighborhoods or that successful neighborhoods don't have black people living in them (hence the Warrensville Heights example being a moot point as it was an established suburb that saw an increasing percentage of African Americans, although it didn't hit 75% minority until 1980), but it's very difficult to garner investment into an area in disrepair in an economically challenged area of an economically challenged city when nearly 100% of the residents are of a race collectively not holding very much capital.  It's a shame this is how investment works (often along racial lines), and it's the reason you see people like Magic Johnson purposely trying to invest in African American areas to offset the fact that this so often is the case amongst white investors.  I'm not justifying it or saying it's fair or right.  I wish it wasn't the way it is.  But it's the reality until peoples' mindsets, prejudices, and preconceptions change.  It's not going to do any good to ignore it.

 

But it's time to move on.  Hopefully, I'm wrong and the east side of Cleveland can see a turnaround that's good for all, both in neighborhood revitalization and number of jobs.

 

Not quite time to move on.  The proof is right under our noses.  Cleveland Heights v. Euclid.  Both have large minority populations.  However, vastly different correlations between minority population and prosperity.  The difference is that C.H. is a bedroom community and did not suffer disproportionate job loss.  Euclid was heavily dependent on local factories for jobs and all that was lost.  This points out the dangers of drawing any conclusions from correlations.  Simply put correlation points to cause and effect but is not the same.  Again, we need low skill, walk to bus to jobs for these neighborhoods.  If we don't do something soon they will be irredeemable and all the housing stock, infrastructure, etc.  will be permanently lost. 

Not quite time to move on.  The proof is right under our noses.  Cleveland Heights v. Euclid.  Both have large minority populations.  However, vastly different correlations between minority population and prosperity.  The difference is that C.H. is a bedroom community and did not suffer disproportionate job loss.  Euclid was heavily dependent on local factories for jobs and all that was lost.  This points out the dangers of drawing any conclusions from correlations.  Simply put correlation points to cause and effect but is not the same.  Again, we need low skill, walk to bus to jobs for these neighborhoods.  If we don't do something soon they will be irredeemable and all the housing stock, infrastructure, etc.  will be permanently lost. 

 

You're taking what I am saying too far.  I'm not saying minority population percentage and prosperity are inversely linearly correlated.  I'm not even saying they're necessarily correlated at all or that race is the cause for the neighborhood becoming depressed.  All I have been saying is that once a neighborhood has become depressed and in need of revitalization, it seems that it's harder to attract those reinvestment dollars to a neighborhood that is nearly 100% minority than one with a mixture of races (or a large Caucasian population).

 

Maybe I'm overstating the racial causes here, but if I am, what else is the cause of Buckeye seeing little to no reinvestment?  We already determined that crime is no worse than some other popular Cleveland neighborhoods.  Other successful areas around Cleveland and some inner ring suburbs have similar housing stock.  The area has good transit and is close to some job centers.  The only other difference I see is the lack of highway access, but we also discussed that.  So what is it about this neighborhood that is causing it to see no reinvestment when others do see reinvestment?

Okay fine, I will stop debating my point, and ask you, if it is not accesibility that is the problem with Buckeye/Mt Pleasant, then what is it.

 

Same problem, more or less, as Slavic Village,  Clark Fulton, Collinwood,  Glenville, etc.  We live in a region that adds new housing units at a faster clip than it adds households or high-paying jobs, which accelerates the filtering of our housing stock.  We have a vast oversupply of older 2-4 family frame housing, in great concentrations; rents and sales prices are below levels that can finance necessary building life cycle repairs and investment.

"what else is the cause of Buckeye seeing little to no reinvestment?"

 

 

Lack. of. jobs.

The housing stock sucks.  Cleveland doubles suck.  For one thing, nobody here can afford the kind of gas bills they tend to involve.  I don't see Buckeye recouperating until a lot of the housing is replaced.  Lakewood, though structurally similar, is holding on well... but it has a lot of good apartment stock and a lot of stable single-family streets.  Plus it has tons of white people, which keeps at least minimal investment flowing in.  The same thing that happened to Buckeye and other parts of the east side will eventually happen to Lakewood unless our economy changes.  On a regional scale, yes jobs are a major problem.

 

But I still don't buy that lack of jobs in the immediate vicinity is the cause of Buckeye's ills because there are just too many good jobs nearby.  The problem is the housing stock.  Buckeye can't house the middle and upper class that Lakewood does.  Thousands of people have good paying jobs within a couple miles of Buckeye, but they consistently choose different housing further away... including Lakewood.  It's hard for people to choose urbanism, even if they might be inclined to, when the urbanism we offer is so halfass and so poorly maintained.  This problem is compounded by racism and the lack of investment opportunities that accompany it. 

It doesn't matter what the housing is like if it ends combined with a lot of absenteeism and filled with those who don't give one crap about their habitat, even if they do have a decent job, etc. Anything, anywhere, desirable/nice can turn into crap. Pride is free...  some need to show some.

 

Wow!

I'm amazed at the interest that this has generated.

I haven't even read through all the comments, the furthest I've gotten is Etheostoma's post near the top of page 2. The posts were coming so fast that I couldn't keep up.

All I can say at this point is... I love Buckeye!

I do too. 

 

Correction, from earlier:  The new ribs place will be near 128-129, about a block from Popeye's.  And I really wish "Seafood with Soul" would open up more often.  A sign as cool as theirs shouldn't go to waste.  It's got a crab wearing sunglasses. 

Okay fine, I will stop debating my point, and ask you, if it is not accesibility that is the problem with Buckeye/Mt Pleasant, then what is it.

 

I don't think that there's one simple determining factor.  Buckeye is on the losing end of a lot of factors- racial divisions, poverty, type/quality/upkeep of housing stock, economic restructuring, crime (remember the low aggregate numbers I posted include Shaker Square and Larchmere, but a current crime map makes it obvious that there is a sharp divide between those areas and "Buckeye")  And yes, I think accessibility matters, but I doubt that bringing the highway system closer to the neighborhood will be a major factor when other similar neighborhoods with still better highway access still languish.

There are a lot of valid points that are made in the discussion.

 

In my exploring/traveling through the SE side, I got a sense of it being a very insular area.

I mean it's clear that most have not been here, or not here for a very long time. A lot has to do with "how do I get there?"

Someone like me with east side roots (granted they're northeast-side roots... N.Collinwood/East Cleve/NE Cuyahoga-western Lake County suburbs), the southeast side of town was sort of like a new discovery. Of course I had been through it before but not for a long time and not as extensively as when you are trying to get pictures for photo tours. A lot of people are physically familiar with Broadway/Slavic Village (which is SE Cleveland too obviously), but not these "Beyond Broadway" areas. The history of migration in Cleveland is really fascinating especially on the east side where people have been constantly migrating east from Public Square since the 1850s. Specifically, many people that originally settled in Buckeye/Mt Pleasant/Union-Miles Park/Corlett came from Broadway/SV or were new immigrants to America from E Europe that went right to the "new" SE side.

Then many of those residents moved and populated the inner-ring suburbs of Garfield Hts, Warrensville Hts, Shaker Hts etc. leaving the places behind and a lot of people forgot about the "Beyond Broadway" areas.

I think there needs to be better access (some how, some way) and the area needs to be opened up again.

The SE side isn't completely lost yet. Buckeye has the benefit of its location (bordering Shaker Square, really close to University Circle, fairly intact historic commercial district, rapid stop at E. 116th & Shaker just a block away from the commercial center). There are areas of Mt. Pleasant and Union-Miles Park that are really decimated and cannot be sustained as such, but there are also bright spots in those neighborhoods as well.

Corlett, Broadway-Warner-Turney, and Union-Miles Park are still somewhat viable. I took photos of these places for SE Cleveland Part II.

BTW I don't want some of my comments to be misinterpreted.

People and businesses have been moving away from Public Sq since the early days because Cleveland was a growing and ,eventual, rapidly-expanding city.

Same thing goes for why I said the migration patterns of the late 19th century and early 20th century were "fascinating"; Cleveland was a boomtown and the city grew at a wild pace to accomodate its influx of residents.

I did not mean to communicate that sprawl is fascinating. I understand the deleterious effects of sprawl, just like most everyone on this forum.

Sometimes when you write things at 6AM, they sound differently when you read them later.

Two different kinds of growth, one good one bad.  Cleveland was lucky to have grown at a time when people built elegant structures intended to last for centuries.  Sun belt, not so much.  Why this same philosophy didn't apply to Cleveland's residential sidestreets is unclear to me.  I'm sure the feverish boom aspect had a lot to do with it, and lets not forget how much of our apartment stock has been torn down.  It wasn't always like this.  And at least we're left with a solid skeleton of commercial strips on which to rebuild.

i realize cleveland doubles aren't for everyone, but i'm living alone in one in lakewood (upper floor) and i like it a lot. it's way better, imho, than living in an apartment complex. am i just lucky that my downstairs neighbor isn't a complete wackjob? what sucks so bad about cleveland doubles? They are good for a quasi-transient person like me (current position ending in 3 years) who doesn't want to buy.

I would think they wouldn't be too bad for owner-occupied units where the owner wanted a house but needed help with the mortgage (rent).  I wouldn't think finding a respectable tenant should be too hard, especially with all the people probably looking to rent after the foreclosure crisis (many people likely personally know a few people looking to rent).

The area known as "Buckeye-Shaker" is a broad mixture, including sleepy Larchmere and the pricey end of Shaker Blvd.  Note that the city has cut it into two wards, with Buckeye attached to Mt. Pleasant and Fairfax while those nicer parts get their own guy.  I'm told this was all part of the failed anti-Reed effort.  The point was to split Mt. Pleasant, but they had to split Buckeye from Shaker to accomplish that.  And Zack Reed still got reelected.

 

About those stats, clearly we've got some myths floating out there regarding east vs. west safety.  I love the Near West Side but it's as rough as any part of town.  St. Clair can be scary but so is Clark.  Garden Valley sure has a lot of projects but so does West 25th Street.  Once you get all the commonalities out of the equation, you're left with prejudice and terrible freeway access. 

 

I really do think the Opportunity Corridor would do a lot for Buckeye.  If nothing else, it would make my grand residential improvements a lot more plausible.  Say what you will but a lot of people put a high priority on freeway access.  I bet the Near West wouldn't look so rosy without it.  I know people don't want to hear that but I'm sorry, I think it's a much bigger factor than crime in what we're seeing here.       

 

As lifelong resident to the area I dont understand what you wrote. 

i realize cleveland doubles aren't for everyone, but i'm living alone in one in lakewood (upper floor) and i like it a lot. it's way better, imho, than living in an apartment complex. am i just lucky that my downstairs neighbor isn't a complete wackjob? what sucks so bad about cleveland doubles? They are good for a quasi-transient person like me (current position ending in 3 years) who doesn't want to buy.

 

The concept of these doubles was actually a good one...  Owner occupied living in one half...rents the other to pay his mortgage. The trouble started when many started becoming fully rented out with many owned by absentee landlords. Such leads to leaving the neighborhood to eventually be occupied with many who are those who no mater what, just don't give a crap about how they treat the place.

 

Our family has owned two of these, and were NOT absentee landlords, and we were careful to try and get good tenants, but sometimes we could not tell...they wrecked the place...invited hoodlems over and so goes planting some of the seeds for decline.

 

Interestingly enough, they had decent jobs...what they lacked that simply having cash in pocket will not always change.... is the attribute that has someone respecting/grasping what it means to respect their neighbors in a communal setting.

 

Sometimes something as simple as one word..... "behavior" or lack there-of is something we are not recognizing as a contributing element to a declining hood.... as we diligently and scientifically try to figure out all the problems of such a place. Oooops! Oh, I forgot... crappy neighbors...a few bad apples can spoil a bunch and lead to others saying "I've had it.. I'm outta here!" Should not be that way. So, its not really the doubles that are the problem...it is who ownes them and what they end up being filled with.

 

I actually think these look sharp when taken care of well. Albeit, we do have a glut of them and could stand to use a bit more diversity in the housing stock.

I know I have been commenting on accessibility being the problem with Buckeye, but I have always had a theory about this nabe, and others too.

 

Buckeye historically was probably one of Cleveland most ethnic with 110th and Woodland/Mt Carmel, Auburn being Italians, and the rest Hungarian and Slovenien.  Once these people saw one black family move in, they fled...and quickly.  The same can be said with the Italian neighborhhods in Collinwood, Polish Neighborhood in Slavik Village, and the Irish neighborhoods along Madison on the West Side.  However, the latter was Hispanic Familys moving in.  As we know, first generation Europeans, and other ethnic decent tend to be the most racist group of people you can ever meet.  Extremely ignorant, and tend not to be open to other cultures. 

 

The stories of how these people had to flee their neighborhood to to other races moving in were passed down to kids and grandkids.  Therefore, the picture of these neighborhhods were painted ugly from day one in peoples life, and they did not venture over there.

 

Look at the flip side, and Clevelands neighborhoods that over the years have been more invested into.  Old Brooklyn, Westpark, South Hills, 117th/Lorain, Ohio City, Edgewater.  These neighborhhods really have no ethnic history, therefore no ethnic flee.  They were built on a potpourii of middle class working familys (Well maybe not Edgewater).  These are the neighborhoods that you really don't here horror stories about, and have the opportunity to turn it around. 

 

I don't know, but I have always wondered what happened to our ethnic neighborhoods, and why couldn't they hang on.   

Okay fine, I will stop debating my point, and ask you, if it is not accesibility that is the problem with Buckeye/Mt Pleasant, then what is it. 

 

I don't think that there's one simple determining factor.  Buckeye is on the losing end of a lot of factors- racial divisions, poverty, type/quality/upkeep of housing stock, economic restructuring, crime (remember the low aggregate numbers I posted include Shaker Square and Larchmere, but a current crime map makes it obvious that there is a sharp divide between those areas and "Buckeye")  And yes, I think accessibility matters, but I doubt that bringing the highway system closer to the neighborhood will be a major factor when other similar neighborhoods with still better highway access still languish.

 

this pretty much hits the nail on the head... the bottom line is that the problem to buckeye is... complex.  To say the least.  There is no silver bullet or magic button to push that will turn things in this area around.  It's going to take a lot of hard, grass roots style, work.  And its going to be a long time until there is any help from major developmers doing anything market rate.  That's just the reality of the situation.

I know I have been commenting on accessibility being the problem with Buckeye, but I have always had a theory about this nabe, and others too.

 

Buckeye historically was probably one of Cleveland most ethnic with 110th and Woodland/Mt Carmel, Auburn being Italians, and the rest Hungarian and Slovenien.   Once these people saw one black family move in, they fled...and quickly. The same can be said with the Italian neighborhhods in Collinwood, Polish Neighborhood in Slavik Village, and the Irish neighborhoods along Madison on the West Side. However, the latter was Hispanic Familys moving in. As we know, first generation Europeans, and other ethnic decent tend to be the most racist group of people you can ever meet.   Extremely ignorant, and tend not to be open to other cultures.

 

The stories of how these people had to flee their neighborhood to to other races moving in were passed down to kids and grandkids. Therefore, the picture of these neighborhhods were painted ugly from day one in peoples life, and they did not venture over there.

 

Look at the flip side, and Clevelands neighborhoods that over the years have been more invested into. Old Brooklyn, Westpark, South Hills, 117th/Lorain, Ohio City, Edgewater. These neighborhhods really have no ethnic history, therefore no ethnic flee.   They were built on a potpourii of middle class working familys (Well maybe not Edgewater). These are the neighborhoods that you really don't here horror stories about, and have the opportunity to turn it around.

 

I don't know, but I have always wondered what happened to our ethnic neighborhoods, and why couldn't they hang on.

 

In a way you prove my point.  You note a correlation, old ethnic groups moving out when new ones move in, but that does not address the question.  None of these specific ethnically changing neighborhoods colapsed during economic boom times.  The highest correlation is to massive unemployment and neighborhood colapse.  It is easy to blame racism (for everything).  If is sobering to look in the mirror and say we are failing as a region to address the joblessness problem of specific ethnic groups.  That is indeed racism and I lay it at the feet of the current and immediately previous Mayor. 

but it also has to do a lot with expansion without growth.  during the boomtimes from the 1800's into the 1950's Cleveland was rapidly growing.  As new neighborhoods further out were built and people were moving to them, the inner neighborhoods were being filled with new groups.  Over the last 50-60 years cleveland (or I should really say the region) has declined in population or at best remained somewhat stagnant.  But it hasn't stopped us from building like crazy further and further out.  Only this time there aren't any people moving in to populate the neighborhoods left behind.  So you end up with those with wealth that can afford the "latest and greatest" neighborhood moving further out.  And those without means staying behind.  It's the donut hole theory.  And it's not something you can pin on 2 mayors.  it is way way way more complicated than that.

 

Further I'm not aware of the "create manufacturing jobs" button.  Show me where it is, I'd like to push it.  And please explain how it is the fault of 2 people that the manufacturing base in america had the rug pulled out from under it.  First they moved to suburbia because of the low cost of developing greenfields, and the outward migration of the people / employees.  Then they moved to the south for the low cost of labor. Then they moved overseas to "remain competitve".  And all this went on, will continue to go on regardless of who is the top politician in Cleveland, OH.

but it also has to do a lot with expansion without growth.  during the boomtimes from the 1800's into the 1950's Cleveland was rapidly growing.  As new neighborhoods further out were built and people were moving to them, the inner neighborhoods were being filled with new groups.  Over the last 50-60 years cleveland (or I should really say the region) has declined in population or at best remained somewhat stagnant.  But it hasn't stopped us from building like crazy further and further out.  Only this time there aren't any people moving in to populate the neighborhoods left behind.  So you end up with those with wealth that can afford the "latest and greatest" neighborhood moving further out.  And those without means staying behind.  It's the donut hole theory.  And it's not something you can pin on 2 mayors.  it is way way way more complicated than that.

 

Further I'm not aware of the "create manufacturing jobs" button.  Show me where it is, I'd like to push it.  And please explain how it is the fault of 2 people that the manufacturing base in america had the rug pulled out from under it.  First they moved to suburbia because of the low cost of developing greenfields, and the outward migration of the people / employees.  Then they moved to the south for the low cost of labor. Then they moved overseas to "remain competitve".  And all this went on, will continue to go on regardless of who is the top politician in Cleveland, OH.

 

That is a thoughtful response and I won't be able to prove my point as it becomes somewhat of an estatological (sp?) argument but here goes.  While I agree that manufacturing has been in decline probably since the early 1960's things really accelerated with NAFTA, especially for this region.  Pre NFTA, growth in service and new manufacturing (e.g. Mr. Coffee, etc. ) more or less kept up with the loss.  Post NAFT, other than a few very specialized, very high tech industries (e.g. picker, GE imaging) could not afford high priced labor without having to move to Mexico or abroad.  The problem was union wages.  A less than high school educated woman making car seats in Colinwood simply wasn't worth $12.00 an hour.  This happened overnight.  The Unions basically said, "we would rather ride this plane into the ground at $12.00/hr. than adjust to the economic reality that at best this is a minimum wage job".  This happend at the Steel Mills too although legacy costs played a role but there too Unions refused to recognize that all those legacy costs were not sustainable in an international economy.  So, cities like Cleveland rode the economy down, with a bright spot in the 90's due to the dot com boom.  When that went bust things picked up where the downward slide left off.  After 2001 what we needed was a Mayor that said, "Screw living wages. This is a cheap town to buy a house in and we are going to put every uneducated slob to work in minimum wage sweat shops and collect all the income and property taxes and the unions can go to hell".  Lots of these kinds of factories existed in southern cal, particularly south LA.  Nobody would have gotten rich but people at work 8 hours/day can't be committing crimes at the same time.  A little bit of this attitude existed in Solon in the 70's and that is one reason all those factories got built out there.  I know I worked in one where a union vote failed.  People wanted job security more than a living wage.  That company is still in business.  Mike White got to pass on that issue because of the short term good economy.  The local economy didn't give Jane or Frank that luxury and they both lacked the vision to make the tough (suicidal?) political decision to forgo union suport and donations. 

What?  Since when can the Mayor of the City just get rid of industrial unions?  I know you have some sort of problem with Jackson (really, you find a way to pin everything on him, to the point that I think you have an unhealthy obsession), but how exactly do you expect him to implement the idea you are saying he should?

I have many bones to pick with recent mayors but this isn't one of them.  Housing prices here haven't fallen enough to catch up with demand.  Same goes for retail and industrial land.  As McCleveland noted above, we've been building outward when we no longer had any backfill demand for the areas left behind.  I happen to think the demand is there, just not for the housing that currently exists. 

 

Supply and demand no longer work when prices are held artificially high.  We've got situations all over town where "demand isn't high enough to pay the rents" so storefronts lay empty.  That makes no sense.  If demand isn't high enough for a certain price, you don't waste resources for decades on end, you reduce the rents until they meet demand.