Why Can't Detroit Be More Like Chicago/

[EMG]

Doubt it. If the conditions were different, they would, but Detroit doesn't have that type of environment to allow or dictate that. Chicago is a giant metro with a lot going on; Detroit is the opposite. Toll is the least of Detroit's issues on the totem poll. Perhaps my sarcastic meter is not working.

I may not have been explicit enough in my basic point: the reason I say Detroit would never allow it is because Detroit is the car-centered motor city. Any plan for toll gates a la Chicago would fail for the same reason every and all toll-ANYTHING having to do with roads and driving would fail. Toll roads, even access-limited HOV lanes, mass transit, you name it. The average Detroiter regards unencumbered access to the highways a Constitutional right, not something anyone should have the ability to restrict and impede the way tollgates do. Not that I say there's anything wrong with that - I actually still agree wholeheartedly, even as an ex-Detroiter. I'll give up my car the day they pluck the keys from my cold, dead fingers, and the green-earth environmentalists who would try to make me feel guilty about it can all just cough and drop dead. [[And no, I am not being sarcastic).

Now before you make me out to be some kind of polluting ogre with a million-square-mile carbon footprint, there's more. I actually currently live only 2 miles from work and in a year round sunny warm weather climate and have the luxury of being able to bicycle to and from work almost every day. But I am doing that by choice and because I enjoy it, not out of any sense of obligation to the Al Gore Save The Whales crowd, and if my circumstances ever changed that might also very well change. NO ONE should be beholden to an inconvenient bus schedule or hoops and hurdles if their preference is to own and drive their own vehicle independently, as long as they are of sufficient mental and physical health to be able do so safely.

[EMG]

That's unfortunate. Because the Detroit area should probably seriously look at tolls as a way to help maintain the crumbling roads.

...or the State of Michigan should look at other places to cut fat from the budget so as to be able to afford the necessary repairs to crumbling roads. Many states with lower tax rates than Michigan can do it. Michigan has no excuse.

[crawford]

Chicago is a good city, but certainly isn't first-rate.

It's crappy compared to NYC, London or other first-tier cities, and I would rank it domestically behind San Francisco, LA and Washington, DC.

It leads the nation in murders, has lost a half-million people, and has very mediocre transit. On the positive side, it has a thriving core, the nice lakefront and is a big post-collegiate magnet.

Personally, I prefer metro Detroit, which is in the beautiful state of MI [[IL has to be among the worst states in the union), and has a higher quality of life [[cheaper, lower taxes, and better location) than Chicagoland.

[dove-7]

I may not have been explicit enough in my basic point: the reason I say Detroit would never allow it is because Detroit is the car-centered motor city. Any plan for toll gates a la Chicago would fail for the same reason every and all toll-ANYTHING having to do with roads and driving would fail. Toll roads, even access-limited HOV lanes, mass transit, you name it. The average Detroiter regards unencumbered access to the highways a Constitutional right, not something anyone should have the ability to restrict and impede the way tollgates do. Not that I say there's anything wrong with that - I actually still agree wholeheartedly, even as an ex-Detroiter. I'll give up my car the day they pluck the keys from my cold, dead fingers, and the green-earth environmentalists who would try to make me feel guilty about it can all just cough and drop dead. [[And no, I am not being sarcastic).

Now before you make me out to be some kind of ogre, there's more. I actually currently live only 2 miles from work and in a year round sunny warm weather climate and have the luxury of being able to bicycle to and from work almost every day. But I am doing that by choice and because I enjoy it. NO ONE should be beholden to an inconvenient bus schedule or hoops and hurdles if their preference is to own and drive their own vehicle independently, as long as they are of sufficient mental and physical health to be able do so safely.

I understood your point, but it's irrelevant to the actual topic. Tolls being part of the equation is like having a piece of wheat bread inside of a loaf of white wonder bread.

Hell, we have tolls here, but it's not the make or break thing that defines the Bay area. It's just part of the equation. If anything, a lack of transit is more relevant than Toll. But like I had said in my initial post, there are several things that are lacking in Detroit as well as preventing Detroit from growing; many of those examples have been posted by the posters in this thread. Again, toll fees is the lowest on the poll. And when you look at Chicago, they have many transportation resources and there is a reason for those Tolls too.

Is it about being beholden to a bad transit or just the freedom have a car? That's not the point of transit, the point is having it because it's needed and it's there for just in case you needed. Not some obligation. Not everyone can afford a car; I like my car too, but I also like that I can park my car and get on the subway and head to school when I need to do that, or don't feel like being stuck in mad traffic. Plus transit helps to balance out some of the traffic too.

[dove-7]

...or the State of Michigan should look at other places to cut fat from the budget so as to be able to afford the necessary repairs to crumbling roads. Many states with lower tax rates than Michigan can do it. Michigan has no excuse.

And or they can both fix roads and find other transit alternatives. Car pools, transit bus system. A real transit system and not some isolated transit that works solely in one city. Politics in Michigan is your primary handicap, always have and far as I'm concerned, always will be.

[EMG]

If I had to choose a city worth modeling after, I'd go for Toronto!

I would say Chicago and Detroit both have their own advantages and disadvantages depending on what one's priorities are. Certainly, if one is the type who primarily values downtown urban shopping and culture, Chicago wins, hands down. But if one wants things other than a vibrant downtown - i.e. places to go on day trips and family vacations - the dull farm fields of Illinois are absolutely no comparison for all the tourist opportunities of Michigan. At least in the good summer months!

[EMG]

And or they can both fix roads and find other transit alternatives. Car pools, transit bus system. A real transit system and not some isolated transit that works solely in one city. Politics in Michigan is your primary handicap, always have and far as I'm concerned, always will be.

Well I say the vast majority of people in Southeast Michigan will not use public transportation. Ergo, investment on mass transit will simply be a waste of money that would be better spent on road repair. Even here in metro Phoenix where I live that is the case. We have light rail that costs money on a per-rider basis that would much better have been spent on road construction.

[dove-7]

Chicago is a good city, but certainly isn't first-rate.

It's crappy compared to NYC, London or other first-tier cities, and I would rank it domestically behind San Francisco, LA and Washington, DC.

It leads the nation in murders, has lost a half-million people, and has very mediocre transit. On the positive side, it has a thriving core, the nice lakefront and is a big post-collegiate magnet.

Personally, I prefer metro Detroit, which is in the beautiful state of MI [[IL has to be among the worst states in the union), and has a higher quality of life [[cheaper, lower taxes, and better location) than Chicagoland.

Sometimes preference doesn't always equate to facts. Yes it's true that Chicago has crime, but so do the other cities that you posted. DC is just as bad or worse on a crime level. BUT, Chicago has an excellent transit system. Is it the best? No, but none of them are perfect, but beats the shit out of Detroit and metro isolated transit. The last time that I was in the metro area, I wanted to head to the auto show. That wasn't possible due me not having my car there and a lack of transit system that I have here and can hit the auto show anytime that I want, including heading to metro areas.

[dove-7]

Well I say the vast majority of people in Southeast Michigan will not use public transportation. Ergo, investment on mass transit will simply be a waste of money that would be better spent on road repair. Even here in metro Phoenix where I live that is the case. We have light rail that on a per-rider basis would much better have been spent on road construction.

Well there is a reason for that and it's common sense, the major city isn't the heart of the economy anymore, so why would the metro need it? But with the cost of gas and oil prices a transit is a necessity. Plus, metro Detroit has been conditioned not to depend on mass transit. If it were there, I'd wager that they'd use it. But like I have already pointed out, Detroit isn't heart of the economy which would justify having a transit. As far as roads, they repair those roads every year; road repair isn't the major solution to heavy traffic.

We're currently on strike here with the Bart subway, because of foolish Union workers wanting more during bad times and now it's just going to make things worse because the cars drivers and those that don't drive their cars is going to make traffic a nightmare starting next Monday. I never thought that I'd be against Unions, but they picked the worse time to not want to compromise when there isn't room to really debate.

[EMG]

We're currently on strike here with the Bart subway, because of foolish Union workers wanting more during bad times and now it's just going to make things worse because the cars drivers and those that don't drive their cars is going to make traffic a nightmare starting next Monday. I never thought that I'd be against Unions, but they picked the worse time to not want to compromise when there isn't room to really debate.

And that is yet another reason against it - perhaps even the strongest. It's one thing for unions to shut down public schools [[I don't have kids) or inflate the cost of domestic automobiles [[I buy nothing but foreign) but there is NO WAY my transportation is ever going to depend on a union.

[davewindsor]

If I had to choose a city worth modeling after, I'd go for Toronto!

You know how much a gallon of gas is in Windsor or Toronto is right now? A dollar a litre or $3.80 a gallon and Canada is an exporter of oil. You're paying more than a buck difference and exchange is around 8% right now. A gallon of milk at Walmart is over $4.00 in Canada. You hire someone to prepare your taxes, you pay a services tax of 5%, which is being raised to 13% next fall. Liquor tax is higher, tobacco tax is higher, property taxes are higher, and prepared to get raped on income taxes. Do you really want to model Detroit after that?

[iheartthed]

If I had to choose a city worth modeling after, I'd go for Toronto!

I would say Chicago and Detroit both have their own advantages and disadvantages depending on what one's priorities are. Certainly, if one is the type who primarily values downtown urban shopping and culture, Chicago wins, hands down. But if one wants things other than a vibrant downtown - i.e. places to go on day trips and family vacations - the dull farm fields of Illinois are absolutely no comparison for all the tourist opportunities of Michigan. At least in the good summer months!

Or Chicagoans could just drive the 40 miles to Michigan, take advantage of all Michigan has to offer, then drive back to their vibrant urban thriving paradise.

[crawford]

Or Chicagoans could just drive the 40 miles to Michigan, take advantage of all Michigan has to offer, then drive back to their vibrant urban thriving paradise.

You're referring to the murder capital of America as a "vibrant urban thriving paradise"?

Chicago has some very successful neighborhoods and a great core, but most of Chicago is indistinguishable from most of Detroit. The South and West Sides [[70% of the city) are the same as Detroit.

And the suburbs are almost exactly the same. If anything, I would go with Detroit's burbs as somewhat better.

And Detroit is much closer than Chicago for all that Michigan has to offer. Chicago is more than 40 miles from Michigan, and the scenic parts of MI are a long ways away.

[Detroit Stylin]

I already have one. I also have a back ground in graphic and website design. I make money doing it on the side and currently working on a client's website.

But I might need your help on a php mysql website that I'm working on for a different project. Are you able to do any php mysql programming?

I am somewhat proficient at it. It all depends on the scope of it. I am ssuming since you mentioned mysql that this is a database driven site?

[Danny]

In Order for Detroit to be like Chicago, it have to these requirements:

1. More land expansions

2. More meat and farming manufacturing and merchantilism.

3. More glass covered skyscapers filled with booming New Yorkesque businesses.

4. More media studios in downtown buildings.

6. More condos and townhouses in Downtown.

7. More Downtown retail

8. More ethnic neighborhoods

9. A lack of vacant and abandon buildings

10. A diversed city workforce

Detroit will NEVER be like Chicago. It will remain mostly black and 10,000 times more corrupt than any other city in the U.S.

[iheartthed]

You're referring to the murder capital of America as a "vibrant urban thriving paradise"?

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but that was sarcasm.

Still, the point is that Chicago isn't prohibitively farther from Michigan's assets than Detroit. They are closer to many of the resort towns on the west side of the state than Detroit.

And I'm not disputing that there are many parts of Chicago that look like Detroit, since I've said that same thing many times on here before. [[Personally, I think Chicago is as much Detroit as it is New York.) But there are no parts of Detroit that look like the most recognizable parts of Chicago.

But again, I don't want Detroit to be Chicago, I want Detroit to be Detroit. I think Detroit can be as good of a city as Chicago, or even better, if it learned some lessons from Chicago. There is room for two bustling cities in the Midwest.

I also think Detroit's history is more interesting than Chicago's, and it's history is more mainstream amongst Americans and other westerners [[even if Americans do currently view Chicago more favorably). Most people I meet who aren't from Detroit are dumbfounded as to why the city doesn't capitalize on this more. Frankly, I'm dumbfounded by it too. I know several people who would to come to Detroit just to see where Motown was born, and to see the neighborhoods where those singers lived.

Tangent: Tourism in New York is something like a $16bn per year industry. Now, Detroit wouldn't bring in that much any time soon, but I can easily see Detroit attracting a fourth of that or better. But Detroit would need a much better transit system. Tourism alone could probably pay for one to be built.

[maxx]

Let's see. Unaffordable real estate. $400 annually to park your car in front of your house. Instant $60 tickets for not displaying visitors pass when parking at friends house. 10.5% sales tax. Horrible traffic. Trash everywhere [[literally). And then there is that whole dirty little secret that the world, including Chicago's own politicians, forget about so easily: the South Side.

I've seriously considered Chicago, and after spending plenty of time there working and playing, I'll pass and take my own little piece of paradise in Hamsandwich.

Yes, things are cheaper in Detroit, but services are lousy. It's like Detroit is nothing but the southside of Chicago.

[Fury13]

Chicago has some very successful neighborhoods and a great core, but most of Chicago is indistinguishable from most of Detroit. The South and West Sides [[70% of the city) are the same as Detroit.

I have to take issue with this. Chicago is overall much more dense and the most common type of residential building in the neighborhoods is the two- or three-flat. Single-family homes tend to be late 19th-century "workers' cottages" that have been remodeled/expanded, or postwar Cape Cods and raised ranches. Most of the housing stock, by far, is brick, not frame. It is also generally older -- there are lots of Victorian-era buildings from the 1880s to about 1910 [[most of Detroit's residential housing is post-1915 with a lot from the '20s). The average residential neighborhood in Chicago looks nothing like one in Detroit.

As for the South and West sides, they get a bad rap. Sure, Englewood or Austin are both hellholes; but Bridgeport, McKinley Park, Hyde Park and Beverly are pretty nice places to live. Then there are the slightly grittier, edgy areas like Pilsen, Canaryville, Brighton Park, Archer Heights, and Back of the Yards. They would be no more challenging to live in than many Detroit neighborhoods that people on this forum consider "OK." Chinatown is picturesque and fascinating. Bronzeville is on the rebound; so is the area around the United Center on the West Side. Chatham is a very decent area on the South Side chosen by middle class African-Americans [[as is Beverly/Morgan Park). Even dicey areas like the East Side [[which is really far south) and South Chicago have many points of interest and I would be perfectly fine exploring them during the day.

Would I walk down 63rd Street between Western and Halsted by myself at midnight? No. I have more street smarts than that. But you are painting with a broad brush. Many of the neighborhoods on Chicago's South and West sides aren't bad at all, and some are downright decent [[even though they're not overly gentrified like Lincoln Park or Wrigleyville).

And I would feel safer waiting for an L train on the Red Line at 47th in Chicago than I would waiting for a bus at Conner and Gratiot in Detroit. But maybe that's just me.

[dove-7]

And that is yet another reason against it - perhaps even the strongest. It's one thing for unions to shut down public schools [[I don't have kids) or inflate the cost of domestic automobiles [[I buy nothing but foreign) but there is NO WAY my transportation is ever going to depend on a union.

That's great that you're against it, but let's not find or use excuses to justify not wanting or needing this. Transit Unions rarely pull these type of stunts. Overall, the Bay area has excellent transit system and within that same system are cars that you can rent for car pooling.

Cars are fine, but when you do a compare and contrast to transit vs the crappy nightmare traffic and bad roads that you mention, it's a no brainer, you look at transit as a alternative but you make sure that it's going to be effective vs. some isolated bus system that only work in one city.

[dove-7]

I am somewhat proficient at it. It all depends on the scope of it. I am ssuming since you mentioned mysql that this is a database driven site?

Yes, it's data base driven. Send me an email? I can give you more info. on this. I don't want to hi jack the thread.

[dove-7]

In Order for Detroit to be like Chicago, it have to these requirements:

1. More land expansions

2. More meat and farming manufacturing and merchantilism.

3. More glass covered skyscapers filled with booming New Yorkesque businesses.

4. More media studios in downtown buildings.

6. More condos and townhouses in Downtown.

7. More Downtown retail

8. More ethnic neighborhoods

9. A lack of vacant and abandon buildings

10. A diversed city workforce

Detroit will NEVER be like Chicago. It will remain mostly black and 10,000 times more corrupt than any other city in the U.S.

Most corrupt city part is debatable. But, in order for the above to exist, your politics in the metro area and city has to change. That is the source of your woes. From the racial issues, corporate greed that kept your transit from becoming a reality, but is now several times smaller than what it use to be. I'm referring to General Motors.

You have the corrupt Black politicians that like to sit there and talk a good game [[city council) while their pockets get fat.

I remember when the DEMF first hit the city, it was interesting seeing all of the diversity at the event; it also opened my eyes to what Detroit use to be and what led to the current. Most of that diversity can't even relate to Detroit in the same way that people here can to Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose. There is that fear and projection that over several decades changed the dynamics of city to suburbs; you'd swear that the suburb is the major city because most have been conditioned that, "these are the places the be." Not if they're isolated from the rest of the metro.