Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think this is close. Even though it's a shadow of its glory days, Detroit by a wide margin. Much bigger, great architecture. StL's downtown isn't known for much of anything except for the Arch. Meh.
Are you kidding me here? STL scoffs at being compared to metros half its size, even though they are more vibrant (there's too many to mention but Richmond, Louisville, New Orleans, Nashville come to mind)
Yet, they want to compare themselves to a metro and city twice their size? Detroit wins this easy. The only reason it is close is Detroit has such a bad rap.
Are you kidding me here? STL scoffs at being compared to metros half its size, even though they are more vibrant (there's too many to mention but Richmond, Louisville, New Orleans, Nashville come to mind)
Yet, they want to compare themselves to a metro and city twice their size? Detroit wins this easy. The only reason it is close is Detroit has such a bad rap.
Those cities might have more vibrant downtowns, but StL has plenty of individual neighborhoods that are vibrant in their own right that together rival any of those mid size cities. Neighborhoods like Soulard, the Central West End, the Delmar Loop (I know, technically not in the city), Grand Center, and strips like South Grand and Cherokee St dot the city and form many different nodes of activity. Yes, downtown is sorely lacking, but unlike most cities, it's not the only place to go.
I will definitely concede that Detroit has far worse a rap than StL here on city-data. That seems to be the case nationwide, but I think the public image (or at least the one reflected in the media) is changing fairly quickly to reflect more of a "comeback city" image. In the mean time, St. Louis gets completely ignored by the media and the corporate and consumer worlds. Sometimes I feel like the rest of the nation likes to forget we exist.
I will also ultimately concede that Detroit has the better future. Though they were brought in by very unfortunate circumstances, Detroit's current leadership is looking in the right direction, towards a brighter future for the city and for the metro. This is in stark contrast to the parochialism, provincialism, cliquishness, complacency, and small-minded thinking that plagues St. Louis' public and private leaders and residents.
Those cities might have more vibrant downtowns, but StL has plenty of individual neighborhoods that are vibrant in their own right that together rival any of those mid size cities. Neighborhoods like Soulard, the Central West End, the Delmar Loop (I know, technically not in the city), Grand Center, and strips like South Grand and Cherokee St dot the city and form many different nodes of activity. Yes, downtown is sorely lacking, but unlike most cities, it's not the only place to go.
I will definitely concede that Detroit has far worse a rap than StL here on city-data. That seems to be the case nationwide, but I think the public image (or at least the one reflected in the media) is changing fairly quickly to reflect more of a "comeback city" image. In the mean time, St. Louis gets completely ignored by the media and the corporate and consumer worlds. Sometimes I feel like the rest of the nation likes to forget we exist.
I will also ultimately concede that Detroit has the better future. Though they were brought in by very unfortunate circumstances, Detroit's current leadership is looking in the right direction, towards a brighter future for the city and for the metro. This is in stark contrast to the parochialism, provincialism, cliquishness, complacency, and small-minded thinking that plagues St. Louis' public and private leaders and residents.
I think STL CITY vs Detroit CITY...STL probably wins for all the reasons you mentioned....but come on....you cannot compare yourself to a metro twice your size....then get all upset when you get compared to a metro half your size. It works both ways.
Detroit just offers alot more in culture, business, shopping, museums, art, and most importantly, international flair and diversity. Detroit is coming back because 2 billionaires are pumping so much money into the core. You will see.
Not to mention Detroit has all 4 major pro sports, and the list goes on.
I disagree that Detroit has a brighter future than St. Louis. For the record, I absolutely LOVE Detroit and think it's one of the most iconic and culturally significant cities in the country, and its influence on American culture is undeniable. That said, the St. Louis economy is far and away more diverse than Detroit's and it isn't inextricably tied to a single industry. Yes, Detroit is significantly larger in population, but St. Louis is still more centralized and with a more concentrated urban center with a much more formidable academic presence, despite what any numbers on paper may indicate otherwise. Any objective visitor to both cities can easily observe which of these two cities has more vibrant, cohesive and livable urban neighborhoods (outside downtown). I think downtown Detroit is probably better at this point in time than downtown St. Louis, in large part because of its steadfast corporate presence and lack of a competing suburban center. Southfield and Troy are both major employment hubs adjacent to Detroit, but they don't have the same adversarial draw from downtown as Clayton does with STL.
The original question in this thread is which city has a better downtown. Depending on your metrics and perspective it could go either way, but I would say downtown Detroit edges out STL in terms of raw energy and potential, although it's very close, and STL's rail system puts Detroit-- a substantially larger city/metro-- to shame. However, if we open this up to urban core as a whole, St. Louis runs away with this without any question whatsoever. There just aren't Detroit parallels to STL's urban neighborhoods like the Central West End, Lafayette Square, Soulard, Benton Park, Tower Grove and many others. There just aren't. Detroit's decline is widespread and obvious no matter where in the city you are. The wounds are very, very easy to see, whereas STL definitely hides its demons better. Not at all suggesting that STL's decline isn't also obvious, but compared to Detroit it just isn't even close. Again, raw numbers do not tell the whole story and a simple visit would affirm what I'm saying unless the visitor is either hopelessly biased or blind.
I would also disagree with U146's generalization that "Detroit is just like St. Louis: black city, white suburbs." That is just not true at all, for either city. Detroit has the largest Middle Eastern population outside the Middle East. It is an EXTREMELY diverse metro area, and it also has a huge hispanic community. That statement doesn't apply to St. Louis either, because the city proper is barely a black majority, with an ever-growing immigrant and white population shifting those numbers further. The suburbs of St. Louis are very diverse as well, and North County is now predominantly black. These old stereotypes are just obsolete.
Both of these cities are freakin' awesome and both are cooler and more original and interesting than 90% of American cities. Both have strengths in different areas, and both have their weaknesses in others.
Detroit downtown is not that great. Casinos, a couple breweries, and some restaurants nestled among massive decomposing buildings makes not a downtown.
When's the last time you were in downtown Detroit? 1992?
I disagree that Detroit has a brighter future than St. Louis. For the record, I absolutely LOVE Detroit and think it's one of the most iconic and culturally significant cities in the country, and its influence on American culture is undeniable. That said, the St. Louis economy is far and away more diverse than Detroit's and it isn't inextricably tied to a single industry. Yes, Detroit is significantly larger in population, but St. Louis is still more centralized and with a more concentrated urban center with a much more formidable academic presence, despite what any numbers on paper may indicate otherwise. Any objective visitor to both cities can easily observe which of these two cities has more vibrant, cohesive and livable urban neighborhoods (outside downtown). I think downtown Detroit is probably better at this point in time than downtown St. Louis, in large part because of its steadfast corporate presence and lack of a competing suburban center. Southfield and Troy are both major employment hubs adjacent to Detroit, but they don't have the same adversarial draw from downtown as Clayton does with STL.
The original question in this thread is which city has a better downtown. Depending on your metrics and perspective it could go either way, but I would say downtown Detroit edges out STL in terms of raw energy and potential, although it's very close, and STL's rail system puts Detroit-- a substantially larger city/metro-- to shame. However, if we open this up to urban core as a whole, St. Louis runs away with this without any question whatsoever. There just aren't Detroit parallels to STL's urban neighborhoods like the Central West End, Lafayette Square, Soulard, Benton Park, Tower Grove and many others. There just aren't. Detroit's decline is widespread and obvious no matter where in the city you are. The wounds are very, very easy to see, whereas STL definitely hides its demons better. Not at all suggesting that STL's decline isn't also obvious, but compared to Detroit it just isn't even close. Again, raw numbers do not tell the whole story and a simple visit would affirm what I'm saying unless the visitor is either hopelessly biased or blind.
I would also disagree with U146's generalization that "Detroit is just like St. Louis: black city, white suburbs." That is just not true at all, for either city. Detroit has the largest Middle Eastern population outside the Middle East. It is an EXTREMELY diverse metro area, and it also has a huge hispanic community. That statement doesn't apply to St. Louis either, because the city proper is barely a black majority, with an ever-growing immigrant and white population shifting those numbers further. The suburbs of St. Louis are very diverse as well, and North County is now predominantly black. These old stereotypes are just obsolete.
Both of these cities are freakin' awesome and both are cooler and more original and interesting than 90% of American cities. Both have strengths in different areas, and both have their weaknesses in others.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and what does that have to do with architecture? BTW that's not what I asked & u could look that up. Doesn't prove u been here
