Next stop: Oakland?: Suburbs study expansion of Woodward rail

[Warrenite84]

I think the LRT system would minimally impact cars using the Michigan Lefts by running on both northbound and southbound inside curb lanes.

How was it situated in the thru-way prior to 1956 when we had streetcars?

Great job for Oakland County communities being proactive in investigating a possible LRT expansion.

[professorscott]

How was it situated in the thru-way prior to 1956 when we had streetcars?

In the middle of the street, which is likely how any northern extension would look if we did it nowadays. And somehow, all the motorists and pedestrians were able to figure it out

[Russix]

Now someone just needs to lobby the M1 Rail group to change their stance from "local" economic development tool to "regional" economic development tool and maybe we'll see some real progress.

[KOMPOST]

http://www.freep.com/article/2011080...yssey=nav|head

I always make the mistake of reading the comments following a Free Press/News article and subsequently lose all faith in regional humanity.
I realize these people aren't completely representative of the area, but I can't help but link these nay-sayers' attitude to L Brooks' comment that "if it does happen it will be by the will of the people".

[Scottathew]

lol keep dreaming.

Wake up to reality, people don't dream of working "downtown" as much as the extreme outer fringe on this board think 99% of the population want to.

I see your point. Folks think Detroit is a lost cause. They're wrong though. Things are changing, and private sector leaders are leading. Big names are bringing jobs and dollars downtown.

I have one of those jobs that got moved downtown. I was excited about it from the beginning, and so were most of my co-workers. The only folks that were not thrilled were the ones that live really far away.

Things have really changed down here in the last year. Restaurants are opening. Street food vendors have setup shop this summer. There's a lot more people down here. Buildings are being scooped up by some of the big players and are being renovated. I think BCBS, DTE, and Quicken have thousands more they're going to bring down.

It's just a start, and there's a long way to go. But for the first time in a long time, things are getting better.

[brizee]

I always make the mistake of reading the comments following a Free Press/News article and subsequently lose all faith in regional humanity.
I realize these people aren't completely representative of the area, but I can't help but link these nay-sayers' attitude to L Brooks' comment that "if it does happen it will be by the will of the people".

The Freep is the absolute worst when it comes to comments.

Freep<Detnews<<<MLive<<<Crains

And the worst part is they tiptoe around their bile.

Just say it. They don't want a bunch of niggers in their neighborhood in any shape form or fashion. You have the brass balls to broadcast the sentiment don't pussy out on the actual words.

[jsmyers]

The blue lines represent areas that are within 1/2 mile walking distance of stops at 11 Mile and 12 Mile roads.

How did you calculate these network distances? Did you do it manually for each line you drew with Google maps, or is there a tool you used?

[Bham1982]

Things have really changed down here in the last year. Restaurants are opening. Street food vendors have setup shop this summer. There's a lot more people down here. Buildings are being scooped up by some of the big players and are being renovated. I think BCBS, DTE, and Quicken have thousands more they're going to bring down.

It's just a start, and there's a long way to go. But for the first time in a long time, things are getting better.

As long as DYes has been in existence, these sentiments have been repeated.

Detroit is always "on the cusp" and "about to change" and "gonna make it this time". The downtown potemkin village is supposedly always on the very edge of self-sufficiency.

And the strongest proponents of these sentiments are folks who haven't been around all that long to see the region's ups and downs.

If we had DYes 20 years ago, we would hear the exact sentiments. A progressive new Mayor Archer, three casinos on the waterfront, new downtown stadia, a proposed downtown shopping mall, a revitalized and fast-growing Foxtown, multiple new downtown office towers [[150 West Jefferson, Comerica Tower), etc. etc.

Really the only consistent regional trend over the last 60 years has been the implosion of the core and the expansion of the fringe. As of right now, I see no evidence that these trends have reversed.

[iheartthed]

Really the only consistent regional trend over the last 60 years has been the implosion of the core and the expansion of the fringe. As of right now, I see no evidence that these trends have reversed.

I agree with the first part. Disagree with the second. Two things are different: 1) the easy credit that spurred cheap development on the fringe is a thing of the past, 2) Michigan has a governor who seems cognizant of the true cost of sprawl. When/if Metro Detroit does start to grow again, I doubt it will be on the fringe. And other than the fringe, the only other area with room to grow is Detroit itself.

[Novine]

The sprawl machine isn't dead. It's been showing some signs of life out here in the 'burbs. But the end of the days of cheap credit, cheap gas and government subsidized development may keep it from spreading even further out into the outer rings of Metro Detroit.

[BrushStart]

As long as DYes has been in existence, these sentiments have been repeated.

Detroit is always "on the cusp" and "about to change" and "gonna make it this time". The downtown potemkin village is supposedly always on the very edge of self-sufficiency.

And the strongest proponents of these sentiments are folks who haven't been around all that long to see the region's ups and downs.

If we had DYes 20 years ago, we would hear the exact sentiments. A progressive new Mayor Archer, three casinos on the waterfront, new downtown stadia, a proposed downtown shopping mall, a revitalized and fast-growing Foxtown, multiple new downtown office towers [[150 West Jefferson, Comerica Tower), etc. etc.

Really the only consistent regional trend over the last 60 years has been the implosion of the core and the expansion of the fringe. As of right now, I see no evidence that these trends have reversed.

You say this as if it is some glorious accomplishment. I think that's why I usually disagree with you. It's not because you are always wrong, it's because you always seem smug about it.

[mwilbert]

Really the only consistent regional trend over the last 60 years has been the implosion of the core and the expansion of the fringe. As of right now, I see no evidence that these trends have reversed.

I don't think that there is much evidence that the trends have reversed, but there are some things that are different and which could herald a change. There are more people living downtown. There is a swing away from owning property toward renting it. An ever-smaller percentage of families have children. It appears people are reaching their limits in terms of how much time they are willing to spend driving.

But it is a mistake to say a trend is over until there is a significant and fairly protracted movement in a different direction, and that certainly hasn't happened in metro Detroit.

[ghettopalmetto]

I don't think that there is much evidence that the trends have reversed, but there are some things that are different and which could herald a change. There are more people living downtown.

I really despise that word "trend". It seems to imply some sort of inevitable, unstoppable cause that just goes in whatever direction it feels like...

...rather than the outcome of conscientious and intentional decisions made by people.

[mwilbert]

You don't have to like it, but trends exist. Of course they can be affected by decisions made by people, but only if those people make different decisions, and people's preferences don't seem to change that quickly. On the other hand, generally people don't have to follow the trend if they don't want to, so feel free not to live in Independence Township if you don't want to. I know I'm not.

[hudkina]

How did you calculate these network distances? Did you do it manually for each line you drew with Google maps, or is there a tool you used?

I did it manually. It took about 15 minutes.

[ghettopalmetto]

You don't have to like it, but trends exist. Of course they can be affected by decisions made by people, but only if those people make different decisions, and people's preferences don't seem to change that quickly. On the other hand, generally people don't have to follow the trend if they don't want to, so feel free not to live in Independence Township if you don't want to. I know I'm not.

I don't disagree. But I think it's ridiculous to discuss the "trend" of suburbanization when in reality, it's been the only legal pattern of development since the end of World War II.

A "trend" implies that there are multiple options, and that a preference is given in one direction or another. The word "trend", by definition, cannot be applied to a socialistic policy manifesto applied universally without forum for public input or decision-making.

It's like saying that the "trend" of the 1920s was for people to purchase black Model T's, as opposed to the white, brown, blue, red, and purple Model T's.

[Detroitnerd]

Self-fulfilling Prophecy Central.

[jsmyers]

I did it manually. It took about 15 minutes.

Great job. If you've got to do a few of those, manually doesn't cut it, but for a one-off demonstration, it works ok.

[mwilbert]

It's like saying that the "trend" of the 1920s was for people to purchase black Model T's, as opposed to the white, brown, blue, red, and purple Model T's.

I think the trend in the 20s was to buy a Chevy. In any case, just because there is a reason for a trend, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And only half of Bham1982's trend was mandated--new housing had to be suburban, but there wasn't any legal reason the center had to hollow out.

[ghettopalmetto]

I think the trend in the 20s was to buy a Chevy. In any case, just because there is a reason for a trend, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. And only half of Bham1982's trend was mandated--new housing had to be suburban, but there wasn't any legal reason the center had to hollow out.

Unless you subscribe to the laws of mathematics and economics, that is.

Stop being so intentionally obtuse.

[majohnson]

As long as DYes has been in existence, these sentiments have been repeated.

Detroit is always "on the cusp" and "about to change" and "gonna make it this time". The downtown potemkin village is supposedly always on the very edge of self-sufficiency.

And the strongest proponents of these sentiments are folks who haven't been around all that long to see the region's ups and downs.

If we had DYes 20 years ago, we would hear the exact sentiments. A progressive new Mayor Archer, three casinos on the waterfront, new downtown stadia, a proposed downtown shopping mall, a revitalized and fast-growing Foxtown, multiple new downtown office towers [[150 West Jefferson, Comerica Tower), etc. etc.

Really the only consistent regional trend over the last 60 years has been the implosion of the core and the expansion of the fringe. As of right now, I see no evidence that these trends have reversed.

One thing has changed,
More people value urban living and expect it in lower tier metro areas across the US.

[mwilbert]

Unless you subscribe to the laws of mathematics and economics, that is.

Stop being so intentionally obtuse.

I don't think I'm the one being obtuse. Just because suburbs were developed didn't mean the core city had to hollow out. There are many more people now than there were in 1950. The laws mandating suburban style development didn't hollow out all the other cities in America; and certainly not to the extent of Detroit.

[DetroitPlanner]

The sprawl machine isn't dead. It's been showing some signs of life out here in the 'burbs. But the end of the days of cheap credit, cheap gas and government subsidized development may keep it from spreading even further out into the outer rings of Metro Detroit.

A shrinking population in the region makes additional development further out much more riskier than it once was. In many cases infastructure needs upgrading to handle the additional needs for water, sewer, and transportation. On a positive note, it also means there are more opportunities for infill when development does occur. One example of this is Kohls who has not opened a store around here in recent years has announced they are putting one in a the once derelict Livonia mall. This store is only about 2.25 miles from the Detroit city limit.

[ghettopalmetto]

I don't think I'm the one being obtuse. Just because suburbs were developed didn't mean the core city had to hollow out. There are many more people now than there were in 1950. The laws mandating suburban style development didn't hollow out all the other cities in America; and certainly not to the extent of Detroit.

Then you, sir, simply haven't travelled very much around this country of ours.

Detroit may have suffered a greater exodus than most other cities. But then again, many other cities retained their extensive networks of public transportation, which made urban living more convenient. Many other cities have geography that doesn't allow for endless expansion in all directions. And many other cities don't have such fragmented--and competing--parochial interests in their region.

But to play the "Woe-is-poor-Detroit" card, and imply that rapid suburbanization and hollowing-out of Detroit was the result of some mysterious, unavoidable force in the universe? Bullshit. All you're doing is defending your subsidized lifestyle.

Most regions have added people since World War II. It takes real talent to double your urbanized area with zero population growth over 40 years, though. So yes, you ARE being OBTUSE.

[iheartthed]

Just because suburbs were developed didn't mean the core city had to hollow out. There are many more people now than there were in 1950. The laws mandating suburban style development didn't hollow out all the other cities in America; and certainly not to the extent of Detroit.

I'm not sure the numbers back up your claim that suburban development did not hollow out a broad range of American cities. How do you explain that 9 of the 10 largest cities in 1950s America lost population in the decades following? [[If you count the largest 11, then 10 of those 11 lost population -- Los Angeles is the only exception.) Only one of those cities, New York, has yet to recover that population loss. All of the remaining cities are still more than 20% off of their peak, and a third of them are more than 50% off of their peak. Detroit isn't alone... Nor is it the worst decline [[that notoriety still belongs to St. Louis, albeit by a nosehair).