U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan > Detroit
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2010, 10:35 AM
 
Location: The Lakes
2,375 posts, read 2,784,337 times
Reputation: 1066
Yes, entirely. The entire city of Detroit isn't blighted, nor is it bad. If you drive around, walk around on foot, talk to the people, you realize that black isn't always bad. There are loads of well kept middle class, even upper class enclaves within the city, even beyond B-E and the Villages. Yes, the bad areas are large, but that is the exact result of what happens when you spread a city across such a major area. It makes the problem look much worse than it seems when in reality the solution would be to downsize and contain. If people keep looking at area instead of population, then it seems like a hopeless case. Realize though that blighted housing is exactly that... Empty... and can be removed.

I hate to see so much great architecture go, but it would leave a lot of land fresh for development and make things easier for the police, fire, and medical crews to not have to deal with those residences. The city could even divide up the land for the planning of new suburbs or even for agricultural use.


http://renegadeinvestmentclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/detroit-map-area.jpg (broken link)

With half of a city of that size disappearing so suddenly, how can the city overcome the image of being a largely blighted poverty pit? That is the challenge, but already we see progress. Brush Park looks WAY better than it used to, for one. It's home to some of the most famous blight photo ops and now has LOADS of new homes, condos, apartments.


But again, yes, he is wrong. He is one of those people who never ventures from the freeway, and if he does, never ventures from the major streets to find any of the major middle-class to wealthy enclaves. He has yet to experience the life-blood of the city. He likely hasn't left his car to even speak with a native Detroiter. If he had, perhaps he wouldn't be so "cass" or as we original southerners call it "stupid" to make such remarks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2010, 10:40 AM
 
3,129 posts, read 5,027,306 times
Reputation: 962
There are middle class black enclaves... but they are deteriorating because even the black professional class is realizing that it can't live in Detroit. Black Flight is the New Worry for Detroit - WSJ.com - The Johnette Barnhams of Detroit are fleeing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UKUKUK View Post
If you drive around, walk around on foot, talk to the people, you realize that black isn't always bad. There are loads of well kept middle class, even upper class enclaves within the city, even beyond B-E and the Villages.
Quote:
Yes, the bad areas are large, but that is the exact result of what happens when you spread a city across such a major area.
Automobile-oriented cities are spread out larger than pedestrian/public transit oriented areas. Having said that... Detroit has very unique problems in that its tax base fled to the suburbs. Other automobile oriented cities are often able to annex land with businesses so the tax base doesn't go away. This isn't an option for Detroit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 10:54 AM
 
Location: The Lakes
2,375 posts, read 2,784,337 times
Reputation: 1066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicman View Post

Automobile-oriented cities are spread out larger than pedestrian/public transit oriented areas. Having said that... Detroit has very unique problems in that its tax base fled to the suburbs. Other automobile oriented cities are often able to annex land with businesses so the tax base doesn't go away. This isn't an option for Detroit.
But that's the thing... Detroit still has a tax base. It's just a tax base designed for a city and infrastructure that needs a tax base twice the size to hold it up.

What do I recommend? Downsize. Literally shrink the city limits and create a greenspace between the city and suburbs where it is not developed, dividing small enclaves of population into new suburbs. Either that, or simply divvy the whole thing up into new communities, with Detroit's final incarnation being about 50-60 square miles. This would allow for it to have a much stronger tax base for the amount of infrastructure and area it needs to support, while letting small, non-dense (after blighted housing is removed) communities develop on their own. Once the anchor city rejuvinates, these new border communities will draw people in droves to live next to a new, more compact, more efficient, more wealthy, safer, smarter Detroit.

Also, once you restrict Detroit to a more compact size, public trans and building density then building up instead of out becomes a very real option. With the way the city is spread out, it's an ideal candidate for building a light rail system to rival that of Chicago's without having to do much damage. Detroit can do it.

Last edited by UKUKUK; 07-28-2010 at 11:13 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 11:11 AM
 
Location: The Lakes
2,375 posts, read 2,784,337 times
Reputation: 1066


Imagine how much easier it would be to manage the city in green, or if you're feeling very extreme, in red. Containing it to the red boundaries (very roughly drawn) would leave Detroit with most of its business power while eliminating many problem areas and making it in general a VERY easy to rebuild city.

Look at Cleveland, they diversified and cleaned up the city without having to give up any land at all. I personally believe Detroit will need to give up land, but will be better in the long run because of it. The city could VERY easily divvy itself up and establish new suburbs with decent populations at that. Imagine 10 new Hamtramcks and Highland Parks, but surrounding a vibrant urban core with a high amount of residential and commercial desirability (look at cases in the Chicago metro like Schaumburg for this, New York as well. The entire state of New Jersey must be a massive office park and shopping mall)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 12:40 PM
 
3,129 posts, read 5,027,306 times
Reputation: 962
The Bing government agrees with you, UKUKUK, so it is trying to shut down neighborhoods with hardly anybody left so that it can compact Detroit's population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 12:51 PM
 
Location: The Lakes
2,375 posts, read 2,784,337 times
Reputation: 1066
I know, but I feel he's not quite extreme enough. I love the city and everything it stands for, but the current incarnation is not sustainable. To wait even one more year to do this is to only lessen the chances of the city's success. I'm not saying relocate people, I'm saying change the line of city boundaries and services, let the county take care of the desolate areas and the blight on the north, east, and west sides. Keep the urban core, shrink the city down to at most 55 sq. miles. Once the city rejuvenates and attracts more business, it can re-annex the newly established outer communities if they want it.

The areas left behind already have the potential to establish themselves as unique entities. 6, 7, and 8 mile road could be cut into sections that are very small and manageable. Sherwood Park could be a Grosse Pointe North (not named that, but it already has the homes for that kind of community) The East side NEW suburbs would likely be not-so-desirable, but I feel they too, would gentrify over time.

But imagine a shrunken Detroit with midtown, downtown, the river area with neighborhoods like B-E and the villages. You've already got classic homes, a downtown with loads of room to build dense residential and commercial development, and a still extremely strong tax-base (you've got DTE, GM, loads of other revenue sources) for a much better amount of land area. Let the outer areas between this NEW Detroit and the current suburbs either fade to rural or become their own entities.

It could be the Dallas, Houston, Austin, or Phoenix of the north. It's got business power and the ability to draw more.

This new, compact city, with much greater incentives for new development (as it will no longer be anywhere NEAR as poor or dangerous) will have to build smarter and more sustainably. It will actually be possible to develop the city so public trans is a reasonable option and able to be built and used effectively.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2010, 09:56 PM
 
Location: north of Windsor, ON
1,887 posts, read 2,700,424 times
Reputation: 573
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72 View Post
Looking for urban blight in Detoilet is kinda like looking turds in sewer, or maggots on a bloated deer lying on US27. You know your gonna find some, lots of it. A better question would be, can you find one block without abandoned houses, or a street without drugs being sold on it. Detroit is hopeless
I just might be able to do that. Try Collingham and Carlisle streets, between Regent and Mohican. I go through there every once in a while. It looks just like North Warren... It's gotta be two of the nicest blocks on the entire east side. They do have video surveillance on the streets (or at least signs declaring as much), I wonder who paid for this...strong block club, perhaps. Surrounding streets have blight (sometimes bad) and drugs, but the neighboring section of south Warren isn't that much better if at all anymore.

The Windmill Island area might qualify, at least the better parts. Harbor Island Street comes to mind.

There's other upscale stuff along the river...
51 Sand Bar Ln, Detroit, MI, 48214 - MLS #210072053 - Single Family Home real estate - REALTOR.com® You'd be out of your mind to pay that much to live in Detroit, but it is nice. I hate to think of the property taxes on this one.

The subdivision where the Manoogian Mansion (where the mayor lives, not sure if Mayor Bing lives there though) is (Dwight Street) is around the corner from that and is quite a nice subdivision.

Moral of the story...it's there, just have to look for it a bit. I'm a Detroit basher too, but I know there's still good to be found there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2010, 06:09 AM
 
5 posts, read 3,641 times
Reputation: 10
Smile detroit now

Hi Guys
I live in Ireland and as such I dont know anything about your city and would like a bit of help.
I would like to invest in some houses in America to rent out.
lately there is a big push to buy houses in Detroit by estate agents.
Properties are cheap and already has tenants in, so the potential is there to break even or make a little.
But I have been doing some research and it would seem that Detroit has bad areas with a lot of decline and good areas where prople look out for each other, homes are maintained and tenants will stay.
But I only have the sales talk from the realtor to go on and he wants to sell, then its my problem.
Is it a good time to invest in a house or houses in Detroit to rent out.
Do you think tenants will stay.
What are the areas to avoid and the areas to look at.
How can I tell if areas are good or bad by their post code/ street name etc.
Do property taxes determine a good area or just the price of the property.
Do any of you know any sites for futher information or research.
Its just Ireland is a half a world away and so different.
thanks in advance
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2010, 08:37 AM
 
183 posts, read 267,715 times
Reputation: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remisc View Post
I've been trying to find it for some time now. I thought Brightmoor would take the gold, but, while it has a very low standard of life, it's not as blighted as I thought. I'm looking for areas that look like post-apocalyptic movie sets. Areas where there's almost no houses for 4 city blocks, and the houses that are have been abandoned for 40 some-odd years.
Why?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2010, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Detroit's Marina District
968 posts, read 1,684,000 times
Reputation: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Browneyes29 View Post
Why?
I love driving around in those areas, and taking pictures. Its one of my hobbies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan > Detroit

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top