Belle Isle State Park

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

HonkyTonk, did you even read my post? I praised the architecture and stated emphatically that converting it from a Potemkin aquarium open a few hours a week into something that would have more users all week long is a better tribute to it's architecture and history than pretending we have an aquarium, which is a shadow of it's former [[even then thin) self. I appreciate the nostalgia for it. I have wonderful memories of the Olympia Stadium; that doesn't mean the Wings should still be playing there. Nostalgia is an emotion, not a logical argument. A tiny, unimpressive aquarium that is almost always closed is not a sensible use of a great old building on an island with very limited capacity for further buildings. The island, at least in nice weather, gets thousands of visitors a day. On the one day a week the aquarium is open, it's patronized by just a fraction of them. I think there could be a use for the building that could enhance the park-going experience for thousands. Not the odd, 15-minute diversion for dozens twenty hours a month. I say: save the building and do something useful with it; make other plans for an aquarium.

[Detroitnerd]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

[Eber Brock Ward]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

You can still get onto the island for free via bus, walking, or bike.

And if you can afford a car and gas, maintenance, bbqing supplies and all that, then you can afford the $11.

Bad effort this time.

[Detroitnerd]

You can still get onto the island for free via bus, walking, or bike.

And if you can afford a car and gas, maintenance, bbqing supplies and all that, then you can afford the $11.

Bad effort this time.

Oh, yeah. Sure. I bet you know all about poverty, having lived it for years.

Nice glib answer is exactly what I expect. "That's OK, gramma. Just put your dialysis machine up on the bicycle and push those pedals. This park is FREE! All those kids? All they gotta do is walk. They're obese anyway. Why didn't you ride the bus? Oh, there IS no bus? Hmmmm..."

[Eber Brock Ward]

Oh, yeah. Sure. I bet you know all about poverty, having lived it for years.

As a matter of fact, I do. My mom and I lived in the basement of a laundromat for awhile with a toilet in the corner and no real kitchen or anything. I could tell you lots of other stories, but that's not the point, now is it? So shove that "you don't get it" shit right up your ass.

Growing up poor like that, I realize that the $11 wouldn't apply because there's no car to put the sticker on or to pay the fee for, and matter of fact, you can't afford to get to the island anyway because bus fare money could be used for something else more important like some more mac and cheese or a gallon of milk.

Now maybe I'd go to the island with my aunt or my cousins or something, but they could afford cars and, with that, the $11 sticker.

Altogether, my point is perfectly clear, there aren't many people -- period -- that are poor enough to not be able to afford the $11 sticker but that are also, at the same time, wealthy enough to afford a car. That overlap in groups might include a dozen people in the Metro area, and even then only by some really really weird circumstances.

[Bham1982]

Altogether, my point is perfectly clear, there aren't many people -- period -- that are poor enough to not be able to afford the $11 sticker but that are also, at the same time, wealthy enough to afford a car. That overlap in groups might include a dozen people in the Metro area, and even then only by some really really weird circumstances.

This is obviously wrong. A functioning car is pretty much a necessity in Michigan. An $11 visit to a park isn't a necessity. The fact that car owner can, by default afford $11 doesn't mean they will choose to do so.

I can technically buy a ferrari without ending up homeless and destitute; doesn't mean it would be a wise use of my funds. An $11 discretionary charge isn't comparable to the necessity of transportation.

[Eber Brock Ward]

This is obviously wrong. A functioning car is pretty much a necessity in Michigan. An $11 visit to a park isn't a necessity. The fact that car owner can, by default afford $11 doesn't mean they will choose to do so.

I can technically buy a ferrari without ending up homeless and destitute; doesn't mean it would be a wise use of my funds. An $11 discretionary charge isn't comparable to the necessity of transportation.

Ahh, but you see you're moving the goalposts from whether they are being excluded under the new conditions [[i.e., "can they do it?") to whether or not they'll choose to do so under the new conditions [[i.e., "will they choose to do it?").

The former is a potential social justice issue. The latter, not so much.

[GP For Life]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

I was on the island February 1st, which was the first day the MSP and DNR were patrolling the island. You would have lost your mind. They were pulling people over for speeding and tags. It was great. As I was leaving they apparently found a gentleman, who I am assuming had an outstanding warrant, and hauled him off to jail.

Sending a clear message that ne'er-do-wells won't be tolerated.

Why would you try to spin this as a negative?

[mwilbert]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

For the reasons other people have outlined, I doubt the charge will significantly reduce either the total number of visitors, or the number of visitors from the city or even the number of low-income visitors, but as is so often not this case with this kind of argument, I expect that soon we will have actual data and then we can probably tell whether that is true.

I think the more interesting question is how the usage of the park changes. As a state park there will be somewhat different hours of operation, rules, and levels of enforcement than there were previously, and it seems to me that those changes are likely to affect the composition of visitors more than the admission charge.

[Wesley Mouch]

So, everybody enjoying the park without all the poor people?

They were smart to institute it during the coldest time of the year. I can't wait until that first hot day when people try getting on the island and are PISSED. By then they'll probably have a Starbucks at the Casino.

Yay! Income-based segregation is color-blind and progressive!

DN, quite the bitching. And bring some fact. If there's a reduction in park use by 'poor people', let's hear the facts and then think about solutions.

Even if there is a drop in 'poor people' at the park, that's not necessarily such a big deal. A society fixes things. Poor people shouldn't stay poor. Social programs help people. Charities help people. Government helps people. People help people... yes -- even poor people.

So bring a solution -- not just a bitch.

And while I'm typing... I like the existing aquarium. Not everything needs to be 'world-class tourist destination'. Sometimes small is better. I haven't been there since my youth, but I have very fond memories and wish those fond memories on others, including those 'poor people' you pity so much.

[Honky Tonk]

And while I'm typing... I like the existing aquarium. Not everything needs to be 'world-class tourist destination'. Sometimes small is better. I haven't been there since my youth, but I have very fond memories and wish those fond memories on others, including those 'poor people' you pity so much.

Please read my post about attending, and especially the part about dropping a $20 into the slotted barrel. Thank you.

[Detroitnerd]

DN, quite the bitching. And bring some fact. If there's a reduction in park use by 'poor people', let's hear the facts and then think about solutions.

Even if there is a drop in 'poor people' at the park, that's not necessarily such a big deal. A society fixes things. Poor people shouldn't stay poor. Social programs help people. Charities help people. Government helps people. People help people... yes -- even poor people.

So bring a solution -- not just a bitch.

Suck it, Wes. I'm able to complain to my heart's content. There is no onus on me to provide any fucking "solution". And who made you the forum administrator and didn't tell us all? How the fuck are people supposed to know there's a problem unless it's discussed loud and clear?

And you know what you do when you tell people not to bitch? You are offering ... a bitch. So shut it, hypocrite.

[corktownyuppie]

Suck it, Wes. I'm able to complain to my heart's content. There is no onus on me to provide any fucking "solution". And who made you the forum administrator and didn't tell us all? How the fuck are people supposed to know there's a problem unless it's discussed loud and clear?

And you know what you do when you tell people not to bitch? You are offering ... a bitch. So shut it, hypocrite.

February 12, 2014: The Day DetroitNerd Admits to Being a Complainer With No Solutions

[Hermod]

February 12, 2014: The Day DetroitNerd Admits to Being a Complainer With No Solutions

The Spurious Sophist of Snark.

[bailey]

HonkyTonk, did you even read my post? I praised the architecture and stated emphatically that converting it from a Potemkin aquarium open a few hours a week into something that would have more users all week long is a better tribute to it's architecture and history than pretending we have an aquarium, which is a shadow of it's former [[even then thin) self. I appreciate the nostalgia for it. I have wonderful memories of the Olympia Stadium; that doesn't mean the Wings should still be playing there. Nostalgia is an emotion, not a logical argument. A tiny, unimpressive aquarium that is almost always closed is not a sensible use of a great old building on an island with very limited capacity for further buildings. The island, at least in nice weather, gets thousands of visitors a day. On the one day a week the aquarium is open, it's patronized by just a fraction of them. I think there could be a use for the building that could enhance the park-going experience for thousands. Not the odd, 15-minute diversion for dozens twenty hours a month. I say: save the building and do something useful with it; make other plans for an aquarium.

I think the point you're missing here is that the aquarium as it is now [[open for 5 hours once a week) is not the final product. This is step one. hopefully with the state taking the reigns, funding will be available to bring it back to full operation.

it's never going to be Schedd there is no need for it to be. If it can just get back to what it was before the money ran out and its closure, it'll be fine. It'll return to being a destination for fieldtrips and family outings and be local draw...not a national one.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I think the point you're missing here is that the aquarium as it is now [[open for 5 hours once a week) is not the final product. This is step one. hopefully with the state taking the reigns, funding will be available to bring it back to full operation.

Bailey, I'm not missing that point. I think there is a chance the state will put money into the aquarium. No guarantee, but they might. But it will never be much of an aquarium, even if we get the money. A few more fish, sure. More hours bringing in a few more visitors, yep. But it will still be a third rate aquarium, albeit in a cool old building. There is not room to expand it into a great exhibit. It could serve a lot more people as something other than as our aquarium.

Well, if we're going to turn it into a concession stand, why not add some golden arches, too? You probably think the old Michigan Theatre is better as a garage, too, because who needs more theaters downtown, right?

Downtownguy, I would not be in favor of putting a McDonald's in there; although if we did that at least more people would get to see the building. I think it's an ideal place to rent bikes, cross-country skis, roller-blades, etc. Of course there could be some food service, too. I don't favor selling alcohol there: public spaces should be free of alcohol.

My whole point in wanting to switch out the aquarium isn't to destroy the hopes and dreams of those who love the aquarium. And I appreciate the hard work of the volunteers. But the whole island exists for the recreation of the people of Detroit [[and, now, the people of all of Michigan). Our aquarium will never be used- even if fully funded and keeping decent hours- by most of the patrons. It's just not big enough, and it has little room for expansion and modernization. We have limited space on the island. I think the best use of the island's existing spaces lies in finding purposes that serve the most people. This cool and historic building could be used for something else that benefits more people.

We should take this chance to rethink everything on the island. The old boat club, the aquarium, the Dossin Museum, the giant slide. What [[if anything) can be done to make these things better assets for the park? I don't think our heroic little fish tank will ever be something- in it's current size and location- that is a significant asset to the park. If it disappeared tomorrow- but it didn't make any news- I suspect that beyond the volunteers hardly anyone would notice. Let's turn it into something that thousands of people will use every week, not thousands every year.

[bailey]

Bailey, I'm not missing that point. I think there is a chance the state will put money into the aquarium. No guarantee, but they might. But it will never be much of an aquarium, even if we get the money. A few more fish, sure. More hours bringing in a few more visitors, yep. But it will still be a third rate aquarium, albeit in a cool old building. There is not room to expand it into a great exhibit. It could serve a lot more people as something other than as our aquarium.

That "third rate" aquarium was seeing over 100,000 visitors a year in the 90s. I think that had fallen to about 40k when it closed in early 00s.

It doesn't need to be anything more than what it was for 100 years of operation prior to its closure.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

That "third rate" aquarium was seeing over 100,000 visitors a year in the 90s. I think that had fallen to about 40k when it closed in early 00s.

It doesn't need to be anything more than what it was for 100 years of operation prior to its closure.

I totally agree. The aquarium does not need to be a first class aquarium because of its location on Belle Isle. When I lived in West Village I would sometimes take visitors to the aquarium, but it part of our trip the the island - to see the conservatory, drive about the island, etc. Because of going to do several things, the size and scope of the aquarium never seemed to be a problem for me.

[Detroitnerd]

If this policy hurts anybody, it's bad policy. If it means that one hot family on the edge of poverty cannot come onto the island for a bit of refreshment, then it means that, despite all glib answers to the contrary, we have failed in the mission of providing for our neediest.

On the one hand, you have people saying it won't change a thing because OF COURSE Detroit's desperately poor people will be able to pay it, or walk or bike [[despite being perhaps crippled) or take the bus [[which doesn't exist). On the other hand, you have people delighted that the island will have fewer poor people on it. Sorry, y'all can't all be right.

[Khorasaurus]

If this policy hurts anybody, it's bad policy. If it means that one hot family on the edge of poverty cannot come onto the island for a bit of refreshment, then it means that, despite all glib answers to the contrary, we have failed in the mission of providing for our neediest.

On the one hand, you have people saying it won't change a thing because OF COURSE Detroit's desperately poor people will be able to pay it, or walk or bike [[despite being perhaps crippled) or take the bus [[which doesn't exist). On the other hand, you have people delighted that the island will have fewer poor people on it. Sorry, y'all can't all be right.

Anyone who is happy there will be "less poor people" is elitist at best, racist at worst.

But the fee is $11 per year. And it's charged to people who own cars and are already required to pay $65 or so every year for their registration. It increases that to $76 and also allows access to every other State Park. It's about as good of a deal as adding a "fee" can be.

The fact that we have people who are forced to pay for the upkeep of a car but might struggle to to come up with 91 additional cents per month shows what a disaster our public transportation system is. That's the way we're failing our poorest residents, not the nominal fee for an annual pass to take a car onto Belle Isle.

[bailey]

If this policy hurts anybody, it's bad policy.

yeah, because that is a logical standard. I mean what policy anywhere has zero negative effect on anyone?

The rest of your post has been repeatedly debunked and refuted.

[ABetterDetroit]

If this policy hurts anybody, it's bad policy. If it means that one hot family on the edge of poverty cannot come onto the island for a bit of refreshment, then it means that, despite all glib answers to the contrary, we have failed in the mission of providing for our neediest.

Yes, Detroit has completely and utterly FAILED "in the mission of providing for our neediest" Time to change that, finally.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

If this policy hurts anybody, it's bad policy. If it means that one hot family on the edge of poverty cannot come onto the island for a bit of refreshment, then it means that, despite all glib answers to the contrary, we have failed in the mission of providing for our neediest.

On the one hand, you have people saying it won't change a thing because OF COURSE Detroit's desperately poor people will be able to pay it, or walk or bike [[despite being perhaps crippled) or take the bus [[which doesn't exist). On the other hand, you have people delighted that the island will have fewer poor people on it. Sorry, y'all can't all be right.

What if it means one ADDITIONAL hot family visits the park because its less of a dump?

[noise]

we have failed in the mission of providing for our neediest.

Is this the stated mission of Belle Isle?

[Hermod]

I totally agree. The aquarium does not need to be a first class aquarium because of its location on Belle Isle. When I lived in West Village I would sometimes take visitors to the aquarium, but it part of our trip the the island - to see the conservatory, drive about the island, etc. Because of going to do several things, the size and scope of the aquarium never seemed to be a problem for me.

The Belle Isle Zoo wasn't a "world class zoo" and the conservatory was not a "world class arboretum" but the people enjoyed them just as much.