Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is to outsiders?

I work for a foreign corporation with facilities here in Metro-Detroit. Recently I had a discussion with some young European co-workers that were here on short-term assignment. They all told me that they didn't care much for Metro-Detroit. They weren't crazy about Downtown Detroit or the suburbs. They stayed in Novi. Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit. Take Detroit proper out the picture. No one I know in cities such as DC, NY, Miami, etc. says "Detroit sucks but its suburbs are world class". This makes me wonder. Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

I don't think most people are unaware of it so much as they're wedded to an incorrect analysis of how it got that way and what should be done about it.

I don't think to many people around here hold any illusions about the outside worlds perception of Detroit and it's environs. Take what your read on internet forums from some of the locals [[which is at least based on somewhat real experiences) and multiply it tenfold in nastiness and that's about what the outside world thinks of Detroit. No matter how many excellent things we have the only ones they know about are the abandonment, rapes, and murders that they read about.

Unfortunately, I don't see this changing much in the near future.:[[

Another guy on this forum, Bham1982, and Brooks Patterson will argue for hours how the suburbs are world class and the city sucks.

We all know that the whole world thinks that the city of Detroit is a shithole. This thread is going to accomplish nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1

I work for a foreign corporation with facilities here in Metro-Detroit. Recently I had a discussion with some young European co-workers that were here on short-term assignment. They all told me that they didn't care much for Metro-Detroit. They weren't crazy about Downtown Detroit or the suburbs. They stayed in Novi. Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit. Take Detroit proper out the picture. No one I know in cities such as DC, NY, Miami, etc. says "Detroit sucks but its suburbs are world class". This makes me wonder. Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

---

I think in general you're more like to find Europeans who loathe the suburbs but love spending time in the city proper. Then again, one of the Europeans' biggest attractions here is Cranbrook, deep in the 'unattractive' suburbs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1

I work for a foreign corporation with facilities here in Metro-Detroit. Recently I had a discussion with some young European co-workers that were here on short-term assignment. They all told me that they didn't care much for Metro-Detroit. They weren't crazy about Downtown Detroit or the suburbs. They stayed in Novi. Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit. Take Detroit proper out the picture. No one I know in cities such as DC, NY, Miami, etc. says "Detroit sucks but its suburbs are world class". This makes me wonder. Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

---

Maybe your looking at it from the wrong perspective... you're asking people from other countries who are sent here on temporary assignments, and have likely been given no orientation overview of metro Detroit at all.

I give tours to large [[bus full) cultural groups from Europe [[mainly Germany, Austria and Hungary), who are on tour visiting ethnic social clubs across the USA to perform. While in Detroit [[home base German club in Sterling Heights), I give the groups a daytime bus tour, while they perform in Sterling Heights in the evening.

My tour takes them down Jefferson starting at 11 Mile, so that they see St. Clair Shores Nautical Mile [[hundreds of acres of boats)... then into the Grosse Pointes for a tour of the Ford House [[and lunch). Then we head down Lakeshore Dr., and into Detroit, where they see the decimated East Jefferson/Chalmers area [[so they see some of the worst we have)... and then once around Belle Isle for a photo op. Then I take them downtown to the Guardian Building.... and then once around on the People Mover, pointing out the convention center, waterfront, and One Woodward Ave. [[prototype for the World Trade Center)... then we go up to Comerica Park where they have a photo op in front of one of the giant tiger statues, and then a tour of the Fox Theatre. Then it's back onto I-94 to head back to Sterling Heights.

After this orientation, the visitors [[ages 18-72) are always impressed with much of what metro Detroit has to offer. By the time they get to Chicago, where their hosts usually take them mall shopping, and maybe a tour around the loop, the visitors often tell them how wonderful Detroit is... to bewildered Chicago hosts!

But if you plop down a foreign worker into a Metro Detroit suburb, and much of what they see first are nearby strip malls from their hotel rooms... then yeah... the suburbs look as bad as Detroit.... First impressions are very important... so it sounds as though the foreign company that you work for doesn't offer any first impressions, except for some suburban office park and likely some nearby sterile hotel room... :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1

I work for a foreign corporation with facilities here in Metro-Detroit. Recently I had a discussion with some young European co-workers that were here on short-term assignment. They all told me that they didn't care much for Metro-Detroit. They weren't crazy about Downtown Detroit or the suburbs. They stayed in Novi. Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit. Take Detroit proper out the picture. No one I know in cities such as DC, NY, Miami, etc. says "Detroit sucks but its suburbs are world class". This makes me wonder. Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

---

Has anyone in your company taken the time to show your colleagues around the city and metro area? For the last several years, working with colleagues from India, California, and the UK that were on short-term assignments in our suburban Detroit offices, I've taken them on tours lasting from 3 to 10 hours, depending on the day and availability, on my own time, to share some of Detroit's historic and cultural treasures with them. All have enjoyed their experiences and some have asked for follow-up tours on subsequent stays.

I can't imagine being sent to a place where I'm holed up in a hotel room with little or no access to transportation when not working in the office. With mostly malls to visit in Novi, who wouldn't think little of the area?

From what I've seen, suburbs are suburbs. What exactly makes European ones so special?

I think American suburbs in general are unattractive to Europeans. They just are not used to spread-out auto-centric neighborhoods, endless stretches of 1960s - 1990s architecture [[or, should I say "architecture"?), and shopping in giant hermetically sealed spaces surrounded by vast parking lots. So, what many Americans see as open, airy, and convenient, appears to folks from Europe as uninteresting, culture-less, and desolate.

The problem here in Detroit is that, unlike many other American cities, our urban center is also sorely lacking. Detroit, with its large areas of separated single family homes, already wouldn't meet a lot of outsiders' expectation of a city. But the large-scale abandonment of the city by its former residents, and increasingly its more recent ones, and the lack of normal street life in much of the city has left large stretches of the city essentially a giant void. And some of the near-downtown areas that would seem to be most promising to an outsider, like, say, Brush Park, are inexplicably mostly abandoned and shockingly empty. Even areas we tend to think of as densely urban, like Midtown, can seem relatively empty and desolate to outsiders when compared to most other large cities.

I'm also sure that the feeling they run into from a lot of their suburbanite co-workers - that to travel into the city is likely to end in one's live vivisection - really doesn't help either. And our area's least attractive characteristics, its deeply seated and often openly expressed racism, its knee-jerk racial politics, and a racial divide much more severe than any other present-day American city, is definitely deeply off-putting.

Oh, and I hate to break this to ol' Brooksie, but there's no such thing as a "world-class" suburb.

The things I have found most attractive to the foreigners I've hosted in Detroit [[mostly Japanese, and some Europeans) are mostly in the city itself. The Eastern Market on a market Saturday, Hart Plaza during one of our big music festivals, Belle Isle and the riverfront in general [[the boat tours work well in the summertime), our magnificent older office buildings - particularly the Guardian and Fisher Buildings, the DIA with the Rivera Court, Motown and anything else that remains of our African-American musical heritage,the Fox Theater [[which really should be open for regular tours), and the many semi-hidden but wonderful restaurants, bars, and music venues that I'm sure a lot of us could name.

Outside of the city proper, the Polish and growing South Asian community in Hamtramck, and particularly the Arabic community in Dearborn have been big hits. And, of course, the Henry Ford/Greenfield Village complex, and, biggest of all, the Ford Rouge tour.

But actually living here, and living the way most middle-class and well-off people in the Detroit area live, is just not terribly attractive to people from overseas. They're generally used to actual functioning large cities, not the historical residue of one as we have here in Detroit. The local notion of nirvana as a house with a big yard in the "safe" with "good schools" suburbs, having two cars and driving to do absolutely everything, spending weekends mowing the lawn and going to the mall, eating and drinking mostly in restaurants and bars that are part of big generic national chains, and trying to ignore as much as possible the actual city you're living around [[except for watching their sports teams on TV), is just not shared by most Europeans and Japanese in my experience, and most certainly not the young ones.

When I've had the time to take them there, Ann Arbor seems much more open and welcoming, and yes, "urban" than anything in the Detroit area, especially to Europeans. They've found the contrast between small, but very active, AA, and the huge, but often devoid of street life, Detroit area to be very strange and confusing.

And here we are with yet another City VS Suburbs pissing match...

The OP mentioned:

Quote:

---

Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

---

Well, my Italian cousins loved Somerset and all the “space” that we have in the suburbs, but no, they weren’t blown away by it, except for the sheer size. However, they didn’t NOT like the suburbs of Detroit. As a matter of fact, I have never really heard anyone in SE Michigan boast about how “awesome” the suburbs are. They liked Target and Meijer and convenience stores as well. The loved the waterfront from the RenCen all the way up to Selfridge though...and they were from one of the waterfront centers of Europe...Genoa.

It is interesting for me because I moved from the Detroit suburbs to the DC area and I would take the “suburbs” of Detroit over Northern Virginia or Maryland any day of the week. The two advantages that the DC suburbs have over Detroit are the public transportation as well as having the nation’s best job market. I have taken American friends to the Detroit area and can't say I have had anyone biatch about the place. Look, suburbs were not meant to blow anyone away.

I started a thread years ago about the European fascination with Detroit proper. Can’t really say much about the Euro opinion of the SE Michigan suburbs, but I have taken “outsiders” into Detroit and they were absolutely blown away by the DIA and the Motown museum as well as the architecture. All of them came into the city knowing about its bad reputation.

It's not just Europeans who find Metro Detroit unattractive. Americans, Asians and Africans don't like it too much either. I have been in countless conversations where I am defending Metro Detroit but the flaws still outweigh the positives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveJ

We all know that the whole world thinks that the city of Detroit is a shithole. This thread is going to accomplish nothing.

---

As always, your reading comprehension is lacking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It's not just Europeans who find Metro Detroit unattractive. Americans, Asians and Africans don't like it too much either. I have been in countless conversations where I am defending Metro Detroit but the flaws still outweigh the positives.

---

Yeah, affordable housing, safe neighborhood, and decent schools. I'm just dying to move to NYC so I can dedicate 90% of my income to rent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveJ

Yeah, affordable housing, safe neighborhood, and decent schools. I'm just dying to move to NYC so I can dedicate 90% of my income to rent.

---

inject some more sarcasm and rhetoric, that'll teach 'em!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick

And here we are with yet another City VS Suburbs pissing match...

---

It's not a City vs. Suburbs pissing match. I said "Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit." Where is the pissing match in this? I didn't say one sucked and the other didn't. I tend to encounter a way of thinking that says "Detroit is bad but it's great over here" and from what I get from the conversation with my foreign co-workers and friends that live in one of the 10 largest cities in America is that Metro-Detroit on a whole is an unattractive place to live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveJ

Yeah, affordable housing, safe neighborhood, and decent schools. I'm just dying to move to NYC so I can dedicate 90% of my income to rent.

---

NYC grew by nearly 200,000 people between 2000 - 2010, while Metro Detroit shrank by well over 200,000 people during the same time period. Nuff said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveJ

Yeah, affordable housing, safe neighborhood, and decent schools. I'm just dying to move to NYC so I can dedicate 90% of my income to rent.

---

NYC is not expensive compared to incomes in the outer boroughs, and shows, in fact, how out of touch metro-detroiters are. Almost all mid-sized and larger cities such as Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Chicago, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Buffalo, etc. have safe, stable middle class areas with walkable business districts and affordable housing costs. These places are where college educated young people want to move and are moving to.

Hamtramck is the only thing close to that in metro Detroit, and it's barely holding on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gistok

Maybe your looking at it from the wrong perspective... you're asking people from other countries who are sent here on temporary assignments, and have likely been given no orientation overview of metro Detroit at all.

---

Maybe I am looking at it from the wrong perspective. Although the national consensus is that the whole region is bad also. lol. I wonder if the company gives our European employees a tour similar to what you give. That would give a complete picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

It's not just Europeans who find Metro Detroit unattractive. Americans, Asians and Africans don't like it too much either. I have been in countless conversations where I am defending Metro Detroit but the flaws still outweigh the positives.

---

I too have noticed this amongst Africans, Asians, and people from the Caribbean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaiko

Another guy on this forum, Bham1982, and Brooks Patterson will argue for hours how the suburbs are world class and the city sucks.

---

I've never said anything close to this, but feel free to troll away...

BTW, I am European-born, and the anecdotal observations made on this thread are the exact opposite of my anecdotal observations.

The European expats I know and work with love living in the area, and many seek to stay, which surprises me. In short, the lifestyle available in the U.S. is unattainable in Europe. You can't have a full size car, a house with a yard, or leafy surroundings with squirrels/deer etc. in your backyard.

Basically people fetishise the other. That's why Americans go bonkers for Europe, and vice-versa. We go there and say "wow, the trains are so frequent, and the old towns so charming". They come here and say "wow, the homes are so big and everything is so spacious".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gameguy56

NYC is not expensive compared to incomes in the outer boroughs, and shows, in fact, how out of touch metro-detroiters are. Almost all mid-sized and larger cities such as Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Chicago, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Buffalo, etc. have safe, stable middle class areas with walkable business districts and affordable housing costs. These places are where college educated young people want to move and are moving to.

Hamtramck is the only thing close to that in metro Detroit, and it's barely holding on.

---

Exactly. While I am not a fan of sprawl I think suburbs are fine for some people. What I see in Metro-Detroit is a "Bizarro-World" way of thinking when it comes to the role of suburbs in a metropolitan area. I think this way of thinking is conducive to why people from the outside look at Metro-Detroit the way they do. People aren't getting married at 21 anymore and they're graduating school later. If you are single, college educated, and under 40 or over 40 why would a sub-division appeal to you?

Exactly. A largely empty downtown, surrounded by a poor, unsafe, and increasingly abandoned city, and surrounded again by seemingly endless generic American suburbia, is just not interesting or attractive. And the fact that our local idea of entertainment mostly consists of driving to the mall followed by watching the hockey game on TV doesn't help either.

It's really the whole Detroit area "experience" that doesn't appeal to outsiders, and particularly people from other parts of the developed world, as a way to live - not specifically the city or the suburbs. In fact, that very divide, and its centrality to living in our area and our politics, I've found is one of the things that's most unattractive about metro Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

NYC grew by nearly 200,000 people between 2000 - 2010, while Metro Detroit shrank by well over 200,000 people during the same time period. Nuff said.

---

NYC is dirty and over priced, my aunt live on 5th ave across from central park, it's definitely walkable, unlike most parts of Detroit, but they do have a lot of rats, litter, and you just feel dirty in the city,

No, I don't think most suburbanites know how unattractive the suburbs are to outsiders.

They tend to think that the city is dragging down the region and that the suburbs are successful and attractive, when really the suburbs are generally just as unappealing.

Ya but at least the suburbs aren't full with burned downs homes,most are safe to walk, i don't feel the need to lock my car doors while driving in the burbs, in Detroit I do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason

No, I don't think most suburbanites know how unattractive the suburbs are to outsiders.

They tend to think that the city is dragging down the region and that the suburbs are successful and attractive, when really the suburbs are generally just as unappealing.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUSHI

NYC is dirty and over priced, my aunt live on 5th ave across from central park, it's definitely walkable, unlike most parts of Detroit, but they do have a lot of rats, litter, and you just feel dirty in the city,

---

Yet people still move there...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yet people still move there...

---

If the "big three" was to come roaring back with wages almost double the median national manufacturing wage, people would be clamoring to get to the Detroit area as well.

The suburbs of Washington DC are constantly expanding due to jobs being created there. I lived in suburban Virginia until i retired and really prefer the suburbs of Detroit, but the jobs were in suburban Virginia. At least around Detroit, the streets run in a straight grid and outside of the rush hours, the traffic isn't too bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUSHI

NYC is dirty and over priced, my aunt live on 5th ave across from central park, it's definitely walkable, unlike most parts of Detroit, but they do have a lot of rats, litter, and you just feel dirty in the city,

---

Fifth Ave. across from Central Park is hardly dirty. Excepting quasi-dictatorships like Singapore. it's probably as clean as you'll see a very high density residential urban environment.

You're not the first person who's made this claim, though. Is it because you only visited many decades ago, in the "bad old days"? I have some issues with NYC, but "dirty" certainly wouldn't be one of them, especially compared to certain other U.S. and European cities.

I'm in NYC a few weeks each summer, and it is dirty,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Fifth Ave. across from Central Park is hardly dirty. Excepting quasi-dictatorships like Singapore. it's probably as clean as you'll see a very high density residential urban environment.

You're not the first person who's made this claim, though. Is it because you only visited many decades ago, in the "bad old days"? I have some issues with NYC, but "dirty" certainly wouldn't be one of them, especially compared to certain other U.S. and European cities.

---

And most European cities are dirty too, Rome, Frankfurt, Paris,
European are generally just not clean people,

Yonkers and White plains are also dirty, upstate for the most part what I have seen is clean.

I would take a house in Old Detroit any day of the week, than a 500 or 600 square feet apartment in brooklyn, queens, Bronx any day of the week, now they do have some nice homes in the above listed, they are just to congested for my liking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yet people still move there...

---

Right. Also New York today is not like the NY of the 70s and 80s. Nowadays you hear nothing about the bad days of New York. Cost of living isn't as big an issue as some people make it seem. That's not to say affordability doesn't play a role in a city being attractive. If you can achieve the culture/amenities/density/cost of living balance you're winning. I think Charlotte, Atlanta, and Houston have done this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUSHI

And most European cities are dirty too, Rome, Frankfurt, Paris,
European are generally just not clean people,

---

Then I guess that you and I have very different definitions of dirty.

I agree that Rome is somewhat dirty, but Paris is pretty clean, and Frankfurt is like antiseptic clean. German cities are very clean.

And, yeah, I think NYC isn't particularly dirty, especially given the huge pedestrian crowds.

In comparison to the suburbs of Chicago, the suburbs of Detroit are far, far nicer, with more trees, lakes, hills and nicer houses.

The City of Detroit is a boom town that went bust. It is no wonder that there are problems. It is still pretty interesting in an adventure tourism way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Exactly. A largely empty downtown, surrounded by a poor, unsafe, and increasingly abandoned city, and surrounded again by seemingly endless generic American suburbia, is just not interesting or attractive. And the fact that our local idea of entertainment mostly consists of driving to the mall followed by watching the hockey game on TV doesn't help either.

It's really the whole Detroit area "experience" that doesn't appeal to outsiders, and particularly people from other parts of the developed world, as a way to live - not specifically the city or the suburbs. In fact, that very divide, and its centrality to living in our area and our politics, I've found is one of the things that's most unattractive about metro Detroit.

---

This is basically the impression I get from outsiders. They ask why downtown is a ghost town on a weekday afternoon and in the suburbs they feel they are just "there".

Quote:

---

I started a thread years ago about the European fascination with Detroit proper. Can’t really say much about the Euro opinion of the SE Michigan suburbs, but I have taken “outsiders” into Detroit and they were absolutely blown away by the DIA and the Motown museum as well as the architecture.

---

I watched a series called "Reason Saves Cleveland, With Drew Carey", and there was one episode that really struck me. In it, they basically said that if people are excessively pointing at the museums and cultural institutions in a city, then you know the city probably sucks. Any city with a decent population will have museums and cultural institutions. Yeah, Cleveland and Detroit's might have a little more history than their counterparts in Phoenix, but do you think that's going to convince anyone Cleveland or Detroit are better? No. When you go to a place like NYC, they'll tell you that the museums and cultural institutes are nice, but there's much more going on besides that.

And old skyscrapers are cool, but how can I personally interact with them on a daily or even weekly basis? They're forbidding monoliths that are only useful to the average person as a thing to be admired from afar on occasion.

It's people and jobs and the life that pours out from that which makes a city. The rest is overly glorified.

Detroit is no different from any other one-industry city in North America or Europe that existed solely to serve the needs of manufacturers. Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Hamiliton and Windsor Ontario are all examples of cities that are facing or have faced the exact same set of problems that Detroit has. For every London or Paris there are a million dying industrial centres in Europe that don't look much different than Detroit.

In my opinion Toronto is a clean city, Boston hit or miss, Philly isn't clean, atlantic city is clean,

I have been to europe many times, we have a house in Europe land in two different European countries, in general what I have seen its isn't clean,


I have seen more rats in my few visits A year in NYC, than the 16 years that I lived in the D.and I grew up on the eastside of Detroit, w vacant home galore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Yet people still move there...

---

I visited NYC, the only time ever in 2010, and loved every minute of it.

Metro is 10 times cleaner than the airport in Paris, the thought of the smell of the airport in Paris makes my stomach weezy, I had a 7 or 8 hour layover there my last time I went to montenegro.

And the Fu Ken people are very Fu Ken rude.

I don't think this is an issue of city vs. suburb, I think it's an issue of city vs. city and suburb vs. suburb. Metro Detroit's urban areas are worse than other cities' urban areas, and Metro Detroit's suburbs are worse than other cities' suburbs.

The thing is most suburbanites here think that our urban areas compare poorly to other urban areas, but the think our suburban areas compare favorably to other suburban areas. But in an apples to apples comparison, metro Detroit is not attractive compared to other cities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I've never said anything close to this, but feel free to troll away...

BTW, I am European-born, and the anecdotal observations made on this thread are the exact opposite of my anecdotal observations.

The European expats I know and work with love living in the area, and many seek to stay, which surprises me. In short, the lifestyle available in the U.S. is unattainable in Europe. You can't have a full size car, a house with a yard, or leafy surroundings with squirrels/deer etc. in your backyard.

Basically people fetishise the other. That's why Americans go bonkers for Europe, and vice-versa. We go there and say "wow, the trains are so frequent, and the old towns so charming". They come here and say "wow, the homes are so big and everything is so spacious".

---

Sounds to me like there's some self-selection at work there. Europeans who pursue opportunities to live and work in the US probably disproportionately come from the segment of the European population that enjoys things like big cars and detached houses with yards the most, and Americans who pursue opportunities to visit Europe and then rave about the historic cities and quality transit to friends back home probably disproportionately come from the segment of the American population that values those things the most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

If the "big three" was to come roaring back with wages almost double the median national manufacturing wage, people would be clamoring to get to the Detroit area as well.

The suburbs of Washington DC are constantly expanding due to jobs being created there. I lived in suburban Virginia until i retired and really prefer the suburbs of Detroit, but the jobs were in suburban Virginia. At least around Detroit, the streets run in a straight grid and outside of the rush hours, the traffic isn't too bad.

---

Tell me about it. The urban planning here in Northern Virginia sucks, despite having America's best economy and being flush with cash.

Toronto is a clean city? Have you taken the time to explore the entire city and not just downtown? Many parts of Toronto look like Detroit and vice versa.

Being first generation born here, my parents came here w the thought of going back home, which only partly happen, they do return back home once every few years, most immigrants thought the same way, most stayed here, even though most I know have homes back home, that have been in the family for 100's of years, yet they chose to stay here and work and pay taxes, why is that? Because even though the USA Isn't the same old USA it was 20/30 years ago , America is still the best country in the world, And most live in the burbs, with well manicured lawns,

What I seen of Toronto was clean, and not just downtown, I stayed in the suburbs

In such a shiatty economy, people can't be picky, especially when it comes to selecting where a job is located. If a person has choose between staying in NYC and be unemployed/underemployed or moving to Detroit for a good job, what do you think they would do?

Metro Detroit is attractive to people who:

1) Like the kind of things that it has.
2) Know that it has those things.

If you have a job, want to drive everywhere you go, want to live in a nice, reasonably priced house, don't care if there is a functional central city in your region but like the amenities of a large metro area and don't mind winter, then metro Detroit is a pretty attractive area. There are a lot of people who meet those criteria. There are a lot of people who don't.

Personally, I dislike having to drive and like having a vibrant central city. If Detroit weren't where I grew up and where I still have all my family, I would be very unlikely to live in the area. Not because I think it is horrible, or that it doesn't have desirable aspects, but because there are more attractive options.

First, I think, in general, the assertion is correct. Metro Detroit suburbanites, on the whole , generally see little wrong with the suburbs other than the perceptible decline of the last decade. This is an extremely provincial region, and at this point, you have suburbs full of people who have lived in the same suburbs for at least a couple generations now. Compound that with the fact that historically incomes here [[pre-the lost decade) here have been disproportionately high and that these high-income low-education suburbanies can contrast their living situation with an unbelievably horrible, unsafe city they surround, Bubba and Britney Spraycheese really believe they got it made.

Enough with this shit about houses with squirrels. Not everyone in every other city lives in a studio apartment surrounded by piles of garbage. They have squirrels elsewhere, you're not special.

Life in the city is becoming too stressful and intolerable and I'd rather be set on fire than live in the suburbs ever again. I too, see their point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

Sounds to me like there's some self-selection at work there. Europeans who pursue opportunities to live and work in the US probably disproportionately come from the segment of the European population that enjoys things like big cars and detached houses with yards the most, and Americans who pursue opportunities to visit Europe and then rave about the historic cities and quality transit to friends back home probably disproportionately come from the segment of the American population that values those things the most.

---

I would go even further and say that it just seems to be the type of Europeans who end up in Detroit. I have quite a few foreign born friendsand coworkers and they all complain about the same things that Detroit lacks which us Dyes "urbanophiles" complain about. And since I know that NYC [[where I work) attracts far more foreigners than Detroit [[absolute numbers and per capita) then I have to think there is something about NYC that is more attractive than Metro Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maverick1

I work for a foreign corporation with facilities here in Metro-Detroit. Recently I had a discussion with some young European co-workers that were here on short-term assignment. They all told me that they didn't care much for Metro-Detroit. They weren't crazy about Downtown Detroit or the suburbs. They stayed in Novi. Their dislike of the suburbs was equal to their dislike of Downtown Detroit. Take Detroit proper out the picture. No one I know in cities such as DC, NY, Miami, etc. says "Detroit sucks but its suburbs are world class". This makes me wonder. Are suburbanites aware of how unattractive living in Metro-Detroit is nationally and globally? And are they aware of how unattractive it is to single people or people under 40?

---

It's similar to North Koreans buying the propaganda of their regime. If you don't [[or can't) go anywhere else, you don't know what "normal" really is.

Yeah yeah, big plastic houses and acres of grass to cut might be attractive to some, but you can find that shit anywhere. If the suburbs of Detroit are so fantastic, then why do Detroiters flock to Chicago on weekends, and not Schaumburg?

I've found that ordinary folks in other countries are far more interested in learning about American culture than their counterparts in the U.S. are interested in learning about other places. Every time a thread like this starts, the Sprawl Apologists start going on the defensive about how wonderful their shopping malls are, and how every other place sucks so bad. Maybe we're just a little too full of ourselves sometimes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poobert

Enough with this shit about houses with squirrels. Not everyone in every other city lives in a studio apartment surrounded by piles of garbage. They have squirrels elsewhere, you're not special.

---

Actually, that's not true. In Europe, they don't have squirrels in urban areas. You can sit all day in a park in Paris or Frankfurt, and you won't see anything but birds.

The ubiquity of squirrels [[and wildlife in general) is one of the first things you hear from European visitors, and is often mentioned as a special attribute. Now granted, you get squirrels from Manhattan to Livingston County, but they're a big deal to outsiders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathleen

I can't imagine being sent to a place where I'm holed up in a hotel room with little or no access to transportation when not working in the office. With mostly malls to visit in Novi, who wouldn't think little of the area?

---

Excellent point. Many suburbs are simply unwalkable and lack any way to get around. It must be like prison. I doubt many companies are willing to put people up at the Townsend or Westin for three months. Most likely they get put into a long term hotel on a flag lot outside of a freeway interchange. Think Auburn Hills I-75 corridor or Ann Arbor's State St exit. Just dreadful for walking. The issue here can be found in the developer as well as the city planning commissions that have no good examples to strive for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GUSHI

I would take a house in Old Detroit any day of the week, than a 500 or 600 square feet apartment in brooklyn, queens, Bronx any day of the week, now they do have some nice homes in the above listed, they are just to congested for my liking.

---

One of metro Detroit's true assets is that we [[city as well as suburbs) have afforable houses with yards, driveways, and usually a garage. The people here aren't crammed into overpriced apartments like they are in most of the world's other large cities. Sure, a lot of the houses in our area are cookie-cutter little boxes made of ticky tacky and they all look the same, but even in such neighborhoods you can show off your style by painting your house a different color, planting flowers, adding some lawn art, building a deck, or whatever suits your fancy. You can't do that with an apartment.

Europeans love their cars almost as much as we do. If you have money there, you own a car. Not only any car, but a Mercedes or BMW. The other interesting thing that is failed to mention is that you are in trouble if you don't own a car in a lot of villages and small towns far from the major cities. The bus might pass through once a day. In order to get groceries, you may need to drive 40 minutes away to hit a medium sized city [[Smaller than Royal Oak). I have a lot of relatives in Europe and they all own cars and never take public transportation. Again, I'm not speaking for everyone but I'd rather get in my car then stick around a bus stop all day and have to stop every mile.

The contempt some have for Metro Detroit on this board is pretty sad. Outside of a delusional few, nobody claims this area is perfect. Most of us are well aware of its shortcomings, but we also have our reasons for living here. Personally, I love it. You can claim I'm ignorant - but who are you to judge? I'm happy here. Sorry. I'd love to see transit, Detroit proper and many of the us vs. them attitudes improve, but it's not make-or-break for me. I have a good job, a happy family, great neighbors and everything I need within walking or driving distance.

I work for a major foreign-owned company with a large presence in Metro Detroit. We have associates from India, Germany, Mexico, etc. on 3-year work assignments living in the area. Many of them are raising families here. My previous boss' children have spent their entire lives here. Now, I can't read minds, but I highly doubt they'd raise a family here if they hated it. Nobody is forced to relocate.

What's interesting is that, in my experience, many visitors [[especially those on business) are completely unaware of what the area has to offer. Many of them don't venture far from the suburban apartment complex [[or hotel) they are staying in. I couldn't tell you why exactly. I took two associates [[a visitor from Mexico and a coworker from India that has lived here for a year) downtown on Friday. They had never been, and were frankly terrified to go based on what the nay-sayers had told them. It turns out they really enjoyed their visit, and had no idea how much Detroit has to offer. Take that for what it's worth. In my opinion, if one truly knows what Detroit has to offer and fills the holes with what the suburbs have to offer, we've got a pretty good region

As for the comment about visiting Chicago vs. suburban Chicago - that's just silly. If I go to visit the Chicago area, it's because I want to see the attractions of one of the country's biggest cities. It has absolutely nothing to do with my preference of Detroit's suburbs vs. Chicago. I have no reason to go to suburban Chicago because, honestly, it offers the same things suburban Detroit does.

BMW and Mercedes are like ford and Chevys overtheir,
Most of the cabs I ever took in Europe were Mercedes, you get more stares overtheir when you have a mustang or vette or jeep , which my uncle shipped from here, people have no idea what they are it's actually pretty cool, he is actually thinking about sending his hummer H2, Benz and beamers not that big of a deal in Europe.

One more thing I just thought of: When I traveled to Germany last fall, I rented a car and took public transportation exactly zero times. I parked in a parking garage in my suburban-style hotel. I went to a mall that was basically German Twelve Oaks. I drove to the office and airport.

In fact, I can't think of any of my coworkers that regularly take public transportation. They drive. Germans love their cars more than we do.

Germany certainly has vibrant urban centers and public transportation. But my coworkers must not realize how unattractive living in suburban Bavaria is - you know, with the sprawl, malls and highways [[I say that tongue-in-cheek).

Me personally I Wana restore a early 60's Lincoln continental, or A 68-69 camaro and ship it overseas,

You're right Gushi they aren't but it was just my point that not everyone drives some piece of shit econobox and has ikea furniture over there and just loves taking the train. People take public transportation out of need and not choice. If they could afford a car, they would not bother with it. I remember seeing a 1960's Mustang there. I was in shock.

I agree with the others. I have a nice house, family, friends, nice job, nice car, and pretty fill up my vehicle twice a month at the most. My drive to work is 15 minutes. I would not trade my current position to live in Downtown Chicago in some tiny apartment and having to get up an hour early to take the bus to work. Some people live in fantasy land because they went to visit NYC and they took a bus and went to a bar and then took a taxi back to the hotel. Try having to wake up at 4 am in order to get to work by 7 because you have to take trains and buses to go to work. No thanks.

In general people in Europe enjoy life more then we do here, a lot of my relatives over there, don't have good jobs, but all have cars and cell phones, but were my family is from, they don't have mortgages homes have been in the family for decades, property taxes are less then 150 us a year, they always hanging out at the cafes/bars, beach, they hunt , have a garden, I actually had you few come here for a few years , work here and go back, because according to them we don't know how to live, lol , work, eat, shower, shit, sleep same routine 5 days a week. Some times 6, the funny part is you see 90 year old men smoking and drinking and still looking healthy, over here due to all the shit they put in our food, most 90 year olds are done @ 70.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveJ

Europeans love their cars almost as much as we do. If you have money there, you own a car. Not only any car, but a Mercedes or BMW.

---

Yeah, but an A-Class Benz, which is affordable and tiny, and not even sold in the U.S. You don't see E-Class Benzes or Audi A-8s in Europe, unless you're in some embassy district or the like.

Not always the case we rented a s8 last time I was there, I saw a few e classes, and I was in a poor country montenergro , the coolest car I saw there was a dodge ram, was not expecting that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Yeah, but an A-Class Benz, which is affordable and tiny, and not even sold in the U.S. You don't see E-Class Benzes or Audi A-8s in Europe, unless you're in some embassy district or the like.

---

Yep, the increasingly scale of places "no tourist" should go is a factor. As Detroiters and suburbanites [[former Detroiters or whatever) we know where to go and not go. That's not a given for a tourist, or even that there is such a variance or range. Hah! A ride or exit off the freeway into the wrong area could be an 'experience'.

It's like downtown is this bubble of safety, then they'd leapfrog back to the bland hotel in say Novi? That may be the outlook of some who view Detroit as just too violent and crime ridden to venture into for the limited areas 'not' off-limits... coupled with the lack of safe walkability. Nearly all venturing would need to be curbside service.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Exactly. A largely empty downtown, surrounded by a poor, unsafe, and increasingly abandoned city, and surrounded again by seemingly endless generic American suburbia, is just not interesting or attractive.

---

OP, are you trying to tell us that the rest of the world has a negative view of Detroit?

SOMEONE ALERT THE PRESSES!!!

Seriously, this thread accomplishes nothing. Suburbs are the same no matter what city you are in; Sterling Heights vs. a random suburb from any major US city are pretty much indistinguishable. Detroit will have a generally negative prejudice for at least another decade or two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squirtle

OP, are you trying to tell us that the rest of the world has a negative view of Detroit?

SOMEONE ALERT THE PRESSES!!!

Seriously, this thread accomplishes nothing. Suburbs are the same no matter what city you are in; Sterling Heights vs. a random suburb from any major US city are pretty much indistinguishable. Detroit will have a generally negative prejudice for at least another decade or two.

---

Gotta agree... threads like these usually give the anti-suburb crowd something to piss and moan about... although the city is emptying out faster than ever before...

However, I disagree about the perception of Detroit. It's not as negative to foreigners as it is to Americans. I also bet that if pressed most foreigners coming here to work... their perceptions of Detroit aren't really formed until they get here and listen to their American co-workers dire warnings about the city.

Suburbanites warning about the dire consequences of Detroit... Detroiters complaining about how dreary the suburbs are... It's many of the comments on threads like this one that just show how myopic both sides really are, and why we can't get anything accomplished.

When in Ireland I spotted a big car behind me, it was a Mercury Sable! I also spotted a Ford larger than that, I had no idea what it was as it is not sold in North America.

What a bunch of sanctimonious ninnies. You people sound like a collection of college sophomores trying their hardest to impress eachother.

Blanket statements of generalities with personal anecdotes peppered in as facts. Ninnies! Embarrassingly shallow twits.

gnome, we are the knights that say NI!

The comments being made reveal a lot about the priorities of the people making them. People obsessed with the cleanliness of a city or whether they could drive a car wherever they want aren't people interested in the cultural offerings of various urban centers. They're not interested in living an urban lifestyle and would prefer to live on their 1/4 acre lot within driving distance of a mall. NYC, Chicago and cities are appealing because when you're there, you never run out of things to see, do and experience.

When visitors come to Detroit, after they've hit the highlights, you really have to dig deep to find new things to share with them. If you're satisfied with eating out at Applebee's or consider going to a retread 70s concert at DTE to be high culture, Detroit's dearth of culture offerings, nightlife and interesting neighborhoods is never going to be a concern to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novine

The comments being made reveal a lot about the priorities of the people making them. People obsessed with the cleanliness of a city or whether they could drive a car wherever they want aren't people interested in the cultural offerings of various urban centers. They're not interested in living an urban lifestyle and would prefer to live on their 1/4 acre lot within driving distance of a mall. NYC, Chicago and cities are appealing because when you're there, you never run out of things to see, do and experience.

When visitors come to Detroit, after they've hit the highlights, you really have to dig deep to find new things to share with them. If you're satisfied with eating out at Applebee's or consider going to a retread 70s concert at DTE to be high culture, Detroit's dearth of culture offerings, nightlife and interesting neighborhoods is never going to be a concern to you.

---

I get your point but Detroit definitely has more to offer than Applebee's, come on now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wazootyman

As for the comment about visiting Chicago vs. suburban Chicago - that's just silly. If I go to visit the Chicago area, it's because I want to see the attractions of one of the country's biggest cities. It has absolutely nothing to do with my preference of Detroit's suburbs vs. Chicago. I have no reason to go to suburban Chicago because, honestly, it offers the same things suburban Detroit does.

---

It's not silly in the least. When you're trying to attract a workforce that has options on where to live, you have to offer more than plastic boxes, endless freeways, and restaurants supplied by Sysco.

It's mid-April. Head to Ann Arbor right now, and ask the graduating seniors where they'll be moving next month. More importantly, ask them WHY.

Even if those kids are moving to suburban areas in a different metropolitan area, they at least have the option of choosing an urban or suburban environment. Detroit flat-out compels you, if you want an average quality of life, to live in an automobile-oriented suburb, shop at malls, and spend hours of every day in traffic.

Sometimes, I think folks don't realize how ordinary the suburbs of Detroit really are. Oakland County is just Charlotte or Atlanta without the miserable summers.

It ain't about "attractions". People with options, especially people now in their 20s and 30s, go for Quality of Life.

I think we need to make the distinction between tourism and immigration [[that might not be the right word, but you get my drift).

As a tourist area, Metro Detroit sucks. There isn't a large tourist draw here. However you can also say this about many other regions of the USA.

We don't have enough population to be considered a major Metropolitan area with a "core city/downtown" structure. Again, there are only a handful of cities in the USA that remotely qualify for this status.

So basically, we are like about 95% of the USA - not a whole lot to offer right? So why would anyone move here? Simple - for a job. I have met many people from out of the country that live here because of a job. The ones I've met tend to largely live in the suburbs. Why? Not because they like it any better or worse than downtown, but because it's CLOSE TO WHERE THEY WORK. Simple as that

As an aside, most of these folks [[at least the younger set) tends to be really adventurous and likes to explore, and they love hanging out downtown. But again, if their job isn't close to the city, they're not going to live in the city.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DJ Tom T

We don't have enough population to be considered a major Metropolitan area with a "core city/downtown" structure. Again, there are only a handful of cities in the USA that remotely qualify for this status.

---

What gave you that idea? Population-wise, Metro Detroit is in the same league as every metro on the either coast except New York and Los Angeles. But places like Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, San Francisco, etc., manage to maintain a strong core city.

How can there be any argument that people gravitate toward better cities? It's a stupid question with an obvious answer. Trying to convince people to fall in love with Metro Detroit is like trying to force someone to drink spoiled milk.

By and large, the only people coming to Detroit are those who want to start from scratch and build something new from the ground up. For anyone looking for a region with turn-key conditions, forget this area. The fact is, you have to WANT to live here in order to rationalize it. I mean, really want it.

Detroit's downtown core is coming back and becoming more attractive, but it still doesn't compare to regions of even half the size. The rest of the city is mostly gap-toothed in various states of abandonment with some very beautiful neighborhoods sprinkled in-between, but there is no connectivity between them.

Detroit does have some nice suburbs, but by-and-large, they are the same as those I've seen in other regions. Many of Detroit's suburbs are also on the decline and property values in the dumpster. In this regard, there is nothing extraordinary about suburban Detroit. It is not attracting anyone. People who desire auto-centric suburban living can reside almost anywhere suburban USA and get the same experience minus the extreme racial tensions, lousy economy, and decrepit urban core.

The key to convincing people to come to Detroit and like it is to convince them of the opportunity found in rebuilding it. It not only makes for a feel-good story, but people value their ability to accomplish things that would not be possible in other places. This is true for everyone across the spectrum. Dan Gilbert sees the opportunity to build a real estate empire downtown. Urban pioneers see the chance to own a 5,000 sq ft historic home with a library and solarium on a teacher's salary. Entrepreneurs see the opportunity to start a new company and be the first to market, even in otherwise established areas. In Detroit, small businesses can beat out the otherwise dominate chain stores.

For those of us who are from the Detroit region, many of us have chosen to stay out of a sense of pride and loyalty to the city's history and the legacy of greatness that we have heard about. It took a lot of sweat to make the Detroit that was, and it will take even more to make Detroit the city that will be. That's pretty much why I stuck around anyways.

[QUOTE=Novine;314858]When visitors come to Detroit, after they've hit the highlights, you really have to dig deep to find new things to share with them. [QUOTE]

That's an interesting point. Metro Detroit can be pretty entertaining for a week or so, but then outside sitting in a bar watching the game you have to really do research to find something stimulating to do.

We just had some friends move in from New Orleans. Both lived in major cities growing up. Both are HIGHLY educated. They, predictably, chose to live in Detroit. A month later I'm pretty much out of things to show them. Given that they're bright people they understand the devastation of Detroit but the general lack of activity astounds them. What they find most baffling are our suburbs, though - how boundless and bland they are. They both seem really unhappy here. I'm sure they won't last long. Good luck all of you falling back on your "We have squirrels and sometimes you're stuck here cuz of your job" mantra. Last I checked there weren't that many jobs for the havin', anymore.

And all you bitching about how this is divisive and not helpful - first of all, this is an honest discussion that actually requires looking in a mirror, something we're afraid to have in this region. Second of all if we as a region can't rally around TRANSIT and the DIA - that those things should be SO controvertial here where elsewhere they'd be a no brainer, well, there is no indication of ever turning this thing around. Get pissed at your elected officals for being such backwater assholes and write some letters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

What gave you that idea? Population-wise, Metro Detroit is in the same league as every metro on the either coast except New York and Los Angeles. But places like Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, San Francisco, etc., manage to maintain a strong core city.

---

I would submit that Detroit never really had a "strong core city" in that you went downtown for special purpose shopping [[you had your own local shops), doctors, and lawyers. As the doctors and lawyers left the central city for professional buildings with parking and the suburban malls like Northland and Eastland were built, the need to go downtown for most people just went away. Back in the 40s and 50s, trips downtown were always for a special purpose. You didn't go downtown just to "hang out".

The other cities had one or more reasons for their downtown which was strong enough to survive the decay of the city around them. Detroit just didn't have that. Downtown wasn't the major employer in the area. Downtown didn't have irreplaceable buildings [[see how the large office buildings like the Broderick Tower were abandoned).

Washington DC central city would suffer the same fate as Detroit if it were not for the "federal area" at its core.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

Washington DC central city would suffer the same fate as Detroit if it were not for the "federal area" at its core.

---

I'd like to submit a gentleman's amendment that despite the "federal area" at the core of DC, it still suffered the same fate as Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s. The difference is, they decided to DO SOMETHING about it.

Later today, I'll dig up some survey stats from blogs [[CEOs for Cities and the like) that show just how many people Detroit is alienating by strictly focusing on the outdated stupid-ass American Dream of the suburbs in lieu of a healthy central city and region.

Because i really care what a bunch of europeans think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rex

Because i really care what a bunch of europeans think

---

Metro Detroit is hemorrhaging population. Your fellow Americans have already spoken.

and still not a solitary ufck is being given on my end. I don't even disagree with them. As soon as I'm done with grad school I'll probably be out too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hermod

I would submit that Detroit never really had a "strong core city" in that you went downtown for special purpose shopping [[you had your own local shops), doctors, and lawyers. As the doctors and lawyers left the central city for professional buildings with parking and the suburban malls like Northland and Eastland were built, the need to go downtown for most people just went away. Back in the 40s and 50s, trips downtown were always for a special purpose. You didn't go downtown just to "hang out".

The other cities had one or more reasons for their downtown which was strong enough to survive the decay of the city around them. Detroit just didn't have that. Downtown wasn't the major employer in the area. Downtown didn't have irreplaceable buildings [[see how the large office buildings like the Broderick Tower were abandoned).

Washington DC central city would suffer the same fate as Detroit if it were not for the "federal area" at its core.

---

Well, I said "core city" not downtown. And there is a pretty strong correlation between a declining central city and a declining region.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rex

and still not a solitary ufck is being given on my end. I don't even disagree with them. As soon as I'm done with grad school I'll probably be out too.

---

Hey look! This guy doesn't care! Nobody should care!

Quote:

---

'd like to submit a gentleman's amendment that despite the "federal area" at the core of DC, it still suffered the same fate as Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s. The difference is, they decided to DO SOMETHING about it.

---

Yes, Anacostia is beautiful this time of year

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcole

Yes, Anacostia is beautiful this time of year

---

I don't get this attitude. Anacostia is a single neighborhood of DC. There are large swaths [[20+ square miles) of Detroit that will never have the population density and economic activity of Anacostia.

If our Metro-Detroit area diplays its non-ethnic culture filled with big box stores, woe filled neighborhoods, ethnic folks from around the world will not enter into those areas. Since the collapse of Automation Alley after 1975, Detroit went from white to black by 1980. Its suburbs went from keeping up with the Joneses to isolated bedroom pockets, but there are some ethnic markets around. You just have look beyond north of 8 Mile Rd. or west of Inkster Rd. to shop. The best way to make Detroit and its suburbs etnically attractive is to bring regional job growth and promote its infrastructure. And reducing big box superstores and increase proletarian New York City styled owned businesses would lure ethnicity to Detroit and its suburbs for years to come.

Where do I start?

Michigan was the only state in the nation to loose population.

Detroit lost 200,000 people in only 10 years.

Brush Park, strategically located within walking distance to Wayne State University, Detroit Medical Center, Eastern Market and Downtown CBD is a ghost town. In any other city, it would be the highest valued real estate.

Detroit's suburbs are generic, nothing special about them really, outside of Dearborn because of the auto history.

Detroit missed many opportunities to build a mass transit system, including the most recent chance that was suppose to be "the one"

Tourists come here for three main reasons: family, auto history and ruins. What other reason is there?

Yeah, there are artists moving here, but they are moving here because they can make art out of abandoned materials. Once they are bored with that kind of art, they will leave [[there are many dirt-cheap cities to live in that have way more amenities than Detroit, such as Philly).

Not saying Detroit has no hope, it does. But the politics and culture of Michigan and Metro Detroit need to change first.

It really boils down to regional priorities. Among the millions of people living in the 100-plus municipalities in metro Detroit, there is an apparent consensus that we do not need cities. That the city is too far gone, impossible to revive, dead wood.

And, in other cities, you simply do not hear that same consensus among regional residents that a strong central city is unnecessary and impossible.

In fact, in most other regions, that proposition would be regarded as insane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

It really boils down to regional priorities. Among the millions of people living in the 100-plus municipalities in metro Detroit, there is an apparent consensus that we do not need cities. That the city is too far gone, impossible to revive, dead wood.

And, in other cities, you simply do not hear that same consensus among regional residents that a strong central city is unnecessary and impossible.

In fact, in most other regions, that proposition would be regarded as insane.

---

I couldn't agree more with this. But I've often contended that, due to certain aspects of Detroit's history and boomtown settlement patterns, this may be the most 'anti-urban' urban area in the U.S. Outside of the hard core of about 200,000 people who were here back in the early 1900s [[including several of my ancestors), Detroit was a city populated mainly by rural people.

There were a lot of people here like my maternal grandfather, who came here from rural Pennsylvania just after WWI with no formal education, seeking the big-money factory jobs. He and his family lived not far out of downtown, in what we would now call Woodbridge, but his fondest wish was to move out of the city and buy a bigger piece of land, which he achieved first out by Belleville and later down in Florida.

He liked working in Detroit, and didn't mind living here back then [['20s - '40s), but he had no love for cities or urban living. I've met a lot of people around here over the years who are like that, both white and black. People who would gladly move out of the city for the promise of a bigger lot and more land, if they had enough money to do so. This may be one reason why Detroit, though highly populated, didn't grow to be as densely 'urban' as many other cities, and then emptied out to the shocking extent that it has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

I couldn't agree more with this. But I've often contended that, due to certain aspects of Detroit's history and boomtown settlement patterns, this may be the most 'anti-urban' urban area in the U.S. Outside of the hard core of about 200,000 people who were here back in the early 1900s [[including several of my ancestors), Detroit was a city populated mainly by rural people.

---

The boomtown factor is an important one to consider. The city teemed with fortune-seeking transients who had little interest in local institutions. They were here for one purpose and one purpose only … to make lots of money. When the money enabled them to, they moved to a house and a yard, either within or without the city. When the city was built up and couldn't expand farther, they often moved out of the city for that larger house and larger yard.

Of course, the America's industrial cities were never an urban planner's dream. Coupled with the automobile enabling people to live in low-density neighborhoods and federal subsidies that fueled a low-density housing boom [[with freeways and GI Bill loans), that generation dispersed over an even wider area. Once their income and energy was removed from the city, there was even less effort to reform it.

The pastoral tendency in America goes back to the 1800s and Emerson and Thoreau and on back to Jefferson. Our forefathers believed that putting capital cities in major centers of commerce would derange government in favor of business, so they put state capitol buildings in cowtowns [[Lansing) where they look out of place and robbing big cities of monumental architecture. Would they had realized that business would hold just as much sway over states' policies, while small-town prejudices and antipathies against cities would hold sway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Of course, the America's industrial cities were never an urban planner's dream. Coupled with the automobile enabling people to live in low-density neighborhoods and federal subsidies that fueled a low-density housing boom [[with freeways and GI Bill loans), that generation dispersed over an even wider area. Once their income and energy was removed from the city, there was even less effort to reform it.

The pastoral tendency in America goes back to the 1800s and Emerson and Thoreau and on back to Jefferson.

---

This is true to some extent. But just because Detroit [[and Cleveland, Toledo, et. al.) never looked like Brooklyn or even Baltimore doesn't mean they were pastoral or even suburban. A drive down Woodward or Gratiot shows a lot of empty commercial space--space that was once filled with businesses. Then you think of all the buildings that have been razed that had also been filled with businesses.

In short, I think it's a big mistake to argue that Detroit was never "urban". Such ideas seem to only excuse the status quo and get in the way of progress.

this is how the country sees detroit portrayed. looks awfully suburban already. seems the suburbs are just whiter with ranches instead of bungalows and dubstep instead of the hustle...haha. and are average detroiters that overweight?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVWRHJoKqW4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

This is true to some extent. But just because Detroit [[and Cleveland, Toledo, et. al.) never looked like Brooklyn or even Baltimore doesn't mean they were pastoral or even suburban. A drive down Woodward or Gratiot shows a lot of empty commercial space--space that was once filled with businesses. Then you think of all the buildings that have been razed that had also been filled with businesses.

In short, I think it's a big mistake to argue that Detroit was never "urban". Such ideas seem to only excuse the status quo and get in the way of progress.

---

Let me be clear: I do not mean to argue that Detroit was never urban. The area inside the boulevard used to have very high densities. Local businesses and high-density buildings lined every streetcar line. In front of, say, an apartment building in Cass Corridor in the 1940s, the street would be packed with kids. Densities were definitely higher than 10,000 per square mile, and likely higher than 15,000 per square mile.

Of course, these areas were all within walking distance of transit. There were open spaces that were more difficult to develop outside transit lines. The automobile is what filled them in, and they were almost uniformly low-density.

It is incorrect to say Detroit never had a dense urban inner city. It's just that much of it has just been wiped off the map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Let me be clear: I do not mean to argue that Detroit was never urban. The area inside the boulevard used to have very high densities. Local businesses and high-density buildings lined every streetcar line. In front of, say, an apartment building in Cass Corridor in the 1940s, the street would be packed with kids. Densities were definitely higher than 10,000 per square mile, and likely higher than 15,000 per square mile.

Of course, these areas were all within walking distance of transit. There were open spaces that were more difficult to develop outside transit lines. The automobile is what filled them in, and they were almost uniformly low-density.

It is incorrect to say Detroit never had a dense urban inner city. It's just that much of it has just been wiped off the map.

---

I think we can agree on that.

The other point that is often raised is that the portions of Detroit outside the Boulevard were less dense than inside the Boulevard. This is also true. But it is also true in places like DC, Chicago, and Philadelphia, where there are plenty of less-dense "outer" neighborhoods within the city limits.

I just wanted to remind the forum that the real anomaly with Detroit is not its history as compared to its peers, but rather its approach in the past 20-30 years as compared to its peers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

The boomtown factor is an important one to consider. The city teemed with fortune-seeking transients who had little interest in local institutions. They were here for one purpose and one purpose only … to make lots of money.

---

A lot of people don't realize that Detroit is/was simply that, a boomtown... no different, really, than the silver or gold rush towns in the Old West. Detroit just did it on a larger scale and the boom lasted longer than most.

But the boom has been over for 35 years, at least, and all those people who left aren't coming back. Of course, "ghost town" is typically the successor to "boom town," and all you have to do is drive around the vast abandonment to see that evolution.

Our suburbs are no different from any other suburb in America. Except its nothing really to do except shop. What else is there to do? Well I guess you can go to dave & Busters, do some horseback riding and stuff like that. but our suburbs dont offer ANYTHING thats different from any other place. I go to Chicago on the weekends I want to hang out anyway. Its nothing to do in the burbs except shop. That doesnt make it world class in my book. Oh Yeah you can get a plant job. WOW