Revitalizing the neighbourhood: The practices and politics of rightsizing in
Idora, Youngstown
Part of special issue on “The political economy of managing decline and
rightsizing” organised by Matthias Bernt and Manual Aalbers
Dr James Rhodes
Department of Sociology
Arthur Lewis Building
Oxford Road
Manchester
M13 9PL
Email: [email protected]
1
Revitalizing the neighbourhood: The practices and politics of rightsizing in
Idora, Youngstown
Abstract
In recent years, growing academic attention has been placed upon the varied strategies of
rightsizing employed by cities to address the interrelated dynamics of economic and urban
decline and depopulation. Within this body of work the focus has primarily been placed on
the city-level. By focusing on the practices and politics of urban revitalization within the
Idora neighbourhood in Youngstown- a neighbourhood widely heralded as a success story-
this paper deepens understandings of how rightsizing is enacted within more micro-contexts.
Drawing on demographic data, documentary analysis, and observation, it reveals the process
to be complex in its manifestations. Placing the critical gaze upon the neighbourhood level
exposes actualities of urban reconfiguration in the context of stark deindustrialization, decline
and depopulation, elucidating the actors and practices involved, in addition to its politically
charged and contested nature. It concludes with a discussion of the wider implications of this
case study both in terms of the possibilities and pitfalls of rightsizing.
Keywords: Rightsizing, Shrinking Cities, Urban decline, Urban redevelopment
Introduction
On Youngstown Ohio’s South Western side, the Idora neighborhood has been a hub of
activity in recent years. Since 2009 the Youngstown Neighborhood Development
Corporation (YNDC), a non-profit community development corporation (CDC), has acted as
orchestrator of a sweeping program of urban revitalization there. With its headquarters
located in the neighborhood on reclaimed land it shares with its own Iron Roots Farm, the
2
organization, along with an active residents’ association, has been busily engaged in the
material and symbolic reconstitution of place. Drawing upon funds from a range of public,
private and philanthropic entities and employing a diverse set of practices- including
demolition, housing rehabilitation, greening and beautification, urban rebranding, and the
promotion of civic participation- this predominantly black, low and middle-income
neighborhood has become the site of a profound transition. Vacant homes have been cleared
or remodelled, surplus land converted into public gardens, and a frayed urban social fabric
reenergised through the activities of local residents, new socially oriented programs, and the
targeting of community problems.
The recent redevelopment of the Idora neighborhood has occurred within the context of the
city of Youngstown’s 2010 Plan. In 2005, the administration launched a new urban strategy,
which in breaking with the conventions of urban planning, proposed that the city should
embrace its smaller size (City of Youngstown, 2005). In doing so, it became the first U.S.
city to enact such an approach, leading the way for municipalities like Detroit, Flint, and
Rochester to follow suit. In Youngstown, as with rightsizing policies introduced elsewhere
(Aalbers, 2014a; Schindler, 2016; redacted, this issue), neighborhoods were selectively
deemed either suitable or unsuitable sites of resources and targeted intervention. Within this
schema, Idora was identified as a place where urban revitalization strategies might be
employed to “stabilize” this area of the city. Here then, both Youngstown and the Idora
neighborhood are located at the vanguard of a new form of what has variously been termed
“smart decline” or most widely- “rightsizing”. The policy strategies such terms name
emerged in response to the challenges faced by cities and neighborhoods forced to wrestle
with the legacies of sustained patterns of deindustrialization, depopulation and urban decline.
Indeed, cities across the globe are seeking to re-imagine and remake urban terrains in ways
3
that acknowledge “urban shrinkage” and related decline as “a durable, structural component
of urban development” (Martinez-Fernandez et al, 2012, p.218).
Reflective of this emergent urban policy, a growing body of work has shifted academic
attention away from more established concerns regarding the anatomies and consequences of
“urban decline” to the remedies enacted to address the resulting social and material
abandonments and inequities. Here, cities experiencing extreme abandonment, such as
Youngstown and Detroit, are seen as marking not only the demise of the postwar city but also
its reconstruction in ways that resist and reproduce urban orthodoxies (Mallach 2012; Ryan,
2012; Dewar and Thomas 2013; Smith and Kirkpatrick 2015). Smith and Kirkpatrick (2015,
p. vii) argue how in the case of Detroit, the city cannot simply be understood through tropes
of “loss, decay and dereliction”, but also as a space, “containing the embryonic possibilities
of new and/or renewed forms of social integration and economic development.” The
academic interest in “rightsizing” then nestles within urban debates both established and
emergent. “Rightsizing” has been cited as evidence of the re-emergence of urban-renewal era
policies of “triage” (Kirkpatrick, 2015) and “planned shrinkage” (Aalbers, 2014a), as well as
the continuing and deepening of urban neoliberalization and the routinization of “urban
austerity” (Akers, 2013; 2015; Hackworth 2015; Hackworth, and Nowakowski, 2015).
Alternatively, it has been framed as an opportunity for the initiation of innovative, more
equitable and sustainable modes of urban living (Schilling and Logan 2008; Ryan 2012; Parr
2014; Schindler, 2014; 2016).
Within this body of work, studies have overwhelmingly focused upon rightsizing policies at
the city-level (Wiechmann and Pallagst, 2012; Akers, 2013; 2015; Hackworth, 2015;
4
Hackworth and Novakowski, 2015). What a detailed excavation of the case of Idora enables
instead, is to focus the critical gaze upon the neighborhood itself, providing insights into the
practices and politics of rightsizing as they materialize in more micro-contexts. This is
particularly important given that ‘right-sizing’ is implemented unevenly and inconsistently
both between but also within cities. Occupying positions at the heart of an urban plan
identified as pioneering in its approach to ‘rightsizing’, both the Idora neighbourhood and the
city of Youngstown are important sites through which to analyse these trends. Indeed, in
Youngstown and beyond, the revitalization of the Idora neighbourhood has been seen as
evidence of successful approaches to urban shrinkage and decline, with Idora attracting
visitors from other US cities and as far afield as Japan and Germany, from those eager to see
the work that the YNDC has undertaken there.
The paper draws upon a combination of analysis of key strategic documents relating to the
revitalization of the Idora neighbourhood and local media coverage, as well as observations
made on a series of visits to the neighbourhood between 2010 and 2015. It advocates a view
of ‘rightsizing’ as an urban project hybrid in its formulations and enactments; a reactive but
also a productive set of techniques, which does not simply respond to new urban realities but
also remakes neighbourhoods in specific ways. The argument proceeds via the following
structure: firstly, the paper is situated in relation to the emergent academic literature
exploring ‘rightsizing’ and the particular focus on the neighbourhood-level is justified.
Secondly, an overview of the Youngstown 2010 Plan is offered, explicating the position of
the Idora neighbourhood within these plans and the role of the YNDC within such policies.
The remainder of the article considers the “rightsizing” activities in Idora arguing that this
work represents a hybridized project exhibiting a combination of what Hackworth (2015;
2015a) has termed, “market first”, “managerial” and “non-market activities”. These activities
5
are driven by two underpinning logics: firstly, a desire to re-marketize the Idora
neighborhood as a “neighborhood of choice” for both residential and commercial investors;
and secondly and relatedly, to ‘re-socialise’ Idora through an active process of social and
cultural re-integration and engagement, albeit in ways that operate to marginalise poorer
residents. Such attempts cohere around a privileging of homeownership and values of
propriety, responsibility, and civic engagement as a means for neighbourhood stabilization,
revitalization and effective “rightsizing”. The article concludes by considering both the
pitfalls and possibilities represented through “rightsizing” strategies, situating the Idora case
within the wider politics of urban redevelopment in the context of urban shrinkage and
decline. It is argued that this particular example of ‘rightsizing’ is indicative of an emergent
approach to urban citizenship, in which neighborhoods deemed saveable are subject to new
forms of social and economic integration, working to further entrench uneven urban
geographies.
Urban Decline, Shrinkage, and ‘Rightsizing’
In recent years, there has been growing interest in processes of urban depopulation, decline
and abandonment. While these processes are established features of urban environments and
urban studies, cities variously identified as “shrinking”, “declining” or “abandoned”, have
come to be seen as urban forms in need of both practical and theoretical intervention
(Hollander and Nemeth, 2011; Mallach, 2012; Dewar and Thomas, 2013; Smith and
Kirkpatrick, 2015). Historically, cities have been conceptualized and approached as sites of
growth (or potential growth) with “shrinkage” seen as a largely anomalous and temporary
phenomenon. However, sustained patterns of deindustrialization, suburbanisation, urban
decline, racism and segregation, are defining features of increasing numbers of cities, present
6
not as discrete, atypical events within arcs of urban expansion but as pervasive features of
contemporary urban spaces (Pedroni, 2011; Beauregard, 2012; Martinez-Fernandez et al,
2012; Mallach, 2012).
While such cities are not confined to any one country or region, they are shaped by the
specific economic, political and institutional contexts in which they are located. In the United
States, it is the former industrial cities of the northeast and Midwest that have been hit
particularly hard. Here, throughout the “Rust Belt” combinations of profound job losses,
recession, housing and foreclosure crisis, racism, state retrenchment, and the flight of public
and private capital have produced landscapes of striking abandonment and disrepair (Pedroni,
2011; Beauregard, 2012; Mallach, 2012; Dewar and Thomas, 2013; Hackworth, 2015).
Recently, academic focus has shifted away from exploring the roots and consequences of
decline to instead investigating the urban strategies employed to ameliorate and redress these
conditions. This developing interest has been piqued by the emergence of urban strategies
that have purportedly eschewed a commitment to ‘growth’ and instead planned for- or in the
context of- shrinkage. Here cities facing marked depopulation and related patterns of decline,
such as Youngstown, Detroit, and Buffalo, have embraced “rightsizing” policies. Although
not everywhere conceived or performed in the same way, such interventions seek to stabilize
cities in economic, infrastructural, environmental and demographic terms, through the
consolidation of resources, remediation of vacancy and blight, stabilization of the population,
improved services and quality of life, and renewed economic investment. The aim of places
enacting such approaches is to emerge as “smaller, healthier cities” (Mallach, 2012). While
these policies consist of diverse actors pursuing a range of different practices and operate in a
7
variety of ways, “rightsizing” approaches tend to be based upon a number of key
components: “community development in salvageable parts of the city, administrative
restructuring for sustainable public services, democratic initiatives that encourage citizens to
contribute and direct the form of their city, and unbuilding or reshaping the city physically.”
(Hummel, 2015, p.401).
Within the burgeoning academic literature, rightsizing strategies have been treated in a
number of ways. In its most benign rendering, “rightsizing” has been seen as representing a
pragmatic response to observable urban realities of vacancy, blight and depopulation. Here it
is a strategy identified by some as an opportunity to remodel urban spaces in fiscally and
environmentally more efficient and sustainable ways (Schilling and Logan, 2008; Kildee et
al., 2009; Hummel, 2015). Others have pushed this further, seeing such spaces as offering a
more equitable reorganisation of urban life. Parr (2014) for instance, suggests that the
retraction of capital may provide a context in which a new commons may emerge, where
urban spaces are less shaped by and bound to the dictates of capital markets (see also
Schindler, 2014; 2016).
However, much emerging academic work has come to view “rightsizing” through a more
critical lens. Political economists have instead focused on such policies as marking the
intensification of exclusionary urban processes, underpinned by the dual logics of urban
neoliberalization and austerity (Akers, 2013; 2015; Aalbers, 2014; Hackworth, 2015, 2015a;
Hackworth and Nowakowski, 2015). Hackworth and Nowakowski, (2015, p.529) for
instance, have pointed to the way in which market-oriented rationalities have dominated
‘rightsizing’ policies in the United States as “a multiscalar, multidimensional set of forces
8
and impulses…produce and reinforce a market-led approach to land abandonment within
many American cities.” Particularly significant here has been the relative lack of federal and
state resources available to cities accentuated by the recession and housing crisis, which
compel urban administrations to pursue more market-oriented responses to urban
depopulation and decline (Peck, 2012; Rhodes and Russo, 2013; Hackworth, 2015;
Hackworth and Nowakowski, 2015).
While this body of work has been pivotal in advancing our conceptualisations of
“rightsizing”, it has tended to exhibit a number of obfuscations, which this paper seeks to
productively exploit. Firstly, as (redacted) argue in this issue, there are often discrepancies
between planning ideas and actual forms of implementation, with existing work tending to
say more about the intentions of ‘rightsizing’ policies than their actual manifestations. There
is a need to examine not simply what policies assert but what they are used to do. A related
issue is the concentration of existing analysis at the city-level, which often obscures the
complexity and heterogeneity of “rightsizing” policies as they come to be enacted. Within
such analyses, both city planning policies and cities themselves are accorded an intelligibility,
a coherence that they rarely possess in practice. In trying to account for or develop typologies
for cities as a whole, the varied nature of “rightsizing” within cities is suppressed.
“Rightsizing” strategies consist of a series of diffused urban projects, initiated and practiced
by a range of different actors characteristic of the shift from central “urban government” to
more collaborative “urban governance” (Elwood, 2002; Lake and Newman, 2002; Bernt,
2009; Pedroni, 2011; Schatz, 2013). This is particularly important in the United States
context given the relative weakness of city administrations and planning departments
(redacted). In Detroit, for instance, Detroit Works, which brings together city administration,
philanthropic organisations, and CDCs, has been central to the orchestration of the city’s
9
rightsizing strategy (Schindler, 2016; redacted, this issue). Similarly, in Youngstown, much
of the actual implementation of the 2010 Plan within the Idora neighborhood has been ceded
to the YNDC, rather than being overseen and implemented by the city administration.
The focus beyond the city-level is important given the uneven and inconsistent nature of
rightsizing, as even within cities, neighborhoods are conceived of and acted upon in different
ways. “Rightsizing” is imagined and enacted in ways that both reflect and refract fragmented
geographies. Indeed, while work has identified the different fates assigned to variously
classified neighborhoods (redacted; Aalbers, 2014; 2014a), less has been said about the actual
processes of “rightsizing” in these areas. Where research has looked at this it has tended, for
instance, to focus upon the prevalence of demolition within the most marginalised
neighborhoods (Hackworth, 2014). What the case of Idora presented below allows for is an
investigation into how “rightsizing” operates within a neighborhood identified as a target for
deeper redevelopment and investment. This is important as altering the focus of analysis
challenges some of the assumptions present within existing literature. To see “rightsizing” as
being solely characteristic of the deepening of urban neoliberalization, of urban austerity- or
indeed of more sustainable and equitable forms of living- misses the complex ways in which
all of these processes and qualities are simultaneously in evidence in cities like Youngstown
and neighborhoods such as Idora, albeit to differing degrees. What the focus on Idora reveals
is the competing logics that underpin rightsizing policies, and the need for a conceptualisation
of “rightsizing” as an urban strategy replete with multiplicity. Indeed, while the analysis
below remains minded of the embeddedness of neighborhoods within wider social, economic
and spatial arrangements, a focus on the more micro-practices of “rightsizing” adds an
important dimension to existing analyses.
10
Idora, Youngstown and the 2010 Plan
The Youngstown 2010 Plan
In 2005, following an extensive process of planning and civic engagement, Youngstown
introduced its citywide 2010 Plan. The policy represented the first comprehensive planning
document the city had formulated since 1951- a strategy amended just once when it was
updated in 1974. The city that the 2010 Plan was oriented towards was very different from
that of the early 1970s. Since that time, the precipitous collapse of the city’s steel industry
occurred alongside ongoing flight of public and private capital as both residents and
businesses left the city for adjacent suburban areas and beyond. Once one of the nation’s
leading steel producers, the industry dramatically collapsed from 1977 onwards as within the
space of roughly a decade, the city lost 29,000 manufacturing jobs (Ott, 1987). These losses
have been compounded more recently as between 2000 and 2008, an estimated 24,000 jobs
were lost within the Mahoning Valley in which Youngstown is located (Schmidt, 2008).
Paralleling this, between 1950 and 2010, Youngstown’s population fell from a high of
approximately 168,000 to just under 67,000, representing a loss of over 60 per cent of its total
inhabitants. The collapse of the city’s tax base along with diminished state and federal
resources served to intensify social and physical decline.
The outcome of these processes is a city scarred by diminishing services and amenities, a
degrading of infrastructure, and a litany of social and economic ills including high
unemployment, crime, vacancy and poverty. 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS)
population estimates suggested that Youngstown had 7,041 vacant units, amounting to 19.8
per cent of the city’s total housing stock1. Similarly, for the same period the percentage of
11
city families living in poverty was 27.2 per cent2. Indeed, in 2011, a Brookings Institution
report identified Youngstown as possessing the highest rate of concentrated poverty in the
nation as between 2000 to 2005-09, the proportion of residents living in extreme-poverty
tracts increased by over a third, to 49.7 per cent (Kneebone et al, 2011). As with other Rust
Belt cities such inequalities are not evenly distributed but are reflective of deep racial
cleavages, as the poorest and most disinvested neighborhoods within the city are
disproportionately black (Pedroni, 2011; Safransky, 2014; Hackworth, 2016).
The 2010 Plan represented a concerted attempt to address the degraded conditions and
depopulation that had occurred in the city. The reason it garnered such significant attention,
was because of how it explicitly proposed to do this by embracing Youngstown’s smaller size
as a means of urban reconfiguration. Rather than stating an intention to re-grow the city, the
plan instead sought to stabilize its population by improving the quality of the local
environment, economy, and infrastructure. The 2010 Plan was the basis for a redevelopment
strategy designed to replace a plan that “was without foundation and virtually obsolete” with
a new vision that would “provide a solid foundation for a cleaner, greener, and more efficient
city” (City of Youngstown, 2005, p.7). It represented “a strategic program to rationalize and
consolidate the urban infrastructure in a socially responsible and financially sustainable
manne”’ (ibid. p.18), enabling the city “to pick up the pieces and organize them to set the
stage for sustainable regeneration of the 21st century” (ibid. p.15). This strategy was forged
around a number of key goals: an acceptance of Youngstown as a smaller city than it had
historically been; an alignment of the city with “the realities of the new regional economy”;
“improving Youngstown’s image and enhancing quality of life”; and a “call to action: An
achievable and practical action-oriented plan to make things happen” (ibid. p.135).
12
The aims have been pursued through a number of specific strategies: substantial reinvestment
in the city’s downtown core and economic development; a mobilization of the local citizenry;
and a process of neighborhood recovery and revitalization. Resembling closely the “planned
shrinkage” (Aalbers, 2014a) or “triage” (Kirkpatrick, 2015) approach, the city divided
neighbourhoods into categories of “stable”, “transitional”, and “weak” (City of Youngstown,
2005). Within this typology, “weak neighbourhoods” were those deemed to be, “beyond any
hope of short-term solutions and require comprehensive reinvestment strategies” (ibid., 2005,
pp. 34–35), exceeding the fiscal capabilities of the city. Such neighborhoods map onto
historical patterns of racism and segregation reflecting the racialised and classed cartography
of the city (Aalbers, 2014a; Hackworth, 2016). Within the 2010 Plan, those neighborhoods
classified as “weak” are disproportionately poor, black neighborhoods. Meanwhile, “stable
neighborhoods” tend to be more largely white in their racial composition and exhibit lower
rates of poverty, vacancy, and higher property values (see figure 1).
(Insert Fig. 1 Comparison of Idora neighborhood with city of Youngstown and selected
other neighborhoods across a range of indicators based on 2005-2009 American
Community Survey Five-Year Estimates).
Positioned between these “weak”, and those neighborhoods seen as “stable”, Idora was
identified as a ‘transitional’ space- a neighbourhood-type, “exhibiting a substantial
population base but which still display tax and structure problems” that “have not reached the
point of no return and could benefit by city program intervention.” (ibid., p.45). By virtue of
13
this it was viewed within the 2010 Plan as an appropriate site for strategic investment,
illustrating Hackworth’s (2014; 2015) observation that while previous manifestations of
“rightsizing” and urban policy sought to focus on the “mortally wounded”, in the
contemporary period sustained and targeted investment is reserved for the relatively more
stable neighborhoods.
Identifying Idora for revitalization
The Idora neighborhood, located to the southwest of the city, took its name from the Idora
Park amusement park and is bounded by the commercial corridor of Glenwood Avenue to the
east and Mill Creek Park to the west (see figure 2). Founded in 1899, Idora Park was
constructed by a streetcar company and drew visitors from far and wide, playing host to a
range of music, sporting and leisure activities, buoyed by a relatively wealthy local
population and the tradition of local unions to hold family days and events for workers there.
Its decline in the 1970s was linked to both the deindustrialization that was occurring in the
city as well as sustained depopulation. Following a fire in 1984, Idora Park permanently
closed and the 26-acre site remains vacant and is currently owned by a local church
(Beniston, 2008, p.16).
(Insert Fig 2. Map of Idora neighborhood taken from Beniston, 2008, p.15)
Like the amusement park, the experience of the neighborhood that shares its name is also
testament to entrenched processes of decline, depopulation, and segregation. Between 1970
and 2000, the Idora neighborhood experienced profound demographic transitions reflective of
trends in northern industrial American cities. This period was one of consistent population
14
losses hastened by the loss of jobs and white flight out of the area, which accelerated with the
commencement of the 1950s. In 1970, 84 per cent of the neighborhood population was white
with just 16 per cent made up of African-Americans. By 2000, 79 per cent of the population
was African-American, with the white population declining to 17 per cent, as black residents
were able to move into a neighbourhood albeit at a time when disinvestment and deterioration
became increasingly defining features (ibid., p.18). Between 1990 and 2010, the population
of the neighborhood declined by 37 per cent, from 2,378 to 1,504 (YNDC, 2014a, p.205).
This contributed to high rates of vacancy as during the same timeframe the percentage of
vacant houses increased from 9 per cent to 19 per cent (ibid., p.206). Those residents that
remained were characterized by increasing impoverishment, mirroring wider trends in
Youngstown and beyond, as central cities have come to be defined by increasingly
impoverished and increasingly African-American populations. According to 2005-2009, ACS
estimates, 22.4 per cent of families lived below the poverty line. 96.6 per cent of
neighborhood residents receiving food stamps were black or African-American3.
At the time of the conception of the 2010 Plan the Idora neighbourhood, like many others
across Youngstown, was home to a majority black, low and middle-income population and as
elsewhere in the city, it was marred by high crime, high rates of vacancy, blight and
abandonment. Compared to city averages, Idora exhibited a disproportionately large black
population and higher rates of unemployment (see figure 1). Idora also had high rates of
housing vacancy with 107 of 750 units vacant (ibid. p.20). However, there were a number of
features of the neighborhood that compared favourably with Youngstown as a whole, and
particularly with those “weaker” neighborhoods (see figure 1). The population, for instance,
had higher numbers of college graduates than average and property values remained
relatively strong in relation to the rest of the city. Relatedly, in 2010 the neighbourhood
15
registered high levels of owner-occupation, with 66 per cent of housing units lived in by
homeowners, compared to 58 per cent for the city as a whole (YNDC, 2014a, p.206). Also,
the area was heavily residential, favoring single-family, owner-occupied dwellings, and
lacking larger multi-family apartment blocks.
Symbolically, the neighbourhood is particularly important given the former presence of Idora
Park, which kindles nostalgic memories of a more affluent time for the city. Similarly, the
housing stock in the neighborhood also contains significant numbers of large, historic homes
marked out by their grandeur, unlike property to be found in most other parts of the city and
suburbs. These streets also neighbour Mill Creek Park, which acts as a natural boundary to
the neighbourhood. The lakes, woodlands, and trails in the park again make it particularly
attractive to existing and prospective residents. This means that the neighbourhood lacks
some of the more entrenched and stigmatizing “racial inscription” that can work to preclude
investment (Pedroni, 2011:212). Economically, the neighborhood’s proximity to Glenwood
Avenue, a main commercial thoroughfare, also made it a site of potential redevelopment
(Beniston 2008, p.30). Politically, the neighbourhood organisation- Idora Neighborhood
Association (INA), which formed in 2007 and emerged as part of the YNDCs strategy has
developed into one of the strongest neighbourhood groups in the city. Here then a host of
economic, physical, and symbolic factors- drawing upon urban imaginaries of race, class and
nature- made it an area targeted for revitalization.
Enacting rightsizing
16
While it was the city-planning department that identified Idora as a site for intervention, the
lack of resources at the disposal of the city administration and its focus on downtown and
economic development activities, meant that the responsibility for the revitalization of the
Idora neighborhood was ceded to the YNDC. The YNDC was formed by Ohio State
University planning graduate and Youngstown native, Ian Beniston. He, inspired by the 2010
Plan, and in conjunction with the INA (which Beniston helped to form) and the City of
Youngstown, developed a comprehensive workplan for the neighbourhood while studying.
This was approved by the city in March 2008 and Beniston, with the support of the City and
the Raymond John Wean Foundation, founded the YNDC in 2009.
The devolving of such activities to CDCs is typical of urban redevelopment in the United
States more widely, as the retrenchment of city resources has seen many neighborhood
development activities orchestrated by non-state actors, particularly CDCs (Lake and
Newman, 2002; Newman and Ashton, 2004; Jonas and McCarthy, 2009; Thomson, 2013;
Schindler, 2016). Where the city has been directly involved in neighborhood activities in
Youngstown, this has been largely in relation to demolition activities, legislative actions
around housing and zoning codes, and the securing and distribution of state and federal funds
for community development (Newman and Ashton, 2004). The YNDC has operated with
funding from a range of public, private and philanthropic entities- notably the Raymond John
Wean Foundation- as well as successfully competing for state and federal grants. According
to the YNDC’s 2015 annual report, the organisation received $2.1 million in grant funding
(YNDC, 2016:8). Similarly, the previous year it reported grants of $2.9 million (YNDC,
2015). Indeed, as with the Detroit Works project, despite the central role that the YNDC has
played within the 2010 Plan, it has only been partially reliant on city funding. In concert with
the INA, the YNDC has been engaged in a sweeping programme of redevelopment. As stated
17
in a 2014 report, the aim of the YNDC is to focus upon the “transformation of vulnerable,
undervalued and transitional neighborhoods into healthier places where people are willing to
invest their time, energy, resources and where residents can manage their own issues.” (2014,
p.3). The quote is particularly illustrative of the leading role that CDCs play within
contemporary regeneration in the US, and also the devolving of neighbourhood solutions to
residents, who in concert with local non-state institutional actors are expected to ameliorate
what are wider, structural patterns of disinvestment (Lake and Newman, 2002; Kinder, 2014;
Hackworth, 2015).
Rightsizing, remediation and creating ‘Neighborhoods of Choice’:
Re-marketing Idora
It is clear that under the auspices of the 2010 Plan, it was its relative market advantages that
lead to the Idora neighbourhood being targeted as a site for intervention. As mentioned, this
is redolent of the wider shift in relation to distressed urban spaces, where rather than
resources being channelled into the most deprived neighbourhoods they are instead
strategically invested where there is a greater likelihood of “success”, which itself is
measured largely through recourse to housing markets and the anticipated impact of such
investment on property prices (Newman and Ashton, 2004; Mallach, 2012; Thomson, 2013;
Akers, 2015; Hackworth, 2015). It is perhaps unsurprising then that within Idora itself, the
plans for the neighborhood formulated by the YNDC in line with the 2010 Plan, have
focused principally on steadying the housing market and stimulating increased investment
from both existing homeowners and prospective occupiers and investors. Indeed, in its 2010
Idora Neighborhood Workplan, central amongst the list of the organization’s strategic
objectives were plans, “To rebuild market confidence in neighborhoods through strategic
18
reinvestment and neighborhood improvement activities”, in order “to increase wealth and
asset building through the appreciation of home values and other advancements” (YNDC,
2010, p.4).
The approach in Idora parallels the CDC activities observed by Thomson (2013) in similar
“middle neighbourhoods” in Baltimore developed during the 1990s. Here, the “Healthy
Neighborhoods” approach eschewed traditional community development discourses offered
by non-profits in explicitly embracing and emphasizing the aim of increasing property values.
Similarly, the YNDC has sought to stimulate market-demand organised around the creation
of Idora as a neighborhood of “choice” for responsible investors (YNDC, 2014, p.4). Such
strategies are indicative of the central role that low and middle-income home ownership have
come to play within revitalization attempts in neighborhoods with weak housing demand
since the late-1990s as reliance on non-governmental funding encourages the development or
stimulation of privately-owned property (Newman and Ashton, 2004; Boehlke, 2012).
Similarly, the focus on the “responsibility” of residential investors is a loaded term, shifting
emphasis for the fiscal challenges of the neighbourhood onto residents rather than systemic
processes and the actions of financial institutions.
The YNDC has pursued these aims through the deployment of a range of practices organised
around attempts to reduce the housing supply and to stimulate demand- what has been termed
“rightsizing markets” (Kildee et al, 2009; Boehlke, 2012; Mallach, 2012). In terms of
managing the supply of housing and land, this has been achieved in a number of ways.
Firstly, and as Hackworth has noted (2014), demolition has been widely utilised as a means
of ridding the neighbourhood of vacant and blighted housing. Secondly, through the transfer
19
of side-lots acquired through the local land bank, homeowners have been encouraged and
able to acquire property, reverting surplus and delinquent land back into private ownership.
Other abandoned properties acquired via delinquency procedures, or directly from banks or
owners have been rehabilitated and sold to private owner-occupiers. In 2015, for instance, the
YNDC and Mahoning County Land Bank worked together to acquire up to six tax-delinquent
and vacant homes in the neighbourhood. Here, the Land Bank purchases the properties on
which back taxes are waived and then transfers them to the YNDC for $550 dollars each (the
cost to the land bank of the country prosecutor’s office foreclosure fees). The houses are then
rehabilitated and sold privately (Skolnick, 2015a). For Hackworth (2015a), this is a key
strategy within what he terms ‘market-first’ approaches to land abandonment, focused upon
outcomes aimed at increasing private ownership. This tactic has also been reflected in the
attempts of the YNDC to stimulate demand. Here, an aggressive campaign of neighbourhood
branding in which homeowners are recruited as active ambassadors for the area and
encouraged to convey “positive messages”, has involved the installation of artists murals,
new street signs reflecting the historic identity of the neighborhood, physical improvements
to streets and lots, and the introduction of community amenities such as pocket parks, an
urban farm and a farmers market.
Residents have also been incentivized to maintain properties through both more active code
enforcement but also financial support for home repairs, which has worked to improve the
conditions of both rental and privately-owned properties (YNDC, 2010; 2014). The aim of
this strategy is to increase not only the retention and investment of existing residents but also
to attract “new homeowners that will invest, increasing the overall homeownership rate, and
[increase] property values” (YNDC, 2010, p.7). In conjunction with local financial
institutions, the YNDC is able to offer subsidies and financing to promote homeownership
20
amongst low- and moderate-income residents. Here in a context in which private finance has
largely bypassed Idora and Youngstown more broadly, the YNDC has been able to offer its
own finance to prospective homebuyers with more favourable rates of interest and less
demanding credit scores. While not the same as more traditional processes of gentrification
led by private developers, the activities in Idora bear significant resemblances to strategies
identified in inner-city Newark by Newman and Ashton (2004). Here they observed the
increasing role that city administrations and CDCs have assumed in the promotion of
gentrification-style development. While in Idora this does not involve new construction or the
destruction of public housing, the rehabilitation of homes or their acquisition through tax-
reversal processes is used to attract newer, generally more affluent, residents in order to buoy
the local housing market. Indeed, some rehabilitated properties have been reserved for low to
moderate-income residents, however, of those properties sold openly to the private market,
these have commanded sales prices that well exceed the citywide average, which stood at just
$21,327 in 2013 (YNDC, 2014a, p.4). As will be discussed in more detail below, this will and
is serving to alter the racial and class composition of the neighbourhood.
The focus on improving the residential market has been augmented by attempts to reconstruct
the neighbourhood as a site for commercial activity and investment. The Glenwood Avenue
commercial corridor has been targeted by the YNDC for physical remediation with the
removal of blight and vacant structures. In 2012, the YNDC was involved in the brokering of
a deal, supported through financial incentives that brought the discount national grocery store
chain, Bottom Dollar Food, located on Glenwood Avenue (Henkel, 2012). Similarly, the
YNDC has offered both business loans and classes for local residents in the hope of
stimulating economic activity. In 2014, funded by a grant from the Ohio Community
Development Corporation Association, it started offering loans of between $5,000 to $15,000
21
dollars to micro-businesses with fewer than five employees (Hall, 2015). The construction of
the YNDC’s own 1.7 acre Iron Roots Farm in 2012 and the training and employment of local
residents in urban agriculture has been used as an attempt to generate renewed economic
investment and opportunities in the neighbourhood, as well as to address the problem of food
desertification and a lack of access to healthy and fresh produce (Milliken, 2012). Here, there
is an anticipation that those residents able to take advantage of such training will benefit from
the increased opportunities which it is hoped will accrue to the neighborhood.
Beyond marketization?
The normalization and prioritization of market-oriented activities referred to by Hackworth
(2015a) are clearly evident in attempts to brand and sell the Idora neighbourhood and in the
emphasis placed on private property and its ownership. However, the YNDC has worked to
ensure that market activity is embedded within a wider framework aimed at raising
neighbourhood quality of life. This appears to be different from the situation identified in
Detroit (Akers, 2013; 2015; Hackworth, 2015a) where ‘market-oriented’ policies dominate
the local policy terrain. Within the Idora neighborhood it is apparent that in comparison the
role of market logics in ‘rightsizing’ have exerted influence in more muted fashion. This
seems to be a result of the power of the YNDC, over and above those of private interests
within the neighbourhood itself. This is perhaps due to the extent of the surplus land and a
lack of clear present or future private demand, and the general absence of partnerships with
private investors in Idora. Schatz (2013, p.100) has suggested that the relative weakness of
private business within the formulation of the 2010 Plan and the strength of local public and
non-profit actors has meant a greater focus than elsewhere on “land use planning issues (for
instance, excess infrastructure) and the social issues associated with them (such as the rise in
22
crime in neighborhoods with vacant homes), rather than traditional ‘going for growth’
economic development.” The case of Idora would seem to support this. For instance, in
addition to the greater deployment of what Hackworth (2015a) terms ‘managerial’ strategies
such as code enforcement, the YNDC has also engaged in a series of ‘non-market’ activities
to improve the neighbourhood and make it a more attractive space.
According to Hackworth “non-market” strategies involve, the removal of “land from private
ownership for various social or environmental purposes” (2015a, p.78). In the absence of
pressure for new housing construction or significant housing or commercial demand, land
acquired from the land bank has been used for purposes less shaped by private interests,
something Schindler (2014) also identifies in Flint. Indeed, while as Hackworth and
Nowakowski (2015) note land banking systems in Ohio and elsewhere favour the transfer of
land into private, “productive” use, the YNDC with the support of the city administration and
through a close partnership with the Mahoning County Land Bank has been able to influence
such practices at the micro-level (Nelson, 2015). For instance, in addition to the rehab of
salvageable vacant properties, land transferred to the YNDC has been used to create areas of
wildflowers and plants that require little maintenance and can reverse processes of soil
contamination, as well as public pocket parks to be used by and maintained by residents
through its “Lots of Green” programme. Additionally, land has been transferred to the
ownership of the Mill Creek Metropark system-, a public park governed by an appointed
Board of Trustees, while a newly established community garden has been entrusted to the
INA to manage. Significant land has also been acquired by the YNDC and converted into a
working farm and its organizational headquarters, which while retaining an emphasis on
private ownership is used for enterprises whose aim is not to produce financial profits. More
recently, since the closure of the Bottom Dollar grocery store following its takeover by Aldi
23
in 2014, the site has been unable to attract new commercial owners. However, in a proposal
submitted to the city in May 2016, ONE Health Ohio, a non-profit health provider for low-
income patients, plan to take over the building with the city accepting a lower price than
valued for the land (Skolnick, 2016).
In this sense, while market-oriented thinking has guided ‘rightsizing’ strategies in
Youngstown, this has been less pronounced than observed elsewhere, as land has also been
explicitly redirected away from private ownership. Where private investment has been
encouraged this has been done so in a way that seeks to further wider neighborhood interests.
The hybridity of the practices pursued in Idora are further illustrated in the next section,
where focus is placed on attempts to ‘re-socialise’ the neighborhood, as ‘rightsizing’ reveals
itself to be about a reorganisation of the social fabric of the area and its citizenry, as well as
its physical environment.
(Re-)Socialization of the Neighborhood
While much of the “rightsizing” of Idora has been aimed at re-marketizing- albeit in ways
less determined by private interests- the YNDC has also attempted to what might be termed
re-socialize the neighbourhood through aesthetic changes and the cultivation of a more
active, engaged, responsible, and aspirational local citizenry. It is asserted in planning
documents that the neighbourhood lacks appropriate and valued forms of sociality, which the
organisation strategically seeks to inculcate. Indeed, key to making places like Idora
“neighbourhoods of choice” is the need to address the wider social fabric of the area. A
defining feature of distressed neighbourhoods in the United States, and particularly in the
24
context of cities experiencing extreme depopulation and urban decline, are the litany of social
ills that animate the terrain. In Idora, as across Youngstown more generally, the 2010 Plan
and the activities of the YNDC have been motivated by attempts to improve quality of life
issues, relating to high unemployment, poverty, crime, and gang activity. Indeed, crime has
historically been a particular problem for Idora. The neighbourhood plan produced in 2008
identified how, “Burglaries, gun violence and vacant house fires are among the most
troubling examples of crime”. The extent of these issues was revealed by the fact that,
“reports of gunfire more than tripled from 2005 to 2006 from 30 in 2005 to 104 in 2006.’
Similarly, ‘in total, there were 1,443 incidents of serious crimes against persons between
2002 and 2006” (Beniston, 2008, p.40).
In working to improve the social fabric, demolition has been an important tool, as vacant
houses have been shown to be associated with high rates of crime such as arson and drug
sales and usage. In response to this, the transformation of the physical environment through
demolition and the ‘greening’ of vacant lots have been employed as a way to alleviate social
problems such as crime but also food desertification, public health, and unemployment. A
study conducted into the effects of these ‘greening’ initiatives conducted in two
neighbourhoods in Youngstown- including Idora- found that between 2010 and 2014,
greened lots contributed to significant reductions in criminal activity, notably violent crime.
(Kondo et al, 2016). Similarly, the YNDC embarked upon a research project with the
University of Michigan examining the relationship between ‘greening’ and youth crime
prevention. To these ends, the organisation has directly employed marginalised youth in the
regeneration of the neighborhood. Here, resident youth have been tasked with the upkeep of
vacant, greened lots and a local 4-H group- the “Idora Wildcats”- has been established and
has competed in regional competitions. Similarly, following a proposal from the YNDC, in
25
April 2015, the city of Youngstown contracted the YNDC to implement a new program in
which 20 low-income people between the ages of 18-24 would be employed to “cut grass,
clean debris and illegal dumping sites, do light landscaping and board up vacant structures”
(Skolnick, 2015). The Iron Roots farm has also proven a vehicle through which food
desertification and access to healthy foods has been addressed. The local farmers market
offers discounts to those in receipt of food vouchers, while free classes in urban agriculture
and healthy eating are offered to residents. In 2014, for instance, the YNDC offered 27 free
classes on urban farming and 28 classes in how to cook more healthy meals for local
residents (YNDC, 2015, p.9)
These activities form part of a wider organizational aim to improve the social cohesiveness of
the neighbourhood. Here, in the context of diminished public services and policing, the
engagement of the citizenry, evidenced in the close links that the YNDC has forged with the
INA, has become a central aim of the organization as it has sought to, “strengthen the social
fabric of neighbourhoods through the active participation and involvement of residents”
(YNDC, 2010, p.4). “Rightsizing” strategies in Idora have involved the development of an
active citizenry, running counter to the emphasis generally placed on “property rather than
people” which has been seen to characterize such policy initiatives (Beauregard, 2013, p.19).
While this citizenry has been mobilized, in part as a way of safeguarding private property,
more broadly it has been seen as a way to enact neighbourhood change in terms of improving
feelings of safety, efficacy, and “community”. The YNDC (2010, p.19) has expressed a
commitment to, “continue its strong partnership with Idora residents to promote broad based
participation and collaboration.” Here, there is a recognition that,
26
Physical improvements will not change a neighbourhood unless existing residents
are involved, invested and committed to the neighborhood’s transformation.
Neighborhood engagement, involvement, and partnerships are integral to the
success. (ibid.)
While elsewhere in this issue, (redacted), are justifiably sceptical of attempts at community
engagement, seeing it as a means of securing consent for predetermined and widely
detrimental sets of policies, within Idora (and given that many residents here are the
beneficiaries of strategic intervention rather than its casualties) the YNDC and the INA have
combined to define and tackle community problems. Notably, residents led a campaign to
close down a corner store associated with drugs and gun offences in the neighbourhood. In
2009, residents forced the store to close and established a dry precinct, restricting the sale of
alcohol (Skolnick, 2009). This is part of wider efforts, in conjunction with the police, to
address criminal and gang activity. In addition to this, over recent years residents frequently
engage in community clean-ups to board houses, the improvement of lots, and the
development of community projects. Here, through the ethos of community activities,
residents are encouraged to become key actors in remedying local problems, which while
reflecting and normalizing the outsourcing of state functions to local populations (Kinder,
2014), is also seen to promote a sense of community ownership and engagement.
Reconfiguring the local population
If the “rightsizing” of the Idora neighbourhood then has involved the mobilization of citizens
as a means of social and cultural regulation, strategies have also sought to cultivate the types
27
of residents residing there. This represents an attempt to not only “rightsize” markets, but also
to reconfigure its citizenry, something that has been noted as a central aspect of “rightsizing”
policies elsewhere (redacted). Here, in line with contemporary neoliberal orthodoxies,
‘homeownership’, entrepreneurialism and self- responsibility have been valorised as
necessary to the revitalization of declining urban spaces (Newman and Ashton, 2004;
Aalbers, 2011; Boelkhe, 2012). In Idora, the provision of classes in farming,
entrepreneurialism and healthy eating can be seen as strategies to enhance the capacities of
the local populace. Similarly, the promotion of home ownership and maintenance amongst
existing and new residents has been a key tool within this resocialization, in part through the
offering of support for home improvement grants. Clearly claims to remedy the social
cohesion and fabric of neighborhoods hold unstated, racialized and classed meanings,
privileging more educated and affluent residents.
The relative weakness of institutional financial support for property purchases in
Youngstown and the ability of the YNDC to offer its own loans have allowed it to promote
and regulate the entry of homeowners into the neighbourhood. This resocialization has been
done, for instance, through schemes subsidizing homeownership for ‘aspirational’ low and
moderate-income families. Here, home purchasers with incomes at or below 50 per cent of
the area median but who can contribute 3 per cent of the property value through personal
assets are able to gain assistance through a ‘Healthy Homeownership Program’. This program
includes, “soft requirements for new homebuyers to take on leadership roles in the
neighbourhood and become actively involved in the neighborhood’s revitalization”. Within
this scheme, new residents must commit to reside in the neighbourhood for a minimum of
three years and participate in “pre and post purchase homebuyer training.” This comprises
guidance on budgeting and home maintenance (YNDC, 2010, p.7-8).
28
Additionally, the resocialization of the neighbourhood has been pursued through the
rehabilitation and sale of properties through the private market, which sell for significantly
more than the city average. More recently, the YNDC has also developed a small number of
rental units, and the qualification for tenancy includes stipulations regarding credit scores,
incomes and the absence of convictions for felonies in the last three years and violent crimes.
Again, these units command rents that exceed city averages,
The outcome of these strategies is evident in an alteration of the demographic profile of
Idora, through the attraction of relatively more affluent residents. Comparing ACS estimates
from 2006-2010 and 2010-2014,while average incomes of residents and median home values
have declined and poverty status increased, this has occurred at lesser rates than for the city
as a whole. So in relative, rather than absolute terms, the Idora neighbourhood has seen its
position improve. Similarly, at a time when for the city as a whole, the proportion of
homeowners is declining and renters increasing, the inverse trend is evident in Idora.
Between 2006-2010 and 2010-2014, the proportion of owner-occupiers increased from 56.2
per cent to 58.4 per cent4. Similarly, monthly housing costs in the neighbourhood have
significantly increased at a time when across the city they have fallen. Between 2006-2010
and 2010-2014, monthly housing costs for all occupied homes in Idora rose from $545 to
$685, while across the city costs fell from $560 to $546. Rental costs were particularly
pronounced. For renters in Idora, monthly costs rose from $437 to $729, while increases
across the city were $549 to $6125. Perhaps most strikingly, reflecting uneven resources and
entrenched racialised inequalities, the black population of the neighbourhood during this
period declined from 84.8 per cent to 72.6 per cent, while the white population increased
from 11.7 per cent to 25.8 per cent6.
29
The emphasis placed on the resocialization of Idora reveals “rightsizing” to be an urban
project, not simply interested in the physical remediation of urban space, but also in wider
attempts to reinvigorate and reconfigure the social dynamics within contexts of urban
depopulation and decline. This is reflective of wider trends across urban America, where the
aim within contemporary urban policy is to diversify the composition of the population in
class and racial terms within a neighbourhood as a means of ameliorating inequality and
deterioration (Newman and Ashton, 2004; Aalbers, 2011). In Idora, “rightsizing” then
involves attempts to reorganize land, markets, and residents themselves. However, unlike
elsewhere, this has not been done through large-scale revanchism and displacement- at least
not in the short-term. Again, the relative lack of housing demand and the limited supply of
attractive available properties mean that the resocialization or ‘civilization’ (Aalbers, 2011)
of the neighbourhood has not occurred primarily through the importation of more affluent
residents, although this has undoubtedly occurred. Instead, there have been greater efforts to
engage the local citizenry, including low and moderate income-residents- to cultivate and
reinforce particular sets of norms and dispositions, albeit in ways that privilege the interests
of homeowners and potential investors. In a similar vein to how the re-marketization of Idora
has occurred in ways less shaped by market dictates, so too attempts to “rightsize” the
citizenry of the neighbourhood appear to be more focused on improving conditions for
existing residents- or at least those residents who it is thought can be re-socialized into values
of employment, self-responsibility, entrepreneurialism, and home ownership.
Conclusion: Thinking Through Idora
The case of the Idora neighborhood offers some important insights into “rightsizing” as it is
30
enacted in a particular context. In focusing upon the neighborhood rather than the level of the
city, the hybridized nature of this form of urban intervention is revealed as are its
ambivalences and contestations. In this instance, “rightsizing” manifests both the continuing
evolution of processes of urban neoliberalization but also new modes of social, cultural and
spatial regulation demonstrating more ‘managerial’ and “non-market” strategies- a product of
the particular political and economic context found in Idora. Here, while the selection of
Idora as a site for intervention is driven by market logics, and strategies have aimed to
enhance market activity within the neighborhood, the leadership of the YNDC and the
relative weakness of private interests and actors have led to a situation in which market
rationalities appear to have animated policy in more muted forms. Attempts to attract private
investment have occurred alongside measures aimed to improve the lives of existing
residents, through the encouragement of responsible forms of development, a re-energizing of
the social fabric, and the promotion of an active and neighborhood-oriented citizenry.
In Idora, “rightsizing” has been driven by a desire to create a “neighborhood of choice” via
the re-marketizing but also the re-socialising of the neighborhood. The example of Idora,
therefore, suggests a need for analyses of “rightsizing” strategies to be attuned to the
particularities of local contexts, pointing to a conceptualization of “rightsizing” as a strategy
diverse in its actualization and complex in its motivations and features. Broadening out the
analytic lens from Idora itself, it is necessary to conclude with three specific reflections on
the relationship of the case study under discussion with the wider urban context.
Firstly, while the YNDC, in conjunction with an array of funders, an active neighborhood
association and support from the city administration, has been effective in improving the
quality of life for many of the residents there, for swaths of city residents in Youngstown, the
31
urban landscape remains all too frequently a terrain of diminished public resources, economic
opportunity, and social insecurity (Rhodes and Russo, 2013). Indeed, while the Idora
neighborhood has been transformed this has occurred within a wider environment still
struggling, for instance, with a poor quality schooling system and high rates of housing
abandonment, unemployment, and poverty- problems all beyond the scope of CDCs (Lake
and Newman, 2002; Newman and Ashton, 2004; Jonas and McCarthy, 2009). Here, as
(redacted) state, the “rightsizing” practices enacted within cities are much less significant
than the wider urban processes that represent “de facto” “rightsizing”- processes of federal
and state retrenchment, shifts in economic production and enduring racial segregation.
Youngstown continues to lose population
Similarly, the fact that the YNDC operates largely through an assortment of grants rather than
stable funding, indicates both the limits of what they can achieve but also the precarity of
such types of urban governance arrangements. While Idora demonstrates what significant
levels of targeted investments can achieve in a neighborhood that retains significant market
advantages and assets, it is not something can be easily replicated elsewhere in Youngstown.
While the YNDC, which has been contracted to provide planning services to the city since
July 2013, has begun to gain traction beyond Idora, any impact has so far been limited to
similar types of spaces. Crossing Glenwood Avenue, for instance, into the Fosterville
neighborhood adjacent to Idora, reveals just how isolated and atypical the “rightsizing” of
Idora remains. Indeed, a neighborhood conditions report published by the YNDC (2014a, p.8-
9) indicated, according to a range of indicators, that just two of the city’s 32 neighborhoods
could be viewed as ‘stable’, with a further 6 classed as “functional”. For the majority of
neighborhoods, demolition and greening rather than the types of varied and sustained
physical and social intervention enacted in Idora seems to be their likely future (YNDC,
32
2014).
Secondly, the activities in Idora point to the ways in which “rightsizing” activities both serve
to normalize but also challenge the austere conditions in places such as Youngstown. As
argued by Elwood (2002) and Kinder (2014), the devolving of many neighborhood activities
and urban functions to local residents is emblematic of the tacit acceptance of the hollowing
out of the state under conditions of urban neoliberalization and austerity. However, it also
represents simultaneously a potential shift, coming to increase power, engagement and
expertise amongst residents who can then exert pressure on local political actors. Certainly in
Youngstown this has occurred, as the city has been compelled to revise demolition practices,
vacant property ordinances, code enforcement, and nuisance abatement in light of the actions
of both residents and the YNDC. In Idora, for instance, the INA has over recent years,
exerted significant pressure on both the city administration but also businesses deemed
detrimental to the neighborhood as well as negligent property owners and “slum landlords”.
However, the danger is that such influence is concentrated in the hands of specific actors,
principally those that enjoy property rights in areas with relatively strong neighborhood
organizations. Indeed, it has been the presence of the YNDC that has strengthened the
efficacy of local residents.
Thirdly, and relatedly, the case of Idora highlights the politically charged and uneven nature
of “rightsizing” as it reproduces both spatial and social distinctions. Certainly, the
development of Idora has produced admiration but also envy and frustration amongst other
city residents whose own neighborhoods are not seeing the same concerted attempts to
ameliorate negative urban conditions. The likely outcome of this is the deepening of already
33
fragmented geographies, as the Idora neighborhood experiences a more positive trajectory
than other parts of the city, which continue to witness substantial disinvestment, depopulation
and decline. Similarly, within Idora itself, the marketization of the neighborhood is likely to
accentuate racial and class inequalities. In 2011, for instance, the median household income
for black residents was $21,066 compared to $50,648 for whites- the widest disparities in the
city (YNDC, 2014a, p.205)- demonstrating a clearly bifurcated demographic. This is likely to
deepen as more affluent and disproportionately white homeowners enter the neighbourhood.
Additionally, the re-socialization of the neighbourhood through the valorization of
homeownership and civic participation, can, as Newman and Ashton (2004) observed in
Newark, intensify divisions between homeowners and poorer, disproportionately black
residents, as the latter become both materially and symbolically excluded from conceptions
of neighbourhood and community (see Aalbers, 2011). This is both a symbolic process and a
material process; indeed, the outcome of reducing supply and increasing demand for housing,
as survey estimates referenced above suggests, will be increases in property prices and rents
which will likely force out low-income residents or prospective residents over time.
In summary, the practices that have been utilised in Idora are instructive in terms of the
“rightsizing” of distressed US cities and neighbourhoods. For those who are able to reside,
remain or enter neighbourhoods targeted for intervention, there is the prospect, as evidenced
here, that such spaces may experience new forms of market stimulation, as well as social and
cultural regulation that respects and protects primarily homeowners’ rights to private property
and quality of life issues- but also which tangentially operate to enhance the urban
experiences of other groups, such as those who benefit from environmental and civic
improvements and new employment opportunities. Here, the relative lack of housing demand
34
and the excess supply of surplus land means there are possibilities for new formal community
resources- parks, urban gardens, shared amenities- determined by use- rather than exchange-
values. However, for more impoverished residents and spaces this seems an unlikely and
even unimaginable outcome. What the case presented here suggests is that implicated in the
“rightsizing” of cities and neighbourhoods, is also a rescaling of urban citizenship, that
excludes as Hackworth (2015) states- the “mortally wounded”.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Manual Aalbers and Matthias Bernt for putting together this
special issue and for their advice on the paper. Thanks also to Joshua Akers and the four
anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft.
References
Aalbers, Manuel B, (2011). The revanchist renewal of yesterday’s city of tomorrow. Antipode
43(5), 1696-1724.
(2014). Do maps make geography? Part 1: Redlining, planned shrinkage, and the places of
decline. ACME, 525-556.
(2014a). Do maps make geography? Part 2: Post-Katrina New Orleans, post-foreclosure
Cleveland and neoliberal urbanism. ACME, 557-582.
Akers, Joshua M, (2013) Making markets: Think tank legislation and private property in
Detroit. Urban Geography 34(8), 1070-1095.
(2015). Emerging market city. Environment and Planning A 47(9), 1842-1858.
35
Beniston, Ian, (2008) Idora Neighborhood Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Youngstown
OH: City of Youngstown and Ohio State University.
Bernt, Matthias, (2009). Partnerships for demolition: The governance of urban renewal in
East Germany’s shrinking cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
33(3), 754-769.
Boehlke, David, (2012). Preserving healthy neighborhoods: Market-based strategies for
housing and neighbourhood revitalization. In Alan Mallach, editor, Rebuilding America’s
Legacy Cities, 151-176.
City of Youngstown, (2005). Youngstown 2010 Citywide Plan. Youngstown, OH: City of
Youngstown.
Dewar, Margaret, and Thomas, June Manning, editors, (2013). The City After Abandonment.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Elwood, Sarah, (2002). Neighborhood revitalization through “collaboration”: Assessing the
implications of neoliberal urban policy at the grassroots. GeoJournal 58, 121-130.
Hackworth, Jason, (2014). Demolition as urban policy in the American Rust Belt. Working
Paper. Retrieved September 19, 2015,
http://individual.utoronto.ca/hackworth/Demolition_WP.pdf
(2015). Rightsizing as spatial austerity in the American rust belt. Environment and Planning
A 47, 766-782.
(2015a). The normalization of market fundamentalism in Detroit: the case of land
abandonment. In Smith and Kirkpatrick, editors, Re-inventing Detroit: The Politics of
Possibility, 75-90.
36
Hackworth, Jason. and Nowakowski, Kelsey, (2015). Using market-based policies to address
market collapse in the American Rust Belt: The case of land abandonment in Toledo, Ohio.
Urban Geography 36(4): 528-549.
Hall, Kalea, (2015). YNDC offers small business classes, loans. Vindicator, February 21.
Retrieved December 20, 2015 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2015/feb/21/small-business-
effort-helps-big-dreams-b/
Henkel, Karl, (2012). 3 groceries open Thursday. Reverse Youngstown’s “food desert”.
Vindicator, February 8. Retrieved November 15, 2015 from
http://www.vindy.com/news/2012/feb/08/3-groceries-opening-thursday-offer-relief-youngsto/
Hollander, Justin, and Nemeth, Jeremy, (2011). The bounds of smart decline: a foundational
theory for planning shrinking cities. Housing Policy Debate 21(3), 349-367.
Hummel, Daniel, (2015). Right-sizing cities in the United States: Defining its strategies,
Journal of Urban Affairs 37(4), 397-409.
Jonas, Andrew. E.G. and McCarthy, Linda, (2009). Urban management and regeneration in
the United State: state intervention or redevelopment at all costs. Local Government Studies
35(3), 299-314.
Keling, Christine, and Denen, Courtney, (2009). An Idora Revival. Vindicator, December 2.
Retrieved December 15, 2015 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2009/dec/02/an-idora-
revival/
Kildee, Dan, Logan, Jonathan, Mallach, Alan, and Schilling, Joseph, (2009). Regenerating
Youngstown and Mahoning County Through Property Reclamation: Reforming Systems and
Rightsizing Markets. Alexandria, VA: National Vacant Properties Campaign.
37
Kinder, Kimberly, (2014). Guerrilla-style defensive architecture in Detroit: A self-
provisioned security strategy in a neoliberal space of disinvestment. International Journal of
Urban and Regional Research 38(5): 1767-1784.
Kirkpatrick, L. Owen, (2015). Urban triage, city systems, and the remnants of community:
some “sticky” complications in the greening of Detroit. Journal of Urban History 41(2), 261-
278.
Kneebone, Elizabeth, Nadeau, Carey, and Berube, Alan, (2011). The Re-emergence of
Concentrated Poverty: Metropolitan Trends in the 2000s, Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution.
Kondo, Michelle, Hohl, Bernadette, Han, Seung Hoon, and Branas, Charles, (2016). Effects
of greening and community reuse of vacant lots on crime. Urban Studies 53(15), 3279-3295.
Lake, Robert W, and Newman, Kathe, (2002). Differential citizenship in the shadow state.
Geoforum 58: 109-120.
Mallach, Alan, (2011) Comment on Hollander’s “The bounds of smart decline: a
foundational theory for planning shrinking cities”. Housing Policy Debate 21(3): 369-375.
-- editor, (2012). Rebuilding America’s Legacy Cities: New Directions for the Industrial
Heartland. New York: American Assembly.
Martinez-Fernandez, Cristina, Audriac, Ivonne, Fol, Sylvie, and Cunningham-Sabot,
Emmanuele, (2012). Shrinking cities: urban challenges of globalisation. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research 36, 213-225.
Milliken, Peter, (2012). Urban farm reaps harvest. Vindicator, September 4. Retrieved
December 20, 2015 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2012/sep/04/urban-farm-reaps-harvest/
38
(2012a). Adorning Idora: Block now a model of success. Vindicator, November 27. Retrieved
December 2, 2015 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2012/nov/27/adorning-idora-block-
now-a-model-of-succ/
Nelson, George, (2015). YNDC, Land Bank Partner on House Rehab Program. Youngstown-
Warren Business Journal, August 18. Retrieved December 21, 2015 from
http://businessjournaldaily.com/yndc-land-bank-partner-on-house-rehab-program/
Newman, Kathe, and Ashton, Philip, (2004). Neoliberal urban policy and new paths of
neighbourhood change in the American inner city. Environment and Planning A 35, 1151-
1172.
Ott, Thomas, (1987). “Black Monday” still a painful memory. Vindicator, September 19.
Parr, Adrian, (2014). Urban debt, neoliberalism and the politics of the commons. Theory,
Culture and Society, 32(3): 69-91.
Rhodes, James, and Russo, John, (2013) Shrinking smart? Urban redevelopment and
shrinkage in Youngstown, Ohio. Urban Geography, 34(3): 305-326.
Ryan, Brent, (2012). Design After Decline: How America Rebuilds Shrinking Cities.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Schatz, Laura, (2013). Decline-oriented urban governance in Youngstown, Ohio. In Margaret
Dewar and June Manning Thomas, editors, The City After Abandonment. Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 87-103.
Schilling, Joseph, and Logan, Jonathan, (2008). Greening the Rust Belt: A green
infrastructure model for right sizing America’s cities. Journal of the American Planning
Association 74(4), 451-466.
39
Schindler, Seth, (2014). Understanding urban processes in Flint, Michigan: Approaching
“Subaltern urbanism” inductively. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
38(3), 791-804.
(2016). Detroit after bankruptcy: A case of degrowth machine politics. Urban Studies 53(4),
818-836.
Schmidt, Angie, (2008). Hope amid gloom; Tech success, upturn downtown fuel optimism.
Vindicator, February 12. Retrieved October 23, 2008 from http://www.vindy.com/
news/2008/feb/12/hope-amid-gloom-tech-success-upturn-downtown-fuel/
Skolnick, David, (2009). Voters deny Party Pantry a licence to sell beer, wine and mixed
drinks. Vindicator, May 6. Retrieved, December 21, 2015 from
http://www.idoraneighborhood.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Vindy_Idora_Residents_De
ny_Party_Pantry_Liquor_License.pdf
(2015). Youngstown council will consider repealing and replacing various laws. Vindicator,
March 17. Retrieved on December 15, 2015 from
http://www.vindy.com/news/2015/mar/17/council-mulls-streamlining-property-code/
(2015a).YNDC, Mahoning Land Bank team up to save vacant houses. Vindicator, August 18.
Retrieved on December 15, 2015 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2015/aug/18/yndc-
mahoning-land-bank-team-save-vacant-houses/
(2016). Health care provider, city reach deal on Bottom Dollar site. Vindicator, May 25.
Retrieved on October 21, 2016 from http://www.vindy.com/news/2016/may/25/one-health-
ohio-city-reach-deal-on-botto/
40
Smith, Michael P, and Kirkpatrick, L.Owen, editors, (2015). Reinventing Detroit: The
Politics of Possibility. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Thomson, Dale E, (2013). Targeting neighborhoods, stimulating markets: The role of
political, institutional, and technical factors in three cities. In Margaret Dewar and June
Manning Thomas, editors, The City After Abandonment. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 104-132.
Wiechmann, Torsthen, and Pallagst, Karina M, (2012). Urban shrinkage in Germany and the
USA: A comparison of transformation patterns and local strategies. International Journal of
Urban and Regional Research 36, 261-280.
Youngstown Neighborhood Development Corporation, (YNDC), (2010). Idora
Neighborhood Workplan, Youngstown, OH: YNDC.
(2014). Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Report. Youngstown, OH: YNDC.
(2014a). Neighborhood Conditions Report. Youngstown, OH: YNDC.
(2015). Annual Report 2014. Youngstown, OH: YNDC.
(2016). Revitalize: 2015 Annual Report. Youngstown, OH: YNDC.
41
42
1 Selected Housing Characteristics: 2006-2010 American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates. 2 Selected Economic Characteristics: 2006-2010, American Community Survey Five-Year Estimates. 3 Food Stamps/SNAP: 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates4 Households and Families: 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Households and Families: 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates5 Financial Characteristics: 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Financial Characteristics: 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 6 Detailed Race: Universe: Total population, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; Detailed Race: Universe: Total population, 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
Neighborhood and type
Size of black or African-American population
Unemployment rate (16 years and above)
Families below poverty level
Vacant housing units
Median est. value of owner-occupied units
Median household income for previous 12 months
Oak Hill(weak)
81.1% 42.7% 54% 20.8% $26,100 $11,748
Idora (transitional)
81.6% 21.8% 22.4% 19.9% $52,500 $21,500
Brownlee Woods(stable)
0% 12.4% 1.4% 13.8% $63,400 $33,086
City of Youngstown
44.1% 16.2% 26.6% 18.7% $52,900 $25,002
(fig 1. comparison of Idora relative to different neighborhood types and citywide indicators, based on American community Survey, 2005-2009, five year estimates)
Fig 2. Map of Idora neighborhood, reprinted with permission of Youngstown Neighborhood Development Corporation. A color version of this map is available online
Top Related