Belle Isle State Park

[Bham1982]

The park will be patronized by just as many Detroiters as before.

This is quite obviously not true. When you attach an $11 charge to something that was previously free, it will impact patronage.

I don't really have a problem with the takeover, but there's no doubt the new ownership means a different type of park. This is no longer a city park. It's no longer analagous to the traditional major urban parks in the U.S. [[Fairmont Park in Philly, Forest Park in St. Louis, obviously the major Olmstead Parks in NYC area), it's now a fee-based, statewide amenity.

And common sense would dictate that some of the typical summertime Belle Isle activities [[cruising and picknicking) are now permantly curtailed, for better or worse.

[Honky Tonk]

$11 / 12 = $.91 [[66666666666, etc.) per month. WTF?

[Honky Tonk]

HonkyTonk, did you even read my post? I praised the architecture and stated emphatically that converting it from a Potemkin aquarium open a few hours a week into something that would have more users all week long is a better tribute to it's architecture and history than pretending we have an aquarium, which is a shadow of it's former [[even then thin) self. I appreciate the nostalgia for it. I have wonderful memories of the Olympia Stadium; that doesn't mean the Wings should still be playing there. Nostalgia is an emotion, not a logical argument. A tiny, unimpressive aquarium that is almost always closed is not a sensible use of a great old building on an island with very limited capacity for further buildings. The island, at least in nice weather, gets thousands of visitors a day. On the one day a week the aquarium is open, it's patronized by just a fraction of them. I think there could be a use for the building that could enhance the park-going experience for thousands. Not the odd, 15-minute diversion for dozens twenty hours a month. I say: save the building and do something useful with it; make other plans for an aquarium.

Sorry, I forgot about you. YES, MikeyinBrooklyn, I DID read your post, and I totally disagree with what you're proposing. Not everything has to be on a grandiose scale.

[Detroitnerd]

You can still get onto the island for free via bus, walking, or bike.

And if you can afford a car and gas, maintenance, bbqing supplies and all that, then you can afford the $11.

Bad effort this time.

Oh, yeah. Sure. I bet you know all about poverty, having lived it for years.

Nice glib answer is exactly what I expect. "That's OK, gramma. Just put your dialysis machine up on the bicycle and push those pedals. This park is FREE! All those kids? All they gotta do is walk. They're obese anyway. Why didn't you ride the bus? Oh, there IS no bus? Hmmmm..."

[bailey]

This is quite obviously not true. When you attach an $11 charge to something that was previously free, it will impact patronage.

I don't really have a problem with the takeover, but there's no doubt the new ownership means a different type of park. This is no longer a city park. It's no longer analagous to the traditional major urban parks in the U.S. [[Fairmont Park in Philly, Forest Park in St. Louis, obviously the major Olmstead Parks in NYC area), it's now a fee-based, statewide amenity.

And common sense would dictate that some of the typical summertime Belle Isle activities [[cruising and picknicking) are now permantly curtailed, for better or worse.

I think that is overstating it. the 11 dollar fee is one time a YEAR. yes I could see an impact if it was a 2.50 per car EVERY TIME you crossed the bridge. but that isn't it. it'll work out to 30 cents a day if you went every friday, sat and sunday all summer.

Any impact will be felt in the first year as people adjust and then it will disappear thereafter. Heck, if people are paying 11 bucks for it, it may increase usage as people will attach value to it...."i paid for it so I'm going to use the hell out of it".

[GP For Life]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

I was on the island February 1st, which was the first day the MSP and DNR were patrolling the island. You would have lost your mind. They were pulling people over for speeding and tags. It was great. As I was leaving they apparently found a gentleman, who I am assuming had an outstanding warrant, and hauled him off to jail.

Sending a clear message that ne'er-do-wells won't be tolerated.

Why would you try to spin this as a negative?

[mwilbert]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

For the reasons other people have outlined, I doubt the charge will significantly reduce either the total number of visitors, or the number of visitors from the city or even the number of low-income visitors, but as is so often not this case with this kind of argument, I expect that soon we will have actual data and then we can probably tell whether that is true.

I think the more interesting question is how the usage of the park changes. As a state park there will be somewhat different hours of operation, rules, and levels of enforcement than there were previously, and it seems to me that those changes are likely to affect the composition of visitors more than the admission charge.

[DetroitPlanner]

$11 is cheap. Think of it in terms of access to every State park. You can go to Taquemonon [[SP) Falls or Tawas Point if you wanted to with this pass.

In addition it buys you discounts at lots of places including the Big Boy at the foot of the bridge. http://www.michigan.org/dnr-perks/

[Bham1982]

I think that is overstating it. the 11 dollar fee is one time a YEAR. yes I could see an impact if it was a 2.50 per car EVERY TIME you crossed the bridge. but that isn't it. it'll work out to 30 cents a day if you went every friday, sat and sunday all summer.

This is true but people don't usually amortize costs like this. They'll see the fee as an entrance fee. Once-a-year type users like myself will see it as an admission charge per visit, and lower income types will be less likely to be paying extra online for the annual pass during license renewal.

It's already stopped me from going to the park, because I used to swing by the arboretum and Dossin museum occasionally when I was on Jefferson on weekends, or when I was downtown with out-of-towners. I don't have the park pass, so I don't bother anymore.

For the cruising, you're probably talking teens and 20-somethings engaging in relatively spontaneous activitity. I don't see any reason why it would continue when everyone has to pay. Just go to Rouge or Chandler, as the cars and people are the attractions, not the Windsor skyline.

For pickicking, you're probably talking large groups of people related by blood, friendship, or activities coming from all over the place to meet and greet. Moving the picnic to a regular municipal park in the area means saving hundreds of dollars collectively, and is a pretty big no-brainer for folks of limited means.

[Eber Brock Ward]

Oh, yeah. Sure. I bet you know all about poverty, having lived it for years.

As a matter of fact, I do. My mom and I lived in the basement of a laundromat for awhile with a toilet in the corner and no real kitchen or anything. I could tell you lots of other stories, but that's not the point, now is it? So shove that "you don't get it" shit right up your ass.

Growing up poor like that, I realize that the $11 wouldn't apply because there's no car to put the sticker on or to pay the fee for, and matter of fact, you can't afford to get to the island anyway because bus fare money could be used for something else more important like some more mac and cheese or a gallon of milk.

Now maybe I'd go to the island with my aunt or my cousins or something, but they could afford cars and, with that, the $11 sticker.

Altogether, my point is perfectly clear, there aren't many people -- period -- that are poor enough to not be able to afford the $11 sticker but that are also, at the same time, wealthy enough to afford a car. That overlap in groups might include a dozen people in the Metro area, and even then only by some really really weird circumstances.

[Kevgoblue]

And who exactly is going to be standing at the entrance checking plates for the little "P" on the tag? In other state parks I've been in that require the park permit, I've yet to see anyone verifying that cars are compliant.

But checking for loitering, loud music, open beer and burning herb.....of that I have no doubt.

[bailey]

And who exactly is going to be standing at the entrance checking plates for the little "P" on the tag? In other state parks I've been in that require the park permit, I've yet to see anyone verifying that cars are compliant.

But checking for loitering, loud music, open beer and burning herb.....of that I have no doubt.

its on your registration as well.

[mwilbert]

I've seen them check after you are parked.

[Bham1982]

Altogether, my point is perfectly clear, there aren't many people -- period -- that are poor enough to not be able to afford the $11 sticker but that are also, at the same time, wealthy enough to afford a car. That overlap in groups might include a dozen people in the Metro area, and even then only by some really really weird circumstances.

This is obviously wrong. A functioning car is pretty much a necessity in Michigan. An $11 visit to a park isn't a necessity. The fact that car owner can, by default afford $11 doesn't mean they will choose to do so.

I can technically buy a ferrari without ending up homeless and destitute; doesn't mean it would be a wise use of my funds. An $11 discretionary charge isn't comparable to the necessity of transportation.

[bailey]

This is true but people don't usually amortize costs like this. They'll see the fee as an entrance fee. Once-a-year type users like myself will see it as an admission charge per visit, and lower income types will be less likely to be paying extra online for the annual pass during license renewal.

It's already stopped me from going to the park, because I used to swing by the arboretum and Dossin museum occasionally when I was on Jefferson on weekends, or when I was downtown with out-of-towners. I don't have the park pass, so I don't bother anymore.

For the cruising, you're probably talking teens and 20-somethings engaging in relatively spontaneous activitity. I don't see any reason why it would continue when everyone has to pay. Just go to Rouge or Chandler, as the cars and people are the attractions, not the Windsor skyline.

For pickicking, you're probably talking large groups of people related by blood, friendship, or activities coming from all over the place to meet and greet. Moving the picnic to a regular municipal park in the area means saving hundreds of dollars collectively, and is a pretty big no-brainer for folks of limited means.

you don't bother anymore because it's not important enough for you to spend the 30 seconds it takes come registration renewal to add 11 bucks to the tally. Which is fine, but I don't think people like you are a significant population.

Regarding the family reunions/gatherings... yes people coming in from out of town aren't going to pay 11 bucks. they'll pay 8.40 per car...for day passes. Will that mean that the _______ family renunion will move to Rouge Park instead of everyone chipping in a buck or two for the passes? Maybe, but I just don't think it will in appreciable numbers.



As pointed out above, we'll soon have verifiable data one way or the other.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I think the point you're missing here is that the aquarium as it is now [[open for 5 hours once a week) is not the final product. This is step one. hopefully with the state taking the reigns, funding will be available to bring it back to full operation.

Bailey, I'm not missing that point. I think there is a chance the state will put money into the aquarium. No guarantee, but they might. But it will never be much of an aquarium, even if we get the money. A few more fish, sure. More hours bringing in a few more visitors, yep. But it will still be a third rate aquarium, albeit in a cool old building. There is not room to expand it into a great exhibit. It could serve a lot more people as something other than as our aquarium.

Well, if we're going to turn it into a concession stand, why not add some golden arches, too? You probably think the old Michigan Theatre is better as a garage, too, because who needs more theaters downtown, right?

Downtownguy, I would not be in favor of putting a McDonald's in there; although if we did that at least more people would get to see the building. I think it's an ideal place to rent bikes, cross-country skis, roller-blades, etc. Of course there could be some food service, too. I don't favor selling alcohol there: public spaces should be free of alcohol.

My whole point in wanting to switch out the aquarium isn't to destroy the hopes and dreams of those who love the aquarium. And I appreciate the hard work of the volunteers. But the whole island exists for the recreation of the people of Detroit [[and, now, the people of all of Michigan). Our aquarium will never be used- even if fully funded and keeping decent hours- by most of the patrons. It's just not big enough, and it has little room for expansion and modernization. We have limited space on the island. I think the best use of the island's existing spaces lies in finding purposes that serve the most people. This cool and historic building could be used for something else that benefits more people.

We should take this chance to rethink everything on the island. The old boat club, the aquarium, the Dossin Museum, the giant slide. What [[if anything) can be done to make these things better assets for the park? I don't think our heroic little fish tank will ever be something- in it's current size and location- that is a significant asset to the park. If it disappeared tomorrow- but it didn't make any news- I suspect that beyond the volunteers hardly anyone would notice. Let's turn it into something that thousands of people will use every week, not thousands every year.

[Eber Brock Ward]

This is obviously wrong. A functioning car is pretty much a necessity in Michigan. An $11 visit to a park isn't a necessity. The fact that car owner can, by default afford $11 doesn't mean they will choose to do so.

I can technically buy a ferrari without ending up homeless and destitute; doesn't mean it would be a wise use of my funds. An $11 discretionary charge isn't comparable to the necessity of transportation.

Ahh, but you see you're moving the goalposts from whether they are being excluded under the new conditions [[i.e., "can they do it?") to whether or not they'll choose to do so under the new conditions [[i.e., "will they choose to do it?").

The former is a potential social justice issue. The latter, not so much.

[Bham1982]

Ahh, but you see you're moving the goalposts from whether they are being excluded under the new conditions [[i.e., "can they do it?") to whether or not they'll choose to do so under the new conditions [[i.e., "will they choose to do it?").

I never claimed that people couldn't come up with $11. The guy asking for change on the freeway onramp can muster $11. The issue has always been whether the charge will impact the number and nature of visitors, not whether or not it will lead to a destitute populace of former cruisers/picknickers.

[rjlj]

10% off at Mudgie's as well. Why wouldn't you get the parks pass?

$11 is cheap. Think of it in terms of access to every State park. You can go to Taquemonon [[SP) Falls or Tawas Point if you wanted to with this pass.

In addition it buys you discounts at lots of places including the Big Boy at the foot of the bridge. http://www.michigan.org/dnr-perks/

[bailey]

Ahh, but you see you're moving the goalposts from whether they are being excluded under the new conditions [[i.e., "can they do it?") to whether or not they'll choose to do so under the new conditions [[i.e., "will they choose to do it?").

The former is a potential social justice issue. The latter, not so much.

well, the argument [[not that I agree with it) is that it's de facto exclusion not necessarily de jure.

[corktownyuppie]

I don't really have a problem with the takeover, but there's no doubt the new ownership means a different type of park. This is no longer a city park. It's no longer analagous to the traditional major urban parks in the U.S. [[Fairmont Park in Philly, Forest Park in St. Louis, obviously the major Olmstead Parks in NYC area), it's now a fee-based, statewide amenity.

And common sense would dictate that some of the typical summertime Belle Isle activities [[cruising and picknicking) are now permantly curtailed, for better or worse.

It is going to be a different kind of park than it was in 2013, for sure. Just as the park in 2013 is different than it was in 1980. And it was different in 1980 than when it was in 1950.

So change is going to come from one direction or another, one way or the other. My only question is whether or not the change will be positive or negative.

My vote is positive.

[Dan Wesson]

It's going to be interesting for sure. I make it point to visit all the State Parks in Michigan at one time or another. Boozin and cruisin the Island has got to take a hit. How are the gate keepers gonna do the job?

[bailey]

Bailey, I'm not missing that point. I think there is a chance the state will put money into the aquarium. No guarantee, but they might. But it will never be much of an aquarium, even if we get the money. A few more fish, sure. More hours bringing in a few more visitors, yep. But it will still be a third rate aquarium, albeit in a cool old building. There is not room to expand it into a great exhibit. It could serve a lot more people as something other than as our aquarium.

That "third rate" aquarium was seeing over 100,000 visitors a year in the 90s. I think that had fallen to about 40k when it closed in early 00s.

It doesn't need to be anything more than what it was for 100 years of operation prior to its closure.

[townonenorth]

It's going to be interesting for sure. I make it point to visit all the State Parks in Michigan at one time or another. Boozin and cruisin the Island has got to take a hit. How are the gate keepers gonna do the job?

Probably just record plate numbers and send tickets to the registration address if there's no recorded passport. I would think that hanging tickets on the island isn't that good of an idea.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

That "third rate" aquarium was seeing over 100,000 visitors a year in the 90s. I think that had fallen to about 40k when it closed in early 00s.

It doesn't need to be anything more than what it was for 100 years of operation prior to its closure.

I totally agree. The aquarium does not need to be a first class aquarium because of its location on Belle Isle. When I lived in West Village I would sometimes take visitors to the aquarium, but it part of our trip the the island - to see the conservatory, drive about the island, etc. Because of going to do several things, the size and scope of the aquarium never seemed to be a problem for me.