From old economy to new economy: Spatial planning in the county that contains Cleveland, Ohio

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Acknowledgements

Funding for this project was provided under grant 99-07-13810 of the U.S. Economic Development Administration. The author would like to thank Paul Alsenas, John DeMuth, and Kevin Leeson of the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission for their assistance and support.

Notes

1. For readers not familiar with the concept of edge cities in the United States, see Garreau (1991). More analytical treatments of the same subject by urban economists may be found in Anas et al. (1988) and Giuliano and Small (1991).

2. For more on Cleveland's history, see van Tassel and Grabowski (1996) and Keating et al. (1995). For a summary overview of the metropolitan economy of which Cuyahoga County is a part, see Gottlieb (2003).

3. Following industry cluster theory, groups of companies in the same or related industries within the metropolitan area have been formally convened by Cleveland's chamber of commerce. See Kleinhenz (2002) for details.

4. A location quotient is a measure of relative industry concentration, not absolute magnitude. It is calculated as follows:

For each cluster industry c

And for each polygon i

And for each denominator industry d

5. Agile Software is a regional sales office of a Silicon Valley company located in Bellevue, Washington. In both Seattle and Cleveland, these kinds of companies cite transportation access in choosing an edge city location. In both cities, however, the central business district (CBD) lies on the water, and therefore sits at the edge, rather than the centre, of the metropolitan area. Note that in a city like Indianapolis or Atlanta, the CBD could easily be regarded as the point most accessible to the market these firms must serve.

6. The New Jersey State Growth Management Plan (1991) envisioned a ‘hierarchy of central places’ with a typology of so-called ‘communities of place’ planned at different densities, containing different mixes of housing, employment, commercial and industrial development (New Jersey Office of State Planning, 1991). The areas around these nodes would consist of preserved farmland, parks or developed at very low densities. A second spatial construct of this regional plan consisted of ‘tiers’ that reduced the intensity of development for concentric rings increasingly distant from the large cities of New York and Philadelphia.