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.
St. Louis has many very attractive suburbs, especially in central St. Louis County (Clayton, Ladue, Webster Groves, Kirkwood, etc.). These suburbs also tend to be more connected with the city proper than is true of many of the Detroit area's desirable suburbs. I think both metro areas have a lot of potential for the future.
Good point. Many of St. Louis' central suburbs are also connected to the city with light rail. St. Louis also has many suburbs with main streets. U-City has the Loop, Downtown Clayton, Downtown Kirkwood, Downtown Webster Groves, Downtown Maplewood, even the notorious Ferguson has a downtown. Not to mention there are a slew of Illinois suburbs with their own downtowns. Anybody who doesn't think St. Louis has quaint little suburban towns with their own little main streets doesn't know much about the area.
Dayton's population seems to have stabilized - even small gains recently. Compared to the decline of recent decades, I would say that is a reverse of bleak or decline. Sure, that could change again, but it's something.
Good point. Many of St. Louis' central suburbs are also connected to the city with light rail. St. Louis also has many suburbs with main streets. U-City has the Loop, Downtown Clayton, Downtown Kirkwood, Downtown Webster Groves, Downtown Maplewood, even the notorious Ferguson has a downtown. Not to mention there are a slew of Illinois suburbs with their own downtowns. Anybody who doesn't think St. Louis has quaint little suburban towns with their own little main streets doesn't know much about the area.
Agreed 100%.
Though I wouldn't call Clayton a "quaint little suburban town."
That's an edge city.
That phrase probably better describes Edwardsville, Ill., where my Aunt Dorothy and Uncle Phil lived.
Very true statement. The only exception is Grosse Pointe which is very close-in, tightly knit with the City. But Birmingham? Royal Oak? Plymouth? ... hell, some people are now counting freaking Ann Arbor as a Detroit suburb. Yes these places all have 'downtown'/Main Street walkable vitality, esp RO and Birmingham. They are way out-there islands disconnected from Detroit... To me, going to these places is a road trip. Most of what little that passes as public transit in metro Detroit (all buses) end at the City's border anyway. It just goes to show how the dysfunctionality of metro Detroit has manifested to such an extent.
Royal Oak is only a 20-minute ride up I-75 from downtown Detroit. There is an express bus that connects them as well that runs from 4 am to 1 am.
Royal Oak is also not an island. Within 2 to 5 miles are the suburban downtowns/Main Streets of Ferndale, Berkley, Clawson, and Birmingham.
ANYWAY, I VOTE FOR CHICAGO!!!!! Nothing is going to stop that powerhouse!
Royal Oak is only a 20-minute ride up I-75 from downtown Detroit. There is an express bus that connects them as well that runs from 4 am to 1 am.
Royal Oak is also not an island. Within 2 to 5 miles are the suburban downtowns/Main Streets of Ferndale, Berkley, Clawson, and Birmingham.
ANYWAY, I VOTE FOR CHICAGO!!!!! Nothing is going to stop that powerhouse!
Understand usroute10, I'm not just taking pot-shots at Detroit because I like Detroit very much and want it to succeed. But we must be honest and frank in assessing what has led to its serious problems so they may be fixed. The City's finally getting behind and building quality rail transit would be a major step forward... I just don't look for a supposed quick jaunt up a freeway (which may not be so quick depending on the time of day and situation) as a substitute for close-in connectivity. And yes, there are some fast SMART buses that make a fairly fast run to Royal Oak... Royal Oak is very cool, very dense and very walkable in its central core, but I don't look at it as a close-in, accessible suburb like I do Grosse Pointe or Hamtramck.
Side note: I do think Ferndale is nice and has a lot of Main Street potential. It is just north of the 8-Mile Rd border.
Is Detroit doing a major rail transit project? Sorry too lazy to look it up, and just figured you people will know more about it than the search engines.
Is Detroit doing a major rail transit project? Sorry too lazy to look it up, and just figured you people will know more about it than the search engines.
QLine Detroit (fka M1 Rail), along Woodward Avenue (Michigan State Route 1, hence its former name)
There's no way Chicago could ever collapse the way Detroit did, to even infer so is irresponsible IMO. Detroit's collapse was as much political as it was economic. Social conditions in the current age could not replicate Detroit's collapse, and Chicago is FAR to economically diverse and prominent to ever worry about that future. If Chicago ever got to a point where it was collapsing in such a manner there's a very strong chance the rest of the country would be as well.
Population and economic cycles trend in waves. Whatever the circumstances are now that are suppressing Chicago and it's metro area could cycle into growth quickly, when they are adequately addressed.
Agreed. The absurdity of Chicago going down the tubes is too ludicrous to even answer. And if Chicago did go down those tubes, you can pretty well kiss off the whole of the midwest as Chicago is its center and focal point. Chicago is a global alpha city, among the top ten, and obviously the only one in the midwest. It you look at Amtrak designated HSR systems, the one in the midwest is called, with good reason, the "Chicago Hub".
As far as the other cities/metros in the region, I'm a Chicagoan and I am also a Midwesterner. I like midwestern cities. A lot. But none have any potential of a future of being an alpha city. As far as the breakdown, Chicago is clearly the top of the heap. Below it comes the one metro area that fits with the rise of places like Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas or Nashville: the Twin Cities. After Chicago and its wide gap to Mpls-StP is a far bigger gap down to the other major midwest cities. Two of them, Columbus and Indianapolis, get high marks for being the post-industrial white collar dominated cities that rose largely after WWII. But I don't see either of them becoming a regionally dominant city as their potential and draw are not conducive with this.
There is only one Chicago in the midwest. And the midwest benefits greatly because it is there. If Chicago goes down the tubes, you'd pretty much have to put up signs in huge letters that can be seen from 3000 feet above scattered from Cleveland to Kansas City that proclaim "Officially Designated Flyover Country".
And however lame that joke is, I'm not putting down other places in midwest; I'm talking about how the rest of the nation likely would see the midwest.
Agreed. The absurdity of Chicago going down the tubes is too ludicrous to even answer. And if Chicago did go down those tubes, you can pretty well kiss off the whole of the midwest as Chicago is its center and focal point. Chicago is a global alpha city, among the top ten, and obviously the only one in the midwest. It you look at Amtrak designated HSR systems, the one in the midwest is called, with good reason, the "Chicago Hub".
As far as the other cities/metros in the region, I'm a Chicagoan and I am also a Midwesterner. I like midwestern cities. A lot. But none have any potential of a future of being an alpha city. As far as the breakdown, Chicago is clearly the top of the heap. Below it comes the one metro area that fits with the rise of places like Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas or Nashville: the Twin Cities. After Chicago and its wide gap to Mpls-StP is a far bigger gap down to the other major midwest cities. Two of them, Columbus and Indianapolis, get high marks for being the post-industrial white collar dominated cities that rose largely after WWII. But I don't see either of them becoming a regionally dominant city as their potential and draw are not conducive with this.
There is only one Chicago in the midwest. And the midwest benefits greatly because it is there. If Chicago goes down the tubes, you'd pretty much have to put up signs in huge letters that can be seen from 3000 feet above scattered from Cleveland to Kansas City that proclaim "Officially Designated Flyover Country".
And however lame that joke is, I'm not putting down other places in midwest; I'm talking about how the rest of the nation likely would see the midwest.
I no longer live there, but I'm a native Midwesterner myself, a Kansas Citian by birth and upbringing.
I can't dispute your assessment of the Midwestern urban hierarchy, but I do think that like many outside it, you may be selling the metropolitan economy of Kansas City short. That metro has been growing at a pretty steady and respectable if unspectacular clip over the last two decades or so, and the prospect of a truce in the "job creation" "Border War" between Kansas and Missouri now that the Kansans have finally elected a Governor who understands that moving the furniture around the living room isn't the same as building a new home holds out the prospect that the region can grow at a faster clip by devoting the money wasted on site reshuffling to actually growing new businesses.
Indianapolis especially has swiped a bunch of institutions long associated with the city, most notably the NCAA, but I think that for all that city's recent good fortune, it's still not yet in Kansas City's league. Let's say that Tier 1 consists of Chicago and Tier 2 the Twins. Then KC and St. Louis are in Tier 3a and Indy and Columbus are in Tier 3b, with Columbus headed towards Tier 3a fairly rapidly.
However, KC's continued role as a center of government - it's still a major locus of Federal employment and home to one of the 10 Federal Reserve Banks (along with Minneapolis and St. Louis) - I think still gives it an edge over its peers further east on I-70.
The Minneapolis and St. Paul area and I don't really think its close. Year after year the area continues to grow and progress. Some other cities might be doing it now in the Midwest but Minneapolis is more consistent. I don't really think any other city is building like Minneapolis in the midwest other then Chicago. Other cities might have some projects going on but Minneapolis has so many ive lost track.
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.
