Bing to "defrag" the city.

[rb336]

Educated youngsters do not move to a place because it is a "walkable" city. They move to a place because it has a job for them. If the job is in a central city, then and only then do they make the decision to live in the central city and walk or live in the burbs and commute.

Several studies have shown that "youngsters" move to cities with the sort of attributes they want BEFORE finding a job

[DetroitPlanner]

Several studies have shown that "youngsters" move to cities with the sort of attributes they want BEFORE finding a job

Yeah like a chance to get a job! This is more important than any recreational, cultural, or transportation amenitity. Want better transit? Provide jobs! Want cleaner parks? Provide jobs! Want a cultural center less dependant on the govt dime? Provide Jobs!

[English]

^ Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I'm not sure if the "defragging" will work, but one thing's for sure. Something's got to give.

[Bearinabox]

Yeah like a chance to get a job! This is more important than any recreational, cultural, or transportation amenitity. Want better transit? Provide jobs! Want cleaner parks? Provide jobs! Want a cultural center less dependant on the govt dime? Provide Jobs!

Plenty of people with perfectly good, stable jobs in the metro area move away anyway. Jobs are important, but they aren't the only thing that matters, period, end of discussion. "What we really need is jobs" shouldn't be an excuse for not improving transit or cleaning up the parks.

[English]

Exactly, Bearinabox. The majority of the feedback that I've gotten about taking a job in Detroit from others in my field has been negative.

Then again, "can anything good come from Nazareth?" has always been the opinion of the shortsighted. Most people only hop on a bandwagon once it's already rolling. The philanthropists and [[hopefully) the new mayor and council understand that the status quo is untenable. It seems as if they're using foundation dollars to fund the M1, and perhaps the same organizations will identity areas of the city to be taken off the grid. I have faith that they'll have good intentions to do it responsibly.

[daddeeo]

Too bad we can't push the DELETE button on high crime, poor city services and schools.

[canuck]

Wouldnt it make sense to call on top notch visionaries in urban planning, and get them going on a master plan brainstorm session. I think that a week of touring the city and debating on issues at the Cadillac's ballroom would do a lot to give focus. Panelists from different countries with different ideas on solving the many problems the city has to solve. This is such a big undertaking that a very innovative plan needs to be put in place. If I were an urban planner, this would be a dream project.

[English]

They've called in Toni Griffin, a famous urban planner:
http://www.detroityes.com/mb/showthread.php?t=4983

From all accounts, she is phenomenal.

[Detroitnerd]

DNerd, you've been around long enough that I'm surprised that by now you haven't traded most of your idealistic naivete in for a harsh dose of reality with a dollop of cynicism.

Actually, I'm pretty cynical about the motives of Bing et al. But I'm not going to go for the sort of sweeping, it-will-never-work-no-matter-what-we-do-until-the-poorest-and-most-corrupt-among-us-get-it-together brand of cynicism. Great regions work together. Regions with municipalities that fight among one another for resources go down the drain. United we stand; divided we fall. Get it? It's a fact of life, not some starry-eyed hosanna to the unrealistic. This is the path to survival for the whole region. If we can't work together, might as well leave. Lots of young people do the same every year.

Two things stand in the way of your vision.

One, there are no Obamabucks coming our way for any significant urbanization initiatives. Not for the CoD, not for DPS and not for regionalism. Urban agenda issues weren't a major part of his campaign and clearly haven't been a priority for his presidency. The fact that there's not even a whiff of the kind of funding you think we need from the federal government ought to put to rest any hope that we're going to get bailed out by the feds.

All our stars have aligned right now. Detroit is recognized, via the auto industry crisis, the foreclosure crisis and the DPS crisis as being in crisis. We have perfect Democratic party alignment from the most local Detroit political office all the way up to the White House. Mayor is a D, council is D [[OK, city pols are "nonpartisan", but in the D that means D), House Rep is a D, both Senators are D's, the Gov is a D, the House overall is controlled by the D's, the same for the Senate, and of course the President is a D. The biggest, blackest city in the country needs help, and for the first time the President is black too. What more could you ask for? Yet no help is forthcoming under perfect political circumstances. This is reality. Is it realistic to expect that the money will start flowing to Detroit if a bunch of D's change to R's in the next few years? No. Your dream of the feds bailing out the city is dead.

So you say. But does that mean we should abandon the fight for those resources? I believe the savviest among us are aware that the Beltway works for the Beltway. It works for the powerful, the wealthy, the elite. So where does the countervailing force come from? Do we sit around saying it's impossible? Or do we begin to put together alternative plans and lobby for them? Which is more effective, to be "realists" or to be "dreamers." Remember, the march to oblivion is often under the banner of "realism." Alternatively, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has.�

Two, even if billions magically appeared, we as a region are nowhere near endorsing density as a positive thing, as you and many urbanists do. Most people don't want higher density for themselves and aren't about to pay extra to help create it for others. If the oft envisioned crisis emerges and suburbanites can't afford to buy gas or fix their roads, first they'll sell their possessions to raise money, then their children, and only then will they "trade down", in their view, to a smaller, closer-in abode. High density, to many, is for those who can't afford low density.

It's hard to say that that is perfectly true. What of all of our young people? What of people who desire other lifestyle choices? What of those who want walkable, rideable, liveable communities? They leave. Who remains? I believe that, all too often, it is people who stubbornly refuse to believe that cities are anything other than what they used to see on episodes of "Kojak." More and more young [[younger than 40, anyway) people are willing to pay a premium to live in those places. In fact, if you look at places that ARE walkable, such as Birmingham, Ferndale, Royal Oak, etc., you see that people are willing to pay more to live near all that.

Of course, the only way it can work in Detroit is if we all -- and I mean all of us, from Detroit out to Pontiac, get together in one unit of government and decide that each part of the region will do its part well. Reduce subsidies to those who live in remote areas. Increase subsidies for those who want to move to dense areas. Over the course of a generation, we could have a much more sustainable region where young people don't leave as soon as they turn 18.

The alternative, the "realistic" approach, is to bulldoze Detroit into a small city, and to try to let the autocentric parts of the suburbs pick up the slack. I'm afraid in 20 years we may not be able to afford the environment we tried saving. And we may require the environment we sacrificed.

Ultimately, though, I agree heartily with you that we have a lack of leadership. From top to bottom, we seem to have a political class of self-interested, venal pimps for leaders who only want to aggrandize themselves and don't really care about us. Leaders do more than give good speeches or look good on television. The point out the path to the survival of a people. Nobody, but NOBODY, is doing that in our political class. That's why it's up to us, whether "naive" or "unrealistic" or whatever.

[Detroitnerd]

Realistically, that probably won't happen. We can't count on anyone else helping us out. ...

Given your negativity and sarcasm, I'm going to write you off. Best of luck saving a region by knocking it down!

[iheartthed]

Yeah like a chance to get a job! This is more important than any recreational, cultural, or transportation amenitity. Want better transit? Provide jobs! Want cleaner parks? Provide jobs! Want a cultural center less dependant on the govt dime? Provide Jobs!

Actually, you've got it backwards. Educated people are gravitating towards urban centers because that is where the ideas flow. You can hypothetically invent Google or Facebook from a cornfield in Kansas, given the advent of the information super-highway. But good luck on having that epiphany for what people need if your nearest neighbors are a family of field mice.

[Danny]

If King Bing wants to defrag Detroit, I say go right ahead. I like his ideal because Detroit ghettohoods are getting too blighted and too big for city services to mow the weeds and wild wheats. If folks don't want to clean up their communities, then move out and let future developers take over. Let them build new homes, apts and reatails for middle income families. Then Detroit will move on productively.

[Hermod]

Wouldnt it make sense to call on top notch visionaries in urban planning, and get them going on a master plan brainstorm session. I think that a week of touring the city and debating on issues at the Cadillac's ballroom would do a lot to give focus. Panelists from different countries with different ideas on solving the many problems the city has to solve. This is such a big undertaking that a very innovative plan needs to be put in place. If I were an urban planner, this would be a dream project.

I can already write the main recommendation of the panel for the "pipe dream" project.

"Give us an unlimited budget and turn us loose."

[Det_ard]

Actually, you've got it backwards. Educated people are gravitating towards urban centers because that is where the ideas flow. You can hypothetically invent Google or Facebook from a cornfield in Kansas, given the advent of the information super-highway. But good luck on having that epiphany for what people need if your nearest neighbors are a family of field mice.

Urban centers didn't produce Google or Facebook. College kids in college towns did. Palo Alto, Cambridge, Champaign-Urbana for Mosaic, these are the products of University environments, not urban environments. Those tech innovations that come from businesses are coming more from businesses in suburban industrial parks in places like Cupertino, San Jose and Sunnyvale than from San Francisco and Oakland.

So cornfields, no, unless there's a university nearby. Urban centers, no, unless you count the universities and suburban industrial parks.

[daddeeo]

Problem for some Detroiters isn't field mice but big rats.
City has gotten so bad that maybe it can become a poster child for some fixer uppers. Let's face it, it can't get much worse unless it was Juarez.

[iheartthed]

Urban centers didn't produce Google or Facebook. College kids in college towns did. Palo Alto, Cambridge, Champaign-Urbana for Mosaic, these are the products of University environments, not urban environments. Those tech innovations that come from businesses are coming more from businesses in suburban industrial parks in places like Cupertino, San Jose and Sunnyvale than from San Francisco and Oakland.

So cornfields, no, unless there's a university nearby. Urban centers, no, unless you count the universities and suburban industrial parks.

They were created in environments that fostered social interaction and the flow of ideas [[college campuses). Most large colleges are designed to be urban-esque. Students typically live in multi-unit housing, take public transportation, and spend time interacting in public spaces.

[Hermod]

They were created in environments that fostered social interaction and the flow of ideas [[college campuses). Most large colleges are designed to be urban-esque. Students typically live in multi-unit housing, take public transportation, and spend time interacting in public spaces.

No, most major state universities started out in small towns. As the university grew to become an education collosus, the town grew into a city to support the larger institution. UofM isn't in Detroit. Wisconsin isn't in Milwaukee, Illinois isn't in Chicago, etc.If UofM hadn't grown beyond, say 3,500 students, Ann Arbor would still be a small town. Start down the list of states. In how many are the flagship state universities located in the largest cities?

[Jimaz]

I love the defrag metaphor.

English, if you're not defragging your disk because it takes too long, just leave your system on overnight and let it work while you sleep.

[iheartthed]

No, most major state universities started out in small towns. As the university grew to become an education collosus, the town grew into a city to support the larger institution. UofM isn't in Detroit. Wisconsin isn't in Milwaukee, Illinois isn't in Chicago, etc.If UofM hadn't grown beyond, say 3,500 students, Ann Arbor would still be a small town. Start down the list of states. In how many are the flagship state universities located in the largest cities?

I think you missed part of the discussion.

[Hypestyles]

Thanks English, I just saw a pretty sketchy channel 4 news story on it and reacted. The link you provided http://detnews.com/article/20100225/...to-shrink-city gave a lot more info.

What will all the empty land be used for though. I like the idea of parks and trees. Maybe I'm being too idealistic.

I keep imagining a map of Detroit and what it could look like, with a lot more green in it.

I'm looking forward to pessimists views so I could get a real handle on the idea of this.

i'd love for detroit to be a lot greener in the landscape.. so many folks who have grown up in an urban environment have gotten used to the notion that smokestacks and smog equals civilization. The greener suburbs and outer-rim territories are looked at as "the boonies" or "the sticks" at best, or even "klan-land" at worst.. Environmental activism has become synonymous with the "tree-hugger" cliché' of relatively affluent Caucasians who insist on all-organic foods, don't use deodorant and whose toilet paper probably has wood-flakes in it. Dilapidated urban parks have become more known as hang-outs for the homeless or thugs/gangs, and not much is thought of it.
... however, once the more cynical, jaded, and uneducated sorts in local leadership/activism get introduced to ideas like urban farming, shutting down depopulated neighborhoods, and "re-greening" in general, the tendency is to start accusations of suburban land-grab, or "They want to turn Detroit into a Plantation" which adds a totally unnecessary racialized spin to redevelopment efforts..

[Hermod]

I think you missed part of the discussion.

No, you stated that large universities were designed to be "urbanesque" and i noted that most large universities were designed to be smaller institutions in smaller towns away from the press of urban living. In the years since they were founded, the major state universities have become "urbanesque" through massive growth that led to growth of the surrounding small town.

[iheartthed]

No, you stated that large universities were designed to be "urbanesque" and i noted that most large universities were designed to be smaller institutions in smaller towns away from the press of urban living. In the years since they were founded, the major state universities have become "urbanesque" through massive growth that led to growth of the surrounding small town.

So if universities weren't designed to be "urbanesque" than what were they designed to be like? Every student with a 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath house and a 2 car garage? Every building surrounded by 5,000 parking spaces?

[Hermod]

So if universities weren't designed to be "urbanesque" than what were they designed to be like? Every student with a 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath house and a 2 car garage? Every building surrounded by 5,000 parking spaces?

Is an army barracks "urbanesque"? If your definition of "urbanesque" is students sharing a room with one, two, or three other students and a communal bathroom down the hall, then I guess any college other than a "commuter college" is "urbanesque". Michigan Tech up in the UP must be "urbanesque" as well.

Universities were placed in suburban or rural areas specifically to get them away from the hurly-burly of commerce to allow quiet contemplation. They were designed for students living, eating, and going to class within a short walk. When I went to college, it was a small school in a small town. Yes, I had three roommates the first two years and two roommates the last two years. Everyone lived in the dormitory and I could walk anywhere on campus in five minutes. It sure didn't feel "urbanesque" after growing up in Detroit.

.

[Detroitnerd]

Is an army barracks "urbanesque"? If your definition of "urbanesque" is students sharing a room with one, two, or three other students and a communal bathroom down the hall, then I guess any college other than a "commuter college" is "urbanesque". Michigan Tech up in the UP must be "urbanesque" as well.

Universities were placed in suburban or rural areas specifically to get them away from the hurly-burly of commerce to allow quiet contemplation. They were designed for students living, eating, and going to class within a short walk. When I went to college, it was a small school in a small town. Yes, I had three roommates the first two years and two roommates the last two years. Everyone lived in the dormitory and I could walk anywhere on campus in five minutes. It sure didn't feel "urbanesque" after growing up in Detroit..

There are many types of college campuses and research environments. They range from places like Philadelphia and New York and Boston to places that were built by college and defense contractors out in California, totally suburban style.

I think the point is that, when we think of college campuses here in the Detroit area, we don't tend to think of lily-white, totally cut-off places like Adrian or Alma. We tend to think of the University of Michigan, Eastern Michigan University or Wayne State University. These are in urban or quasi-urban environments, with people living often three to a house, places that make use of the organic layout of streets to some extent, and whose students congregate in coffee shops, bars and restaurants off-campus. Less top-down, more bottom-up, more diversity [[in race, religion and orientation) and less small-town small-mindedness.

[Hermod]

There are many types of college campuses and research environments. They range from places like Philadelphia and New York and Boston to places that were built by college and defense contractors out in California, totally suburban style.

I think the point is that, when we think of college campuses here in the Detroit area, we don't tend to think of lily-white, totally cut-off places like Adrian or Alma. We tend to think of the University of Michigan, Eastern Michigan University or Wayne State University. These are in urban or quasi-urban environments, with people living often three to a house, places that make use of the organic layout of streets to some extent, and whose students congregate in coffee shops, bars and restaurants off-campus. Less top-down, more bottom-up, more diversity [[in race, religion and orientation) and less small-town small-mindedness.

UofM and Eastern Michigan were rural environments with students living in dormitories. As the universities grew in size, the construction of dorms did not keep pace with the rise in enrollments and more and more students had to live off-campus in rented housing. Wayne State was a commuter college that as it grew began to attract more and more students that wanted to live adjacent to campus.