roger wyoming II wrote:^ I think if you included Cortex to about Sarah -- which does include BJC/Wash U facilities -- it would be about the same as the Cleveland Clinic complex.
i don't know about that. the CC campus is more spread out with shorter buildings on average and a lot more surface parking.
roger wyoming II wrote:
But Cleveland also has the large and highly regarded Case Western Medical/University Hospitals complex up the street:
ah, but we have Cortex and the maybe-slightly-less-highly-regarded-but-soon-to-be-expanding SLU Hospital/Med School campus up the street as well. from the photos the Case Western Med School campus doesn't look any bigger than the SLU Hospital/Med School campus. we really need to continue working on the FPP connection between the CWE and Midtown.
^ I can't wait for the renderings of the new SLU ambulatory center and hospital. Plus they got tons of parking lots to build on far into the future. And that vast parcel on the north side of Chouteau could really be special mixed-use district if they get it right.
Going back to Cleveland Clinic, its more spread out nature is due to land being cheaper -- it basically was surrounded by the impoverished Hough and Fairfax neighborhoods to the north and south -- so it is has a more open campus feel than the dense core of the BJC/WashU/STLCOP complex. However, like here, a lot of those parking lots are getting eaten up and the area as a whole is exploding and it is easy to see how lots of apartments and retail are going in both areas.
One difference I wonder about is the impact of 64 on housing for employees... Cleveland Clinic/University Hospitals are not particularly freeway accessible, so I can see some degree of preference among workers there to live nearby as a commute by automobile from outlying areas may not be as convenient. It would be nice to have data on work/housing patterns for these centers.
Sparked by a conversation on another thread. I thought I'd share this data comparing the primary city/county area of Saint Louis (STL City + County), Columbus, OH (Franklin County) and Indianapolis (Marion County)
STL City + County = 1.32 million people in 2010: estimated 2014 population of 1.32 million (0% increase)
Franklin County = 1.16 million people in 2010; estimated 2014 population of 1.23 million (5.8% increase)
Marion County = 900 K people in 2010; estimated 2014 population of 934,000 (3.4% increase)
Unless things change, there is a good chance Franklin County will catch up with us by 2020.... that's crazy.
Here's an interesting read from urbanophile on his struggles to figure out why a great place like Cincy with all its cultural and historic assets isn't growing as fast as Midwest cities like Columbus and Minneapolis.
There is simply not a city in the Midwest apart from Chicago that has anything near the great assets of Cincy. It is an embarrassment of riches.
Yet, I’m always befuddled as well as I puzzle a great conundrum: if Cincinnati is so great, how come it isn’t the San Francisco of the Midwest instead of a typical, modestly stagnated Midwestern city? I don’t profess to have the answers, but it just goes to show that having one of the country’s greatest collection of urban assets does nothing for you by itself...
Much of the discussion applies very much to us as well, I believe, although we have do have some differences w/ the Queen City
Just finished reading $2 a Day, about the millions of Americans who live on essentially no income. Very readable, it uses case studies to describe lifestyles. Big part of me was thankful the authors chose Cleveland instead of St. Louis for their "Midwestern city that used to be thriving" example. But I could easily see how closely it tracked our own city. It made me realize that most cities have similar issues for people living on the edge.
^^ I know I'm a bit of a broken record on this, but I can't take Urbanophile seriously anymore. He pretends to be an impartial analyst but he wears his biases on his sleeve. He pretty much refuses to acknowledge that St. Louis exists, while touting the wonders of places like Cincy, Indy, and even Cleveland. In one breath, he'll claim that architecture, parks, cultural institutions, etc. are generic amenities that don't distinguish St. Louis from any other city, but then extol all the same things about Cincy in the next breath. He'll berate a St. Louis tourism video or one of the "This is St. Louis" videos on Monday, and then on Tuesday he'll go on and on about an "edgy" new promotional video out of Cleveland that is, scene-for-scene, almost exactly the same as the St. Louis video. (All of which has actually happened on his blog.) Cincy has some beautiful architecture to be sure, and it's best stuff is probably a little more elaborate and a little denser than St. Louis' best stuff. But in terms of quantity of "great assets" (e.g. historic buildings, parks, cultural institutions, etc...) St. Louis has more, which makes sense considering it was considerably larger than Cincy at its height. He even admits that he hasn't spent any significant time in St. Louis, yet continues to make dismissive, blanket statements like this one. And maybe I'm wrong on this, but St. Louis became a bigger/more important river port than Cincy during roughly the same period, yet he makes it sound as if Cincy was the queen of the rivers and Chicago the queen of the rails... St. Louis who? Anyway, sorry. That guy just rubs me the wrong way.
^ i think Cleveland has a slightly higher % below poverty–maybe that's why the author picked Cleveland instead of St. Louis.
My first take is it's interesting that Dallas is also the most highly valued, yet Cincinnati and Detroit, while high on the list, are one of the handful of teams behind STL on the latest Forbes list.
^^I would have to assume this data is based upon the "City of St. Louis" only, not the entire region. As we know, that paints a much more accurate picture.
urban_dilettante wrote:^^ I know I'm a bit of a broken record on this, but I can't take Urbanophile seriously anymore. He pretends to be an impartial analyst but he wears his biases on his sleeve. He pretty much refuses to acknowledge that St. Louis exists, while touting the wonders of places like Cincy, Indy, and even Cleveland. In one breath, he'll claim that architecture, parks, cultural institutions, etc. are generic amenities that don't distinguish St. Louis from any other city, but then extol all the same things about Cincy in the next breath. He'll berate a St. Louis tourism video or one of the "This is St. Louis" videos on Monday, and then on Tuesday he'll go on and on about an "edgy" new promotional video out of Cleveland that is, scene-for-scene, almost exactly the same as the St. Louis video. (All of which has actually happened on his blog.) Cincy has some beautiful architecture to be sure, and it's best stuff is probably a little more elaborate and a little denser than St. Louis' best stuff. But in terms of quantity of "great assets" (e.g. historic buildings, parks, cultural institutions, etc...) St. Louis has more, which makes sense considering it was considerably larger than Cincy at its height. He even admits that he hasn't spent any significant time in St. Louis, yet continues to make dismissive, blanket statements like this one. And maybe I'm wrong on this, but St. Louis became a bigger/more important river port than Cincy during roughly the same period, yet he makes it sound as if Cincy was the queen of the rivers and Chicago the queen of the rails... St. Louis who? Anyway, sorry. That guy just rubs me the wrong way.
^ i think Cleveland has a slightly higher % below poverty–maybe that's why the author picked Cleveland instead of St. Louis.
YES. You nailed it. For a so-called "expert" on cities, Aaron Renn seems a bit ignorant on St. Louis and other cities that don't fit his experiential narrative. I doubt he's spent more than a weekend here, and he probably didn't venture out of downtown. Richard Florida is no different. They should know better than to take St. Louis at face value. We may not look great on paper, but there are so many intangibles that make this city amazing that are impossible to quantify. Too bad these guys couldn't visit last weekend-- with our perfect weather and an endless variety of festivals and events, St. Louis shined brightly.
Ran across this article on Columbus Ohio, one of the few Midwest cities actually growing at a good pace. I know they the state capital there and a major state university, but they also have two other things we covet here in STL. A strong Downtown core, as the centerpiece of the metro area and jobs keeping young people in town. Nothing groundbreaking, but reiterates the importance of supporting your downtown.
I know this article is old, but Columbus is keeping up the pace.
I see what you did there! But seriously, until we start addressing some of our regional divisions, we're not going to progress as we should.
A stat I heard yesterday is that Missouri is one of only 3 states in the country to not have growth in its immigrant population. We are losing immigrants.
Our well documented Ferguson related divisions are a national/worldwide narrative.
Until we start working on ourselves as a community, and getting some unity, all the talk about other comparisons is secondary.
Our regional divisions are the herd of elephants charging through the room.
DogtownBnR wrote:Ran across this article on Columbus Ohio, one of the few Midwest cities actually growing at a good pace. I know they the state capital there and a major state university, but they also have two other things we covet here in STL. A strong Downtown core, as the centerpiece of the metro area and jobs keeping young people in town. Nothing groundbreaking, but reiterates the importance of supporting your downtown.
I know this article is old, but Columbus is keeping up the pace.
To be honest, downtown Columbus is a bit sleepy imo compared to its Buckeye peers Cleveland and Cincinnati. Like all cities it has seen residential gains and renewed momentum downtown but I don't think it's quite at the level of most of its Midwest peers. At least that is my perception (as a former Buckeye).
Does Cincy have the sprawl that we do in the STL metro area? I've been curious, due to the fact that Cincy has built a 41 story tower and some nice residential projects the past few years. It seems like their downtown is the epicenter of the business community in that town, while 'suburban campuses' are all too common here. I always imagine if just half of the major companies in STL, were located Downtown. Our skyline would rival Minneapolis, Pittsburgh and other peer cities. Hopefully, once we get all of the vacant buildings done and fill building under-leased, we can get our own new tower. We really need a 40-50 story tower, to fill the skyline. Maybe on the old 'Bottle District' site.
^Cincy has a ton of far-reaching sprawl, which is probably equal to if not worse than that in St. Louis. But the key difference maker as you've mentioned is that some major corporations (P&G, Macy's, Fifth Third, Great American, and Western & Southern among others) have all kept their HQs Downtown. Also, Cincy doesn't have anything comparable to Clayton as a 2nd CBD option.
Can't say I see the "need" for a 40-50 story tower to fill the skyline. The AT&T Center seems to be doing just that - and nothing else.
^ Don't know if it has more office sprawl than here but it does have a lot. And Covington across the river is a bit of a mini-Clayton. But you're right Downtown keeping its F500 companies has been huge and getting GE to commit to the Banks over competing proposals within the region for its new global operations center was a big win and vote of confidence.
As for here, both downtown Clayton and STL would be so much better if just half of the corporate office located in sprawlsville were split between the two CBDs. Unlike a lot of other metros, you don't really see a whole lot of action with existing companies choosing to relocate to a CBD.
"in the Midwest, Cincinnati’s growth outpaced Detroit’s 2.2 percent growth, Minneapolis’ and Kansas City’s 2.0 percent growth, and Columbus’ 1.9 percent growth."
St. Louis's econony expanded at 1.7%, which was the best in several years but below the national average and just 7th best of the 10 biggest Midwest metros. It did better than Cleveland, Indianapolis and Milwaukee... those last two grew just .9% and .8%, respectively,
^ yeah, the old argument on where Pittsburgh lies.... it's kind of Midwest/Northeastern/Great Lakes and most certainly Appalachian and old Rust Belt. It is interesting though the Cincy paper didn't see it as Midwest but as a peer city.
Anyway. I guess I'd go with how Pittsburgers see themselves, if they say their Midwest then that's fine by me. And that is impressive growth.
I wouldn't say Cincinnati's sprawl is as bad as STL's. Many similarities for sure, but one difference I see is that there is less sprawl which leads to rural nothingness and an accompanying mindset that sees urban as "rival." There's decent proximity to Indianapolis, Louisville, Columbus, Dayton, etc. In Cincinnati, if you start off on an analogous drive out of town as soon as you get "out there" you begin to bleed into suburban Dayton. While not a major metropolis, I would think there is more urban support in those areas than say O'Fallon, Wentzville, or Farmington. The University of Dayton and Miami, also provide a local constant stream of young professionals many of which are regional and looking for places to find good jobs. Many are comfortable given their midwest roots with Cincinnati as a manageable "bigger city" in which to have some fun, have good entertainment and cultural options, but also put down roots.
