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

[iheartthed]

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.

This is interesting. Where in Queens did you live? With the exception of Staten Island [[which doesn't really count), Queens is probably the borough of NYC that most resembles Metro Detroit. And that's because a lot of it was built to be more suburban/car-oriented.

[Detroitnerd]

This is interesting. Where in Queens did you live? With the exception of Staten Island [[which doesn't really count), Queens is probably the borough of NYC that most resembles Metro Detroit. And that's because a lot of it was built to be more suburban/car-oriented.

I know. Well, maybe he saw some black people and started freaking the fuck out.

[bailey]

This is what happens when you try to bring up regionalism, talk about working together, and explaining why cities and suburbs have a common destiny.

Until "regionalism" stops meaning "Oakland, Macomb, and the rest of Wayne county needs to send us money and not get all up in our business about how we spend it"....it's going to be a hard sell that there is any "common" in that destiny.

[ghettopalmetto]

The point is that our regional plan is to have great suburbs and let the inner city waste away. The old suburban game of blaming Detroiters for the state of Detroit is a silly one.

If I may ask a silly question: What, exactly, makes a "great" suburb? Do you need to have a certain number of Pulte Homes? Is there a certain minimum of pretentious chain stores a suburb must have to be "great"? Are there demographic and income requirements, such as "Six Figures Only" and "Less than 10% Darkies"?

I ask because Detroit's "great" suburbs look pretty much like suburbs anywhere else. I'm just trying to learn why, if Detroit's suburbs are terrific, the kids from those suburbs are still going to college and leaving the state for places like Chicago.

[bailey]

I ask because Detroit's "great" suburbs look pretty much like suburbs anywhere else. I'm just trying to learn why, if Detroit's suburbs are terrific, the kids from those suburbs are still going to college and leaving the state for places like Chicago.

Because they know that the Redetroits [[those that prefer suburbs to cities) outnumber them here by probably a 10-1 margin and, as someone said on the first page of this thread... if you need a "real city" to be happy you need to move to one, because Detroit will never again be one.

[casscorridor]

Regional planning could enable us to concentrate resources toward the center of the metro region... Detroit. New corporate headquarters could be located there. Railroads could be restored, transit build, new infrastructure to enable businesses and industry to set up shop quick and cheap. New housing, shops, services, schools and parks. Everything could be within a 5-10 minute walk, and if not every housing unit would still be within15min walk to a transit station that could take you to anywhere you need to go--school, work, shopping, fun.

This is the lifestyle suburban communities are desperately trying to emulate. They have an advantage at this point, because of their wealth [[better schools, less crime, etc). But that wealth will slowly erode, as will the shoddy buildings that were only built to last 30 years.

A rebirth of Detroit is coming. I feel sorry for those who will be stuck or forced to the suburbs.

[Detroitnerd]

Until "regionalism" stops meaning "Oakland, Macomb, and the rest of Wayne county needs to send us money and not get all up in our business about how we spend it"....it's going to be a hard sell that there is any "common" in that destiny.

Oh, yes. We have a common destiny. We rise or sink as a region. To people around the country, or businesses shopping for a location, you don't live in Bingham Farms, Van Buren Township or Independence. You live in Detroit.

That defensive attitude is no place to start talking about regionalism. People in the city, the inner-ring burbs, the outer-ring burbs and the exurbs will all have to examine some things that make them uncomfortable. But the end product is worth it: An integrated, fully functioning region. [[By 2050, maybe.)

[iheartthed]

Because they know that the Redetroits [[those that prefer suburbs to cities) outnumber them here by probably a 10-1 margin and, as someone said on the first page of this thread... if you need a "real city" to be happy you need to move to one, because Detroit will never again be one.

The hundreds of thousands of people who move away from or avoid moving to Michigan agree.

What will be the difference between Michigan and Mississippi in 10 years?

[Detroitnerd]

If I may ask a silly question: What, exactly, makes a "great" suburb? Do you need to have a certain number of Pulte Homes? Is there a certain minimum of pretentious chain stores a suburb must have to be "great"? Are their demographic and income requirements, such as "Six Figures Only" and "Less than 10% Darkies"?

Hahaha! Yeah, with minimum setbacks, obnoxious community association rules, three house styles, and a big sign to herald your entrance to the sub, right next to the passing lane where the trucks scream by at 80 mph! Yeah, and maybe with just enough darkies to salve the occasional liberal conscience. America, baby!

Just kidding, of course. A great suburb, huh? Well, I'd say that the greatest suburbs were built before the Depression. Or at least the streets were laid out at that time. Denser, more walkable, and with fuller potential. I'm thinking Dearborn, Birmingham, Ferndale. Given the way things are going, the city with the best potential in Macomb County could be Mount Clemens. [[Too bad they knocked down the black end of town, though. I'd be pissed if they tore down my neighborhood and then built a fuckin' courthouse on it.)

I ask because Detroit's "great" suburbs look pretty much like suburbs anywhere else. I'm just trying to learn why, if Detroit's suburbs are terrific, the kids from those suburbs are still going to college and leaving the state for places like Chicago.

Yeah, some are great [[IMHO) and some are not-so-great. The ones with the brightest future are probably places with a sense of history and that walkable scale that comes from pre-Depression design. Dining and entertainment choices don't hurt. A sense of place, some connection to the past, only makes a place better.

I guess that when you say "great suburbs," most people think you're talking about a sub in Troy with a lake or a stream in it, just off the highway, with massive homes and shit like that. Actually, I don't think the long-term prognosis is too good for those neighborhoods. It's worse still for the Clinton Townships of the region. Some people move away and come back [[like me), enjoying the sense of place, memory, community, family that comes with home. And I do enjoy my humble life on the border of Hamtramck and Detroit. But I don't think anybody will ever want to return to a place like Clinton Township after a taste of the world. There's no there there.

[Detroitnerd]

Because they know that the Redetroits [[those that prefer suburbs to cities) outnumber them here by probably a 10-1 margin and, as someone said on the first page of this thread... if you need a "real city" to be happy you need to move to one, because Detroit will never again be one.

Thanks to our insistence that the city is the problem, not a region of scores of governments all scrambling for dwindling resources.

[crawford]

Regional planning could enable us to concentrate resources toward the center of the metro region... Detroit. New corporate headquarters could be located there. Railroads could be restored, transit build, new infrastructure to enable businesses and industry to set up shop quick and cheap. New housing, shops, services, schools and parks. Everything could be within a 5-10 minute walk, and if not every housing unit would still be within15min walk to a transit station that could take you to anywhere you need to go--school, work, shopping, fun.

This is the lifestyle suburban communities are desperately trying to emulate. They have an advantage at this point, because of their wealth [[better schools, less crime, etc). But that wealth will slowly erode, as will the shoddy buildings that were only built to last 30 years.

A rebirth of Detroit is coming. I feel sorry for those who will be stuck or forced to the suburbs.

Eh, no.

The center of the region is in the suburbs. Welcome to 2009.

Downtown Detroit is far from the middle and professional classes, and sits on an international frontier.

If there ever is a recentering of the region, it's highly doubtful it would occur in the historic center, and far more likely it would occur in the current functional center, which would be well outside city limits.

[Detroitnerd]

Eh, no.

The center of the region is in the suburbs. Welcome to 2009.

Downtown Detroit is far from the middle and professional classes, and sits on an international frontier.

If there ever is a recentering of the region, it's highly doubtful it would occur in the historic center, and far more likely it would occur in the current functional center, which would be well outside city limits.

Hahahaha! Get back to me when gas is $10 a gallon.

[crawford]

Hahahaha! Get back to me when gas is $10 a gallon.

If that somehow were to occur, it would most harm places that are far from employment.

Detroit is far from most employment centers, so would be among the hardest hit.

One would be best off in places like Troy and Auburn Hills. That's where the jobs are.

[Detroitnerd]

If that somehow were to occur, it would most harm places that are far from employment.

Detroit is far from most employment centers, so would be among the hardest hit.

One would be best off in places like Troy and Auburn Hills. That's where the jobs are.

Actually, if that were true, it would also harm the places where driving a car every day for long distances was vital to day-to-day survival. You know. Places like Troy and Auburn Hills. Places where you can't buy a goddamn stamp without putting five miles on your odometer.

[crawford]

Actually, if that were true, it would also harm the places where driving a car every day for long distances was vital to day-to-day survival. You know. Places like Troy and Auburn Hills. Places where you can't buy a goddamn stamp without putting five miles on your odometer.

True, $10 gas would harm those places. But Detroit would be even worse off.

For most folks, one would be worse off to live at 6 Mile & Livernois than to live at Big Beaver & Rochester Rd. There are no employment centers proximate to 6 Mile & Livernois.

Driving a car every day for long distances is vital for day-to-day survival for the vast majority of Detroiters. Detroit is a city of cars and single family homes. It isn't NYC, Paris or Hong Kong.

[Retroit]

Detroitnerd: "We all know that our regional vision is to treat Detroit as a repository for everything bad so that the other areas stay good."

Yeah, the suburbs round up all the criminal, homeless, and other undesirables and drop them off in Detroit. Then they go around and disassemble all the burnt-out and dilapidated homes and rebuild them in Detroit. Then they go into Detroit and randomly build expressways just to prevent "density". Then they appoint corrupt politicians to run Detroit. Then they break into CAY Building in the middle of the night and steal all the money.

That explains everything.

[Retroit]

If I may ask a silly question: What, exactly, makes a "great" suburb? Do you need to have a certain number of Pulte Homes? Is there a certain minimum of pretentious chain stores a suburb must have to be "great"? Are there demographic and income requirements, such as "Six Figures Only" and "Less than 10% Darkies"?

I know you know the real answer and are only trying to denigrate the suburbs in an attempt to feel more justified in putting up with living in Detroit, but I will respectfully provide you with accurate answers so that it is blaring clear that you are not fooling anyone:

A great suburb has little to do with transportation choices, little to do with the number of types of homes, little to do with the number and type of stores, little to do with the income, and little to do with the color of skin. It has much more to do with how people live, how they conduct themselves, how they treat other people, how they take care of their homes, how they raise their children, etc. The City of Detroit can be a great place to live, whether it looks like the suburbs or looks like Manhattan, it all depends on the people. However, the chances of it becoming anywhere close to Manhattan is impossible, and the chances of it looking just like the suburbs has been lost due to how the people live.

I ask because Detroit's "great" suburbs look pretty much like suburbs anywhere else.

And at one time, Detroit [[outside of downtown) looked a lot like the suburbs. And people enjoyed living there.

I'm just trying to learn why, if Detroit's suburbs are terrific, the kids from those suburbs are still going to college and leaving the state for places like Chicago.

Kids go to wherever the colleges are located. Some suburban kids even go into the city to go to college [[shock). Why do they leave after college? Well, if they can't get a job here due to the decline in the auto industry, they start looking elsewhere. Chicago and New York have a lot more job opportunities because they are home to a lot more corporations. They would move there whether those cities were filled with high-rises or boring single family homes.

[ghettopalmetto]

I think some people are prematurely writing Detroit's epitaph in favor of places like Troy and Southfield. Detroit was founded where it is for a reason, and those reasons still exist. You have a city that sits on a major waterway, is at the confluence of highway and railroad networks, and sits on an international boundary. Never mind that Detroit has at least as good of connectivity to its neighbors, Ann Arbor and Toledo, which has potential to build economic synergy. These are not unimportant characteristics to casually dismiss.

In my opinion, the days of the suburbs are numbered, even in a white collar culture. Why would one drive an hour each way to a meeting if he could take a cab a few blocks, or God forbid, walk?

I'm trying to throw some food for thought out there. Retroit should take solace in knowing that cities that do provide diverse housing stock, walkable neighborhoods, and higher density are very desirable these days. The evidence is in the housing prices, such as when the outer suburbs of Northern Virginia tanked much sooner and faster than comparable homes in the District of Columbia. Detroit needs to make itself open for business and capitalize on its natural advantages. Copying the suburbs just isn't going to cut it--the people who want to live in those suburbs have spoken with their feet and their wallet, and aren't going to move into Detroit just because it looks and feels the same as where they currently live and work.

[bailey]

I think some people are prematurely writing Detroit's epitaph in favor of places like Troy and Southfield. Detroit was founded where it is for a reason, and those reasons still exist.

It was founded as a military outpost and trading post. It's proximity to navigable waterways made it an industrial hub as most goods were shipped by boat. How many wharfs, docks and factories are on the water in Detroit theses days? It last incarnation was as a car manufacturing center. How many plants are still in Detroit? Two?

You have a city that sits on a major waterway, is at the confluence of highway and railroad networks, and sits on an international boundary. Never mind that Detroit has at least as good of connectivity to its neighbors, Ann Arbor and Toledo, which has potential to build economic synergy. These are not unimportant characteristics to casually dismiss.

well, the control of that international boundary is, for all intents and purposes, in the control of a private citizen for his own gain. I think the areas around the bridge might differ on whether or not having it there is a good thing. Of the three cities, Detroit Toledo and Ann Arbor, the only one thriving is the one NOT located on the waterway, and confluence of rail networks of which you speak. It's thriving because it is as disconnected from the dying manufacturing industry as it possibly can be in this state. However, take away the gigantic state subsidized Uof M, and you'd have the Mt Clemens of Washtenaw county.

In my opinion, the days of the suburbs are numbered, even in a white collar culture. Why would one drive an hour each way to a meeting if he could take a cab a few blocks, or God forbid, walk?

That presupposes the suburbs will not become more "urban" in nature. Downtown Birmingham is walkable..restaurants, condos, and offices galore. Downtown Royal Oak, similar and growing. Dearborn the same....etc. Yes, exurbs are silly, but to say that Detroit MUST come back is ignoring the fact that most of the region has moved beyond needing Detroit as the regional Downtown and have been busily building their own.

Retroit should take solace in knowing that cities that do provide diverse housing stock, walkable neighborhoods, and higher density are very desirable these days. The evidence is in the housing prices, such as when the outer suburbs of Northern Virginia tanked much sooner and faster than comparable homes in the District of Columbia

That is all well and good, but I would contend that DC was always the center of the region and the result you cite is simply the artificial real estate bubble bursting and normalcy returning. If this area ever recovers, what property is going to come back to peak? Indian village or Birmingham?

Detroit needs to make itself open for business and capitalize on its natural advantages.

I agree that Detroit needs to radically overhaul how it does business. But, natural advantages, what natural advantages? access to 19th century modes of shipping? early 20th century architecture? a vast and easily used mass transit system? great schools? educated workforce?
The problem with Detroit is it has virtually nothing to offer the vast majority of those that live here.

Copying the suburbs just isn't going to cut it--the people who want to live in those suburbs have spoken with their feet and their wallet, and aren't going to move into Detroit just because it looks and feels the same as where they currently live and work.

The hilarous part and the part that illustrates Detroit's regional irrelevance is what I said above, all those evil suburban communities are embracing the urbanist planning philosophy. Cities that had no real downtowns are either building them or trying to...with varying levels of success. What no one is doing is considering Detroit as an alternative.

[ghettopalmetto]

Bailey, you ever hear of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Bo said it the best, "What the mind can believe, the body can achieve, and those who stay will be champions."

Unfortunately, it seems that Detroit's biggest export of late is Excuses. So much for that blue collar work ethic, huh?

I guess I'm just curious to know how, if Detroit is completely irrelevant, how you propose to pay for the utilities and roadways in Detroit. How you propose to integrate 800,000+ people into the economy, when a third of them do not have adequate transportation. How you intend to have clean water to drink. How you intend to achieve any sort of critical density necessary for conducting business--density that East Coast cities have in spades over suburban Detroit's entertainment-oriented "downtowns".

[bailey]

Bailey, you ever hear of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Bo said it the best, "What the mind can believe, the body can achieve, and those who stay will be champions

.
What is that? The "Secret"? I'll tell you what you "believe" that Detroit can recover...and I'll live here. Let's see who's prediction comes true.

Also, It's appropriate to quote Bo when talking about futility. By national measures of success Bo failed miserably and repeatedly. I never really got the chest thumping over going 5-12 in Rose Bowl appearances, winning no national titles, but racking up a hellava a lot of wins over craptastic competition. Although, I suppose that is as good a Detroit metaphor as any.

Unfortunately, it seems that Detroit's biggest export of late is Excuses. So much for that blue collar work ethic, huh?

Detroits biggest export is blame and a culture of entitlement and victimhood.

Frankly what detroit needs is a massive, cleansing fire or some other natural disaster so the rebuilding can begin from scratch.

I guess I'm just curious to know how, if Detroit is completely irrelevant, how you propose to pay for the utilities and roadways in Detroit. How you propose to integrate 800,000+ people into the economy, when a third of them do not have adequate transportation.

They are already integrated into the economy...regardless of Detroit's complete failure. Are you claiming that all 800k live and work within Detroit? I'm simply saying Detroit is not the default center of the region anymore and likely never will be again.

I know this is anecdotal, however; of those that I know that still work downtown each one of them talks about how nice it would be to work closer to home.... not live closer to work.

How you intend to have clean water to drink

The same way it's provided now... by a Federal Judge. or it could be privatized. There is no reason Detroit MUST run it. The GPs have their own water. Other communities do and other could build their own, they simply don't because it's cost prohibitive.

How you intend to achieve any sort of critical density necessary for conducting business--density that East Coast cities have in spades over suburban Detroit's entertainment-oriented "downtowns".

Oakland county conducts business pretty well and it's not very dense. My position is that Detroit WILL NEVER BE competitive with East Coast cities. Detroit will never be Chicago, Boston or New York. It is what it is. It's not going to change.

[Detroitnerd]

AT REGIONAL SUMMIT, NO COURSE OF ACTION DECIDED

DETROIT, 2012: Finally, metro Detroit's leaders have come together to search for answers to the region's failures. With unemployment estimated at 30 percent in the city, and foreclosures and job losses plaguing the suburbs, the situation has become a regional problem, needing regional solutions.

Faced with mounting foreclosures, tighter budgets and threatened bond ratings, even the communities of Oakland County are feeling the pinch these days, prompting the get-together to discuss real region-wide solutions to metro Detroit's difficulties.

Among the solutions to come out of this confab, some were truly visionary and interesting. One suburban spokesperson floated the most successful idea of the meeting, pertaining to the city: "Frankly what Detroit needs is a massive, cleansing fire or some other natural disaster so the rebuilding can begin from scratch."

Though the leaders put their heads together for several hours trying to dream up a way to have a Hurricane Katrina-style disaster hit Detroit, thereby killing hundreds of thousands of "uncooperative" residents and destroying the city entirely, rebuilding it as office parks, subdivisions and 20-lane freeways. The suburban cohort at various times erupted in applause.

One speaker proposed that the death and destruction of the approximately 300,000 families that live within city limits would produce something wonderful. "Detroit's biggest export is blame and a culture of entitlement and victimhood," the speaker cried to thunderous cheering. "By destroying the city, we'll be free from all that whining and all those freeloading blacks!"On the Detroit side of the convention floor, the participants scowled and frowned, although the proposal did elicit some mild applause from DDA mover George Jackson.

"They say we need a downtown!" the speaker continued. "We don't need no stinkin' downtown! We have everything the region needs, fast food huts, super malls, mini malls, power centers, and acres and acres of chemically treated lawns as far as the eye can see. Our regional solution should be what it has always been, to rid the region of the most backward city in the nation! We need to destroy Detroit and build it up as a successful suburban city."

But after discussing various ideas to destroy the city, ranging from seeding hurricanes, surrounding the city with flood walls and damming the river to flood it, or just declaring the city a Superfund site and bulldozing it entirely, the negotiations broke down because city leaders would not assent to the idea.

One suburban leader cried: "This is the sort of obstructionist nonsense that prevents us from moving forward as a region! All we want to do is demolish the city and kill -- what? -- probably less than half of the city's residents. And all the city leaders can think to say is, 'No!' Damn you ni---, er, ninnies!"

SATIRE SATIRE SATIRE SATIRE

[iheartthed]

It was founded as a military outpost and trading post. It's proximity to navigable waterways made it an industrial hub as most goods were shipped by boat. How many wharfs, docks and factories are on the water in Detroit theses days? It last incarnation was as a car manufacturing center. How many plants are still in Detroit? Two?
well, the control of that international boundary is, for all intents and purposes, in the control of a private citizen for his own gain. I think the areas around the bridge might differ on whether or not having it there is a good thing. Of the three cities, Detroit Toledo and Ann Arbor, the only one thriving is the one NOT located on the waterway, and confluence of rail networks of which you speak. It's thriving because it is as disconnected from the dying manufacturing industry as it possibly can be in this state. However, take away the gigantic state subsidized Uof M, and you'd have the Mt Clemens of Washtenaw county.

That presupposes the suburbs will not become more "urban" in nature. Downtown Birmingham is walkable..restaurants, condos, and offices galore. Downtown Royal Oak, similar and growing. Dearborn the same....etc. Yes, exurbs are silly, but to say that Detroit MUST come back is ignoring the fact that most of the region has moved beyond needing Detroit as the regional Downtown and have been busily building their own.

That is all well and good, but I would contend that DC was always the center of the region and the result you cite is simply the artificial real estate bubble bursting and normalcy returning. If this area ever recovers, what property is going to come back to peak? Indian village or Birmingham?
I agree that Detroit needs to radically overhaul how it does business. But, natural advantages, what natural advantages? access to 19th century modes of shipping? early 20th century architecture? a vast and easily used mass transit system? great schools? educated workforce?
The problem with Detroit is it has virtually nothing to offer the vast majority of those that live here.
The hilarous part and the part that illustrates Detroit's regional irrelevance is what I said above, all those evil suburban communities are embracing the urbanist planning philosophy. Cities that had no real downtowns are either building them or trying to...with varying levels of success. What no one is doing is considering Detroit as an alternative.

So let me follow you. The characteristics that made Detroit city proper a relevant city and economic powerhouse no longer apply. Thus, the region no longer "needs" Detroit. Okay, I get that [[not that I agree).

But if the resources that made Detroit a relevant city are no longer relevant, then isn't the same true of the entire region? What else is there to keep the suburbs afloat other than a rapidly shrinking industry?

[bailey]

But if the resources that made Detroit a relevant city are no longer relevant, then isn't the same true of the entire region? What else is there to keep the suburbs afloat other than a rapidly shrinking industry?

Nothing. which is my point. The region will likely massively shrink, eventually settle to a natural equilibrium and become just another backwater, 4th tier, has-been region.

I'm not advocating for it, I'm just pointing out reality.

Among the solutions to come out of this confab, some were truly visionary and interesting. One suburban spokesperson floated the most successful idea of the meeting, pertaining to the city: "Frankly what Detroit needs is a massive, cleansing fire or some other natural disaster so the rebuilding can begin from scratch."

Excuse me.. .by "Detroit" I was speaking of the international family of communities., not just Detroit proper.

50 years of retarded regional urban planning are not going to be reversed by a street level people mover on Woodward that might get built 25 years from now.

[ghettopalmetto]

Given how many billions and billions of dollars--federal, state, local, and private--have been invested in Detroit and Southeast Michigan, I simply don't find Bailey's "solution" to be plausible. It's the intellectually lazy way out. No one is going to build from scratch if you can extract value from sunk costs. It'd be like paying off your mortgage and then destroying your house. It doesn't make a lick of sense.