Why hasn't Detroit ever owned up to its urban planning blunders?

[HazenPingree]

I'll gladly bring a shovel.
...
One combatant, identified only as "The Gnome," vowed to "pummel" the bodies of all Detroit mayors after Hazen Pingree [[1890-1897).
...

I would give my vote for sparing Jerome Cavanaugh, he was pretty cool.

[Detroitnerd]

Well, Retroit. I tried. You either are not reading the posts, have no desire to learn anything that challenges your worldview, or just have a really feeble intelligence. If you don't want to have a serious debate, that's fine. I'll just go back to making fun of you.

[Retroit]

Yes, Detroitnerd, everyone has a different perspective on the facts. I do understand where you and others are coming from. I respect your desire to have a dense city full of high-rises and mass transit. I have merely been trying to expose you to how most people that I know out here in the "evil" suburbs think. Personally, I would like to see the city of Detroit become more like the suburbs of Detroit than like Manhattan: safe, clean neighborhoods with single family homes; expressways maintained in current configuration to provide ease of movement; WallMarts and shopping malls so Detroiters don't have to travel all the way out to the suburbs to shop; along with all the other benefits that we superbanites enjoy [[good schools, fairly well-run and accountable representation in city hall, etc.)

Thank you, crawford, for your input. I agree with you on just about everything. As far as the expressways in Manhattan, I somewhat see Ihearthed's initial post that Manhattan [[and to a great extent, Brooklyn) had been better preserved by building the expressways around the periphery [[along the water). This was allowable due to their geography and would not have been possible in Detroit. I-94 couldn't have been built along the waterfront, as that would have necessitated destruction of factories/warehouses along the river in Detroit and the mansions in Grosse Pointe. I suppose if Woodward were a river [[like the East River), I-75 and the Lodge could have bordered that instead of cutting through a landmass. Proves once again that you really can't compare New York and Detroit. But I'm sure it will be only a matter of days before a DetroitYESer tries it again. Oh well... gives us someone to argue with.

[Detroitnerd]

Yes, Detroitnerd, everyone has a different perspective on the facts.

Acknowledging the facts is the first step. Call me when you get there.

[Retroit]

Acknowledging the facts is the first step. Call me when you get there.

It's not so much what took place that I disagree with you on, it's why it took place. You [[and others) seem to be implying that the civic planning of Detroit's transportation infrastructure was contrived by some evil overlords intent on destroying Detroit. I think they were simply reacting to the trend at the time toward of greater use of the automobile and expansion of suburbs, which MOST people at that time wanted. True, this caused some disruptions, for example, when expressways were routed through black neighborhoods, those blacks were relocated to unwelcoming white neighborhoods, etc. But in the broad view from our current position, I think that the expressways were necessary [[sure some minor changes could have been made), and that Detroit is better off transportation-wise than it would be with no, or much less, expressways. The problems that Detroit faces are not due to the auto-oriented transportation infrastructure. We have to accept the city we've inherited, whether we like it or not, and move on from here [[not from a 1950's city that "could-have-been").

[ghettopalmetto]

It's not so much what took place that I disagree with you on, it's why it took place. You [[and others) seem to be implying that the civic planning of Detroit's transportation infrastructure was contrived by some evil overlords intent on destroying Detroit. I think they were simply reacting to the trend at the time toward of greater use of the automobile and expansion of suburbs, which MOST people at that time wanted. True, this caused some disruptions, for example, when expressways were routed through black neighborhoods, those blacks were relocated to unwelcoming white neighborhoods, etc. But in the broad view from out current position, I think that the expressways were necessary [[sure some minor changes could have been made), and that Detroit is better off transportation-wise than it would be with no, or much less, expressways. The problems that Detroit faces are not due to the auto-oriented transportation infrastructure. We have to accept the city we've inherited, whether we like it or not, and move on from here [[not from a 1950's city that "could-have-been").

Anyone who has actually studied this issue, however, knows that the highway planners of the 1950s never imagined the massive sprawl, disinvestment of central cities, and ridiculous levels of traffic that we have today. It was once thought that the Chrysler Freeway in Detroit was going to permanently solve all the transportation woes of Southeast Michigan. It was once thought that people would live in the outer parts of the city and the suburbs, but would continue to work and shop downtown.

You can accept the city you've inherited and the outdated 1950s ideas on which it is predicated. OR you can realize that you're a smart-enough person, and that maybe we've learned a thing or two in the 60 or so years hence.

[Retroit]

Anyone who has actually studied this issue, however, knows that the highway planners of the 1950s never imagined the massive sprawl, disinvestment of central cities, and ridiculous levels of traffic that we have today. It was once thought that the Chrysler Freeway in Detroit was going to permanently solve all the transportation woes of Southeast Michigan. It was once thought that people would live in the outer parts of the city and the suburbs, but would continue to work and shop downtown.

If the "blundering" urban planners at that time thought that Detroit's expansion would magically stop where the expressway ends, then they were very shortsighted... in the direction opposite to those who claim that no expressways should have been built.

You can accept the city you've inherited and the outdated 1950s ideas on which it is predicated. OR you can realize that you're a smart-enough person, and that maybe we've learned a thing or two in the 60 or so years hence.

Learning things isn't going to remove the expressways or the need for them. Detroit is what it is. Make a list of things in Detroit that need to be changed. If the elimination of automobile transportation is in the top 100 of your list, you are not making an honest assessment of life in Detroit.

[Detroitnerd]

It's not so much what took place that I disagree with you on, it's why it took place. You [[and others) seem to be implying that the civic planning of Detroit's transportation infrastructure was contrived by some evil overlords intent on destroying Detroit. I think they were simply reacting to the trend at the time toward of greater use of the automobile and expansion of suburbs, which MOST people at that time wanted. True, this caused some disruptions, for example, when expressways were routed through black neighborhoods, those blacks were relocated to unwelcoming white neighborhoods, etc. But in the broad view from out current position, I think that the expressways were necessary [[sure some minor changes could have been made), and that Detroit is better off transportation-wise than it would be with no, or much less, expressways. The problems that Detroit faces are not due to the auto-oriented transportation infrastructure. We have to accept the city we've inherited, whether we like it or not, and move on from here [[not from a 1950's city that "could-have-been").

It's all part of some nefarious plan? Dude, you really have me confused with somebody else. Maybe you just scan what I type and impute my motives to it. That would explain how irrelevant some of your responses have been to what I'm saying.

OK, expressways make metro Detroit better, transportation-wise. Um...

How about this for another perspective. Cities are places where everything is located centrally. That means that you don't NEED to drive all over creation to put together tonight's dinner, do laundry, get a bite, buy a newspaper, etc. That's what urbanity is: Many different kinds of people, doing many different kinds of jobs, offering many different kinds of goods and services in one place. You don't need the car in the best environments, at all. And that's the kind of lifestyle that is ascendant right now.

See, in a real city, you're better off living-wise. It's all there.

Take when I was living in Brooklyn. My subway stop was a block and a half away. Within three blocks of my apartment, I had a butcher, a baker, an ethnic grocery, two green grocers, a burrito shop, a coffee shop, a supermarket, a diner, a bodega, a dry cleaner and a host of other businesses. I didn't have a transportation problem because I didn't need to travel much.

But, here, since we've decided to build everything so spread out, you NEED a car. Or else you have a transportation problem. So you say you're better off transportation-wise, but, actually, what you have is a life that is impossible without a car. Metro Detroiters are forever shuttling here and there, from big box to pizza shack, from burger hut to drive-thru dry cleaners, spending much more time, money and energy on errands than somebody in a city.

Now, that may just be peachy-keen for you. But a growing segment of the American public is sick of that shit. They demonstrate that by voting with their feet. They actually want that little apartment in an old-fashioned neighborhood with local businesses. Imagine that!

[Retroit]

It's all part of some nefarious plan? Dude, you really have me confused with somebody else. Maybe you just scan what I type and impute my motives to it. That would explain how irrelevant some of your responses have been to what I'm saying.

Detroitnerd: "The freeways were built to move people out of the city and to develop the land outside it to make enormous profits. In the beginning, the lobbies didn't get rich because they were doing the people's bidding. They helped grease the wheels of the system for a bonanza of their own making. And it was all made possible with the people's money."

OK, expressways make metro Detroit better, transportation-wise. Um...

How about this for another perspective. Cities are places where everything is located centrally.

"Located centrally"? We're all supposed to go downtown for all our daily needs?

Answer: No,

That means that you don't NEED to drive all over creation to put together tonight's dinner, do laundry, get a bite, buy a newspaper, etc. That's what urbanity is: Many different kinds of people, doing many different kinds of jobs, offering many different kinds of goods and services in one place. You don't need the car in the best environments, at all. And that's the kind of lifestyle that is ascendant right now.

See, in a real city, you're better off living-wise. It's all there.

Yes, it is good to have our daily needs to be met nearby, and not downtown.

Take when I was living in Brooklyn. My subway stop was a block and a half away. Within three blocks of my apartment, I had a butcher, a baker, an ethnic grocery, two green grocers, a burrito shop, a coffee shop, a supermarket, a diner, a bodega, a dry cleaner and a host of other businesses. I didn't have a transportation problem because I didn't need to travel much.

But, here, since we've decided to build everything so spread out, you NEED a car. Or else you have a transportation problem. So you say you're better off transportation-wise, but, actually, what you have is a life that is impossible without a car. Metro Detroiters are forever shuttling here and there, from big box to pizza shack, from burger hut to drive-thru dry cleaners, spending much more time, money and energy on errands than somebody in a city.

Now, that may just be peachy-keen for you. But a growing segment of the American public is sick of that shit. They demonstrate that by voting with their feet. They actually want that little apartment in an old-fashioned neighborhood with local businesses. Imagine that!

Well, I lived in Queens for a while, and I unequivocally HATED it. Way too congested. Way too claustrophobic. Too noisy. Quite run down and dirty. Had to rely on public transportation. I would bet that most superbanites of Detroit would find living there a steep decline in quality of life. True, maybe for a young person out to see the world, it may be a change of pace for awhile. But they'll get sick of it.

[ghettopalmetto]

Personally, I would like to see the city of Detroit become more like the suburbs of Detroit than like Manhattan: safe, clean neighborhoods with single family homes; expressways maintained in current configuration to provide ease of movement; WallMarts and shopping malls so Detroiters don't have to travel all the way out to the suburbs to shop; along with all the other benefits that we superbanites enjoy [[good schools, fairly well-run and accountable representation in city hall, etc.)

What's the point of making Detroit look and function exactly like its suburbs? Is that supposed to attract people to live in the City of Detroit? To me, that's a competitive disadvantage, as you have two identical-looking products, but one of them has lower taxation, lower crime, and better services. If Detroit is going to compete, it needs to capitalize on the advantages it does have--not replicate Pleasantville. Bear in mind--educated Michiganders are leaving for Chicago, New York, and DC over Detroit, not Sterling Heights over Detroit.

How does it follow that an automobile-oriented design produces "good schools, fairly well-run and accountable representation in city hall, etc."?

So, shop for Chinese junk at Walmart, plan your daily errands around traffic jams, and marvel at the beauty of the vinyl siding on your home. Just don't force that jive plastic lifestyle onto one of the few places in Michigan that hasn't fully embraced the generic suburban vernacular.

[Retroit]

What's the point of making Detroit look and function exactly like its suburbs?

Where are people from the City of Detroit moving to? Answer: The suburbs.
How do you prevent people from leaving the City of Detroit? A: Make Detroit just like them so that there is no reason to leave.

Is that supposed to attract people to live in the City of Detroit?

Is what the City of Detroit currently doing attracting anyone? Answer: No.

To me, that's a competitive disadvantage, as you have two identical-looking products, but one of them has lower taxation, lower crime, and better services.

Yes, that is why people move.

If Detroit is going to compete, it needs to capitalize on the advantages it does have--not replicate Pleasantville.

And it's advantages are? Answer: None

Bear in mind--educated Michiganders are leaving for Chicago, New York, and DC over Detroit, not Sterling Heights over Detroit.

Where are Detroit residents moving to? Answer: The suburbs.

How does it follow that an automobile-oriented design produces "good schools, fairly well-run and accountable representation in city hall, etc."?

That was not my point. I merely mentioned that to show that it was not solely transportation infrastructure issues that were causing people to leave Detroit. I wanted to be clear that that was not what I was arguing.

So, shop for Chinese junk at Walmart, plan your daily errands around traffic jams, and marvel at the beauty of the vinyl siding on your home.

I will inform all the ex-Detroiters [[and many current ones) that they now have your approval.

Just don't force that jive plastic lifestyle onto one of the few places in Michigan that hasn't fully embraced the generic suburban vernacular.

Yes, I wouldn't want to destroy the beauty and tranquility of Detroit's neighborhoods.

[Detroitnerd]

Retroit: What you fail to grasp is that regions work because city, suburb and country are all doing what they do best, appealing to those who enjoy a certain lifestyle, and profiting from each others' excellence. The effort to have suburbs at the expense of cities is, so far, not very successful. Other cities look at metro Detroit as a backward place, not because of Detroit, but because the region doesn't work together. We have some very nice suburbs, true, but they don't have downtowns. We have a nice downtown in Detroit, but awful neighborhoods. And the country? You have to drive for a goddamn hour to get into the country here, as we've spent the last 20 years filling it up with junky exurban places that will probably be empty in another 20 years. It's a goddamn mess. And it's because, once a person moves to Novi or Farmington Hills, they say, "To hell with everybody else. Fuck them. I've got mine. Let them fight for theirs." And that's the philosophy that's sinking us, regionally.

But it's changing. Even right-wing jerkoffs like Patterson get it these days: The destiny of the city and its suburbs are tied together. And no amount of suburbanite chest-thumping will change that. Based on your comments, I take it you're a classic example of somebody who either fears, distrusts, hates or misunderstands what cities are. And no efforts to educate you about the issues will change that, because, at a certain point, your suburban triumphalism will just take over and you'll start happily burbling about expressways and home values and how all these people are moving to the suburbs, neglecting to mention that the reason they're moving there is that they're fleeing a disorganized, underfunded wreck of a city that you cheerfully live next to without a qualm in the world.

[Retroit]

Retroit: What you fail to grasp is that regions work because city, suburb and country are all doing what they do best, appealing to those who enjoy a certain lifestyle, and profiting from each others' excellence.

That is very true Detroitnerd, but I think you are overestimating the number of people that want to live in downtowns or "dense" areas, and you're underestimating those who want to live in quiet suburbs.

The effort to have suburbs at the expense of cities is, so far, not very successful.

The suburbs are very successful. Most of us are quite happy out here, even recent ex-Detroiters. Detroit is not failing because it doesn't have enough high-rises and subways. It's failing because of the way people live [[crime, destruction, lack of morals, not holding elected officials accountable, etc.)

Other cities look at metro Detroit as a backward place, not because of Detroit, but because the region doesn't work together.

...not because the region doesn't work together, but because the people within the city don't work together.

We have some very nice suburbs, true, but they don't have downtowns.

And don't want downtowns, at least not on the order of downtown Detroit. We want peace and quiet.

We have a nice downtown in Detroit, but awful neighborhoods.

Not quite true [[but improving), and quite true.

And the country? You have to drive for a goddamn hour to get into the country here,...

Who cares? What are you going out there for? Fresh air?

...as we've spent the last 20 years filling it up with junky exurban places that will probably be empty in another 20 years.

For your information [[I know you know, of course), the City of Detroit was once largely farm land. We started filling up the farm land a long, long time ago...and will continue filling it up...unless you have a way of convincing people not to reproduce.

It's a goddamn mess.

Some parts are, some parts aren't. The City of Detroit is [[mostly), and the suburbs aren't [[mostly). Take your pick.

And it's because, once a person moves to Novi or Farmington Hills, they say, "To hell with everybody else. Fuck them. I've got mine. Let them fight for theirs." And that's the philosophy that's sinking us, regionally.

What is wrong with people creating a place that they enjoy living. Are you suggesting that people in Novi and Farmington Hills should dictate how others should live? Let everyone decide where and how they want to live.

But it's changing. Even right-wing jerkoffs like Patterson get it these days:

I think you completely misunderstood Brook. He has always been willing to work with Detroit. Can the opposite also be said. The Detroit Shitty Clown Show is not going to take the advice of Brook. They know better. Didn't you know that?

The destiny of the city and its suburbs are tied together.

True.

And no amount of suburbanite chest-thumping will change that.

And no amount of urban chest-thumping will change that. Agreed?

Based on your comments, I take it you're a classic example of somebody who either fears, distrusts, hates or misunderstands what cities are.

Fear? No, unless you mean the crime. Distrust? No, unless you mean the politicians. Hates? I would hate living there, but I don't hate the fact that they exist. Misunderstands? No, I just prefer not to live there.

Can YOU say that YOU don't fear, distrust, hate, or misunderstand the suburbs?

And no efforts to educate you about the issues will change that, because, at a certain point, your suburban triumphalism will just take over and you'll start happily burbling about expressways and home values and how all these people are moving to the suburbs,..

How else am I going to convince you that you're wrong?

... neglecting to mention that the reason they're moving there is that they're fleeing a disorganized, underfunded wreck of a city...

And whose fault is that? You Detroiters create a city that I would like to live in, and I will move there.

...that you cheerfully live next to without a qualm in the world.

What power do I have to change it. If I walked down the streets of Detroit with a bullhorn yelling "Do not steal, do not kill, do not have sex if you are not willing to deal with the consequences, go to school, don't take drugs, clean up your property, discipline your kids", how do you think that would go over?

[Danny]

The old Jewish community at Black Bottom FAILED because the Jews wanted more space.

The old Jewish community at Hasting Street FAILED because the Jews wanted more and more space.

The Jewish community along Oakland St, Woodward from Grand Blvd, Midtown, New Center Area and up to Webb Streets FAILED because the Jews wanted more and more and more space.

The Jewish community at northwest Detroit FAILED because the Jews wanted more and more and more and more space. Therefore they moved to Oak Park, Southfield, Lathrup Village, Franklin, Beverly Hills, Bloomfield Hills, West Bloomfield TWP. Commerce TWP. Farmington, Farmington Hills and Novi.

Polonia FAILED because the Poles in Detroit lower east side wanted more space. Therefore they moved to Hamtramck, Warren, Hazel Park, Sterling Heights, Clinton TWP. Center Line, Shelby TWP, Utica and up to Macomb TWP. and Washington TWP.

Germantown in Downtown Detroit FAILED because the Germans wanted more space. So they followed the Poles and moved to Hamtramck, Warren, Hazel Park, Sterling Heights, Clinton TWP. Center Line, Shelby TWP, Utica and up to Macomb TWP and Washington TWP.

The Germans in Warrendale community FAILED because they wanted more space so they moved to Dearborn [[west), Dearborn Heights, Westland, Garden City and Redford TWP. Canton TWP, Plymouth, Plymouth TWP, Northville, Northville TWP and Livonia.

The Italians in the Polonia district in Detroit's lower east side FAILED because they wanted more space.

The Italians in the Calcalupa district in Detroit's upper east side FAILED because they wanted more and more space.

The Italians in the Little Italy district in Detroit's Northeast side FAILED because they wanted more and more and more space. Therefore they moved to Eastpointe [[ East Detroit) St. Clair Shores, Grosse Pointe Park, Grosse Pointe,Grosse Pointe Farms, Grosse Pointe Woods, Grosse Pointe Farms, Harper Woods, Roseville, Harrison TWP, Macomb TWP, Sterling Hieghts, Clinton TWP, Utica, Washington TWP.

The Hungarians in Delray district at Detroit 's Southwest side FAILED because the need more space. Therefore they moved to River Rouge, Ecorse, Lincoln Park, Wyandotte, Melvindale, Trenton, Grosse Ille, Woodhaven, Taylor, Allen Park, Southgate, Brownstown TWP, Riverview, Gibraltar, Flat Rock and Rockwood.

Ethnicity in Detroit created these urban blunders not just because of political corruption, the growing migration of blacks, Hispanics, Mexicans and Arabs, poor schools and city services, freeways segregation and xenophobia. It's because of people wanted more space after they got a car.

[Danny]

The Greeks in Downtown Detroit stayed because they took pride in their city.

The Chaldeans [[ espacially in W. 7 Mile Rd from Woodward Ave to John R. Rd.) stayed in Detroit because they took pride in their city.

The East Indians in Conant Gardens in the Northeast side stayed in Detroit because they took pride in their city.

The Arabs Muslims at Lonyo, McGraw, W. Vernor HWY. near Patton Park, Warrendale and Mt Elliot area. stayed in Detroit because they took pride in their city.

The Mexicans of Southwest side stayed in Detroit because they took pride in their city.

The Irish in Corktown stayed in Detroit because they took pride in their city.

These group of ethnic people didn't asked for more space, They would fight blunders and crime for their ghettohoods. Most of them even help poor black Detroiters get themselves back their feet.

These are the group of ethnicities make Detroit their home and I'm really proud of these groups.

WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET

Detroit is NOT dead!

[Retroit]

These group of ethnic people didn't asked for more space, They would fight blunders and crime for their ghettohoods. Most of them even help poor black Detroiters get themselves back their feet.

These are the group of ethnicities make Detroit their home and I'm really proud of these groups.

You are quite off on your assessment of the Ethnic groups in Detroit. Many of the groups you mentioned have moved out, are moving out, and will move out as they, too, outgrow their neighborhoods and as new groups of immigrants take their place.

[Retroit]

Ethnicity in Detroit created these urban blunders...

The immigrants [[and their descendants) caused the population to grow. That is not a blunder. The immigrants outgrew their neighborhoods. That is not a blunder. The immigrants desired a "better life" out in the suburbs. That is not a blunder. Automobiles, which provided many of those immigrants with a livelihood, enabled them to live where they want. That is not a blunder.

[[unless I completely missed your point )