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

**iheartthed** · September-18-09, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by 2blocksaway

We sure like to talk out of both sides of our mouths here don't we?

On one thread we talk bout how much it sucks that the domestic auto industry is shrinking and hoe people need to "buy american" to save their jobs and on the other hand we want less cars on the road and more mass transit.

Detroit is the Motor City for a reason. If you don't like it or it's suburbs. Leave.

Public transportation sucks and always will. No matter if I am going 1 or 100 miles I would prefer to drive myself. I don't want to make a stop every quarter mile while sitting next to someone who just got done drinking a bottle of cheap wine or someone who just stinks naturally.

Walking would be fine for short distances but it's Michigan so chances are it will be too cold or too hot a lot of the time.

Uh okay, we get it. You don't like public transportation [[though I have a hard time believing that you have much experience with it). Now what does that have to do with anything? Are you saying that Detroit is a better place without a good mass transit system?

**iheartthed** · September-18-09, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by crawford

The freeways were NOT responsible for Detroit's decline. This is such revisionist B.S.

Gee, if we never built freeways, all the Poles would still be living on Chene Street, right?

Take a look at a city map. There is no correlation between decay and placement of freeways. In fact, the most decayed part of Detroit [[Near East Side/Lower East Side) has no freeways! Not one!

You can't possibly be serious.

**313WX** · September-18-09, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by crawford

I-94 is north of the worst decline on the East Side.

I'm almost certain 48205 is north of I-94.

crawford · September-18-09, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

You can't possibly be serious.

Why are the neighborhoods off Jefferson the most decayed in the city? Where's the freeway? How about Blightmoor? Don't see a freeway. 7 Mile/Hayes? Dexter/Davison? Nope.

Why is NW Detroit the best neighborhood in the city? It should be the pits! Two giant freeways running through these neighborhoods.

Why is SW Detroit the only growing neighborhood in Detroit? Tons of freeways!

And downtown and midtown should be awful. They have the most freeways, by far.

**digitalvision** · September-18-09, 04:06 PM

Crawford,

I think you're suffering from armchair Detroiter-itis.

That far eastside is an area that's coming back pretty strong [[I am regularly over there). Not in the "urbanist" sense so many talk about here, but as suburban style development and new housing tracts. It's so burned out that it's prime land to start fresh and it's starting to fire up.

It's not perfect, but it's got lots of stuff. U-Snapback morningside is over there, lots of new retail developments - there are good tracts that are completely unrecognizable from five or seven years ago.

Oh, I don't know if you realize this, but there is a freeway named the Davison. It happens to be the first one ever built. Just sayin'.

**skyl4rk** · September-18-09, 04:36 PM

Detroit's problems are far too large to have been caused by urban planning mistakes alone.

I'm sure that as a group we could list 100 reasons why Detroit is struggling. Urban planning problems would be on the list but they are only one facet of the problem.

**jjw** · September-18-09, 04:45 PM

The city of Detroit and the metro area exists as it is because the majority of the people living in it like it the way it is; plain and simple. For those who want mass transit and redevelopment with smart planning, it may be wise to move somewhere that practices that while you can still enjoy your life. Some places are just meant to be and unfortunately, I think metro Detroit is one.

I keep thinking maybe metro Detroit is ahead of other east coast and midwest cities in that it is so car-oriented. I mean, after all, all of the growth occuring is mostly in cities modeled after Detroit. But then I remember gas at almost 4 bucks a gallon and personal quality of life issues and realize--nope--mistake.

Anyway, to each his or her own. Drive the mile to the store while staring at all of the lovely grass and cement. Enjoy your day!

**buildingsofdetroit** · September-18-09, 06:38 PM

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

Maybe because the blunders go unsaid. As in, "We screwed up." "Uh, duh?"

**buildingsofdetroit** · September-18-09, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Armed with shovels and what one participant described as a "pair of shit-kickers," angry Detroit residents charged into Woodlawn Cemetery to dig up the body of long-dead Detroit Mayor Albert Cobo [[1950-1957) to give him a sound beating.

I've thought about going over to Holy Sepulchre Cemetery in Southfield to piss on Louis Miriani's grave as payback for tearing down Old City Hall. ...

**gnome** · September-18-09, 06:57 PM

He's not there anymore, I yanked his stinky ol behind out of there this afternoon, right after stomping the respect out of that fucker, Cobo.

"Reperations!" I screamed at both of them, "I demand REPERATIONS!" And you know what the pisser was? Neither one of those bastards had a good word to say about you either.

Ungrateful wretches.

**Fury13** · September-18-09, 07:42 PM

Cobo and Miriani were two of the most popular mayors that Detroit ever had.

Just sayin'...

**Novine** · September-18-09, 08:18 PM

"The freeways were NOT responsible for Detroit's decline. This is such revisionist B.S."

The direct impact of the freeways on neighborhoods was just one aspect of how freeways harmed Detroit in the long-term. The freeways helped facilitate the suburban sprawl that drew population out of the city and into the suburbs. It also sucked massive amounts of money away from maintaining and improving surface streets and transit. If even a percentage of that money had been put into transit lines and upgrading major city streets, Detroit would be a lot farther ahead than it is today. Instead, the freeways expedited the depopulation of Detroit while providing little in return.

2blocksaway · September-18-09, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Uh okay, we get it. You don't like public transportation [[though I have a hard time believing that you have much experience with it). Now what does that have to do with anything? Are you saying that Detroit is a better place without a good mass transit system?

You are right I haven't. However, every time I have taken the bus here or in another city it was a drag.

If given a choice I would choose driving myself over current public transportation, or fairy tale land nice, clean, affordable public transportation anytime. I'm a control freak. I like to determine when I can come and go not a schedule.

Why do you care anyway? You heart the D so much you moved half way across the country.

DetroitDad · September-18-09, 09:14 PM

Great thread!

However, we are playing chess not checkers. The big mistakes you mention got us here, but it was the job of the press or in some serious cases, the FBI, to hold people accountable, which they have done recently. The past blunders [[riots, horrible super projects, and the like) are not what keep us down today, and neither are issues like violent crime, poor schools, and vacant lots, those are symptoms.

First, DV and others, I mean no offence, but you are way off base about suburban developments, the East side, and the like, but that is really neither here nor there. The state of Detroit has little to do with poor urbanism, that is yet another symptom. In theory, the outer areas of Detroit could and should have been able to function just fine on the suburban model in the more recent past.

The REAL problem in Detroit is....

I went for a walk on the West side near Lonyo today with someone who was virtually a lifelong Detroiter who remembered that street in better days. Later I talked to another individual in the same general area. Both of them shared some things that I think echoed the real problem in Detroit, the root of our woes, and rjlj pretty much said the same thing in this post;

Originally Posted by rjlj

When you hire people like your friends and family and put people in charge who have no experience in urban and land use planning, Detroit at its present state is your result. Without a clear vision and master plan by educated planners, we will continue to have a city that is not built for people.

The problem is corruption, and Kwame in particular really put the nail in the coffin that will take a long time to undo. Many city planners and city employees in Detroit got their jobs because of family or friends, not because they were qualified... or even the best qualified. This opinion is told to me time and again by people who have worked along side those handout employees. These "handout employees" are described as lazy individuals who hate their jobs, and do as little work as possible, often getting away with pushing the real work on the already overwhelmed legitimate and desirable employees.

A strong root problem in Detroit is corruption, and this problem is even bigger when compounded with the higher ups who desire comfort. Again, one of these people today pointed out to me that some higher ups actually want Detroit to stay the way it is. These individuals like being the big fish in the small pond. If Detroit improved and grew, said big fish would soon be [[politically) just another fish in a much larger pond. We as a city and state need to be leery about who we trust, as many saviors just seem to enjoy being viewed as God's messenger.

Beyond that, legitimate projects and revitalization efforts are often met with a impenetrable wall of corruption. Many have been drawn to the prospect of rebuilding Detroit, some very knowledgeable and very talented individuals, and almost all have failed. They face that wall of corruption, as well as resistance by those who wish to keep Detroit just the way it is, whether because they want to be the big fish, or because they enjoy being able to break the law, or other such reasons.

**gnome** · September-18-09, 09:49 PM

DOD, how long have you lived here? 6 months? How old are you? 20 nothing? I have shoes older than you; and they have a better education.

**Gistok** · September-18-09, 10:12 PM

Although I can agree with some here that New Center was not Detroit's best idea... I can however understand why it was built.

Back in the 1920s Detroit was bursting at the seams. And downtown real estate was not only hot... it was sizzlingly hot. Prices had skyrocketted by 1920.

That's why when Durant was looking for a new HQ for GM in 1920, he couldn't find enough contiguous property downtown. So he built the GM HQ up in New Center. Ditto for the Fisher Brothers at the end of the 20s. They were looking for piece of land 3 times the size of the current Fisher Building site, to handle the eventual triple tower complex [[that never materialized), but a piece of land that size was just not available, except at outrageous prices.

Other developers downtown had similar problems. Theatre impressario John Kunsky found enough space at relatively reasonable prices to build the Adams [[1917), Madison [[1917) and Capitol [[1922) Theatres. But by 1925 when he was starting to develop the Michigan Building/Theatre, land prices went thru the roof, and he couldn't assemble enough land. The Michigan Building/Theatre only take up 80% of the block that it currently sits on. Original plans for the complex included a much larger building and theatre [[with a triple arch entry instead of a single arch entry that was built). But the 9 parcels on the block along Grand River refused to sell, except at inflated prices.

Only the Book brothers were able to develop as they pleased... and that was because they owned much of the land along Washington Blvd. Sadly for the Book brothers, it was the depression, and not land availability that was the demise for the 80 story Book Tower Annex.

So although we ask why they were so stupid in where they built many of Detroit's larger buildings... one has to remember that speculative land prices were a much greater problem back in the 1920s.

DetroitDad · September-18-09, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

Although I can agree with some here that New Center was not Detroit's best idea... I can however understand why it was built.

Back in the 1920s Detroit was bursting at the seams. And downtown real estate was not only hot... it was sizzlingly hot. Prices had skyrocketted by 1920.

That's why when Durant was looking for a new HQ for GM in 1920, he couldn't find enough contiguous property downtown. So he built the GM HQ up in New Center. Ditto for the Fisher Brothers at the end of the 20s. They were looking for piece of land 3 times the size of the current Fisher Building site, to hanlde the eventual triple tower complex [[that never materialized), but a piece of land that size was just not available, except at outrageous prices.

Other developers downtown had similar problems. Theatre impressario John Kunsky found enough space at relatively reasonable prices to build the Adams [[1917), Madison [[1917) and Capitol [[1922) Theatres. But by 1925 when he was starting to develop the Michigan Building/Theatre, land prices went thru the roof, and he couldn't assemble enough land. The Michigan Building/Theatre only take up 80% of the block that it currently sits on. Original plans for the complex included a much larger building and theatre [[with a triple arch entry instead of a single arch entry that was built). But the 9 parcels on the block along Grand River refused to sell, except at inflated prices.

Only the Book brothers were able to develop as they pleased... and that was because they owned much of the land along Washington Blvd. Sadly for the Book brothers, it was the depession, and not land availability that was the demise for the 80 story Book Tower Annex.

So although we ask why they were so stupid in where they built many of Detroit's larger buildings... one has to remember that speculative land prices were a much greater problem back in the 1920s.

Very intriguing Gistok, with that in mind you can definitely see why they thought the area between many of these buildings would fill in much more than it has.

**iheartthed** · September-19-09, 06:21 AM

Originally Posted by 2blocksaway

You are right I haven't. However, every time I have taken the bus here or in another city it was a drag.

If given a choice I would choose driving myself over current public transportation, or fairy tale land nice, clean, affordable public transportation anytime. I'm a control freak. I like to determine when I can come and go not a schedule.
.

You don't need a schedule with a good public transportation system.

**Fury13** · September-19-09, 07:34 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

You don't need a schedule with a good public transportation system.

Exactly. Frequency is the key to any good transit system. In NYC or Chicago, you usually don't have to wait any more than 10 minutes for a train.

**iheartthed** · September-19-09, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by Fury13

Exactly. Frequency is the key to any good transit system. In NYC or Chicago, you usually don't have to wait any more than 10 minutes for a train.

And 10 minutes is a LONG time to wait for a train in NYC unless it's the middle of the night. But in Detroit waiting only 10 minutes for a bus is considered good.

**tangerine** · September-20-09, 10:53 PM

If you want to truly understand the sociopaths who built post war Detroit and its suburbs, stand to the West of Cobo Hall by Joe Louis and behold the Habitrail pedestrian walkways over a sea of concrete and overpasses. To me it represents a mindset where the road and the automobile are completey supreme to the pedestrian. The pedestrian walways remind me of those overhead conveyors in factories for moving matrials from one location to the other. Ths is how I think the little auto-men of 1950 Detroit looked at people. May they and their mayor Cobo burn in hell.

**Detroitnerd** · September-21-09, 09:12 AM

Down with the Cobo Canals!

**daddeeo** · September-21-09, 10:12 AM

Rehashing the past is just a waste of time these days. Finding solutions to current problems is the way to go.
Cursing the past [[darkness) doesn't bring us out into the light.

**Detroitnerd** · September-21-09, 10:39 AM

Haha. That's like a family that's tens of thousands of dollars in debt, homeless, and hooked on drugs saying, "Let's not examine our past mistakes. Let's just go, charge some groceries, cop a fix, and find a bridge to sleep under. The past is in the past. We just gotta make it through today."

Retroit · September-21-09, 12:24 PM

Are the expressways entirely to blame for Detroit's decline? If the expressways were never built, would the exodus from Detroit have been prevented?

Let's go back in time before the expressways to the days of the interurban. Many Detroiters were drawn to live outside the city because of exposure provided by the interurban. Let's say that instead of building expressways, an extensive interurban system was built. Would this have been less of a means for exodus?

I propose that the exodus from Detroit would have occurred regardless of the expressways and regardless of the interurban. Detroiters would have left if they had to leave on a donkey down a dirt road.

Detroiters didn't leave because of a failure of Civic Planning. They left because there was a demand for their housing from blacks that were moving into Detroit from the South coupled with the availability of cheap land outside the city. And, unlike New York or Chicago, there was not enough commercial activity to make living there advantageous.

If an expressway was built through lower Manhattan, it would still be a densely populated city because it is the largest city in the most prosperous country on Earth and is the main financial and commercial hub of the planet. Reduce it to one industry, import millions of blacks from Haiti, and watch the people flee the city... by subway.