NewGeography.com blogs

One of these cities is the perennial Cinderella to urban planners; the other the ugly sister who always crashes the party. One is the well-planned "City of Roses" (no, not Pasadena), a bastion of mass-transit and controlled development along the Columbia River while its gargantuan sister to the south eschews all such enlightened principles.

That's the gist at least from this paean to Portland in the LA Times today about what the city could learn from its lithe Northern cousin.

A few key differences between these two:

• The vast majority (90%) of job growth in Portland has been in the suburbs

• Portland is actually far less dense than LA

• It has a tiny population of immigrants and poor vis-a-vis LA

• The city is losing families and children and rivals San Francisco for having the lowest percentage of its population under the age of 18 of any major U.S. city.

And he doesn't mention Portland's greatest comparative advantage to LA: amazing beer!

One thing both cities have in common right now: two of the most dynamic music scenes in the country.

----

Here's Joel Kotkin's piece about Portland a few years ago.

New home sales went down by a whopping 73 percent in the Windy City during the first six months of this year. But developers, anticipating high demand - especially for the condo market - have committed to keep building them. From the article in Crain's Chicago:

"Developers are building at a record pace, with 9,528 units scheduled to be finished by the end of next year, Appraisal Research says. Nearly 33% of those remain unsold, a high percentage but slightly better than the first quarter's 35%."

Mirroring a national trend, the income gap is increasing in the Bay State. From the Boston Globe article:

"The gap between rich and poor has widened substantially in Massachusetts over the past two decades, according to a new study by the University of Massachusetts. Only those earning the highest incomes benefited from gains in technology, productivity, and globalization, while middle-class earnings stagnated and incomes for poor families plunged 15 percent."

According to this report by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner research, the American public is restive for "bold change." One of the key findings of the report is that: "Voters are looking for dramatic action. Just 35 percent of voters say we can solve America’s problems with minor changes, while nearly two-thirds believe it will take 'major changes' to bring about solutions." And these respondents look more favorably upon the political legacy of FDR, rather than Reagan, to affect that change.

This climate of political disenchantment is similar to the one that greeted FDR when he entered office. Americans had gone through 12 years of Republican administrations; they viewed Hoover as grim and ineffectual as a leader. His predecessor, President Coolidge, had a famous line that "the business of government is business" which did not exactly resonate with the masses in the fall of 1932. People were ready for boldness and a different approach to economics and government and they got it.

Memo to the candidates to "make no small plans."

The Chicago Tribune reported recently on the state of the finance industry in the Chicago area. Reports indicate smaller, more nimble finance companies in Chicago are tapping an exodus of traders, bankers and investment managers:

Employment in the securities and commodity industries has held steady in the Windy City, showing an unusual resilience while marquee names such as Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers hemorrhage billions of dollars in connection with subprime mortgages. Members of the Chicago trading community say the transparency and technology provided by the futures and options exchanges has insulated them from losses the International Monetary Fund estimates will total $1 trillion.

Looking at the historical numbers, Chicago passed NYC in banking employment in 2001, but that industry is in slow decline in Chicago after peaking in late 2006. Securities jobs in Chicago have remained steady, while this sector in New York City began its sharp decline in September 2007. I'd say any evidence of Chicago growth based on New York's finance job loss is still anecdotal. (Click the chart for a bigger image.)

Chicago Trib link via Steve Bartin.