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.
Ouch! I live in St. Louis, and it is nothing like what is being said about Detroit. Unlike most of the sentiments on this thread about ANY part of Detroit, there are more safe areas of St Louis than there are dangerous...its mostly consolidated to the north side of the city (before you say "But what about East St Louis?" know that East St Louis is a city in Illinois, across the Mississippi, not a part of the city).
People roam the streets of the Central West End, Soulard, DOWNTOWN, and most of South St. Louis without worry. If you stay out of North St. Louis, you are, for the most part, in the clear in St Louis.
I agree. I don't live in St. Louis, but occasionally we go to Blues games. After the game, even in the dark, I feel perfectly fine walking back to our car at Union Station. St. Louis and Detroit are similar in a few ways:
1. Some abandoned industry causing loss of jobs
2. Urban Decay
3. White Flight and Decrease is population in general
There are some abandoned factories in St. Louis (maybe more so on the Illinois side), but probably nothing as large as the automobile industry. St. Louis has a large beer industry, but as long as prohibition stays repealed the industry should be fine.
St. Louis is starting to climb out of it's hole, though. builtstlouis.net has a lot about it. Some historic buildings are being restored. The Homer G. Philips hospital, the first adequate hospital for blacks in St. Louis, has been renovated into Senior Citizen housing and Old St. Louis Hospital is now the Georgian Condominiums. Some old Hotels and office buildings are being turned into residences and retail. There is still a lot of work to do, though. You can get tax cuts for restoring an old building in St. Louis, but I don't know if Detroit or the state of Michigan does that as well.
Since the 1950's St. Louis population has decreased from about 900x to 300x. St. Louis is not part of any county, so suburbs do not really support it, other than people working in the city. St. Louis population has gone up since 2000. Detroit is about 80% black. I'm not trying to be racist, but typically blacks are poorer than whites, unfortunately. And you need your citizens to have money to bring in businesses and industry, if you don't have those the city doesn't get as much tax money. The city then has less tax money to provide things like police, schools, roads, things like that. With that logic, typically a city with more blacks than whites would have less money. Not trying to be racist, that's just normally the way it works. St. Louis is about 51% black and 43% white, which is a good mix to have. You need to have different races in your city to bring different industries, perspectives, religions, and to just add to the fabric of urban life.
I have heard some Detroit citizens say that they don't have enough reason to come into the city. Not even the Red Wings are selling out any more. Why? Well, hockey tickets are typically more expensive than baseball tickets (although the Blues offer tickets half-price on Tuesdays, and they have holiday sales and student nights). So, can people simply not afford to attend games? Maybe the Red Wings lowering ticket prices would help draw more people into the arena. What kind of museums, parks, monuments do you guys have? St. Louis has Forest Park, different Museums and the Arch to bring in tourism, which is a very important part of a city's success. East St. Louis has the Gateway Geyser, which shoots water 630 feet up into the air, but there's not really apparently much of a park around it and I'm not even sure how well-maintained it is.
So, both cities have been hit by these factors, but if St. Louis is starting to bounce back surely Detroit can, too. Renovating and rebuilding are great ways to because it brings in revenue from the new businesses, and of course you need people to build/renovate the buildings and then to work in them, which creates jobs. If the city or state (or maybe even the U.S. Government) could invest some money into restoring downtown Detroit, it would certainly help. St. Louis is restoring the Statler Hotel, but apparently Detroit has already lost theirs.
Anyway, I've never been to Detroit, but I think citizens bounding together really can get city back on it's feet again, although it will take time. And some help from the outside certainly can't hurt. I don't entirely agree with tearing it ALL down and starting over. Surely there's something, particularly historic buildings, in Detroit that can be restored to their former glory. I always hate to see a beautiful building meet the wrecking ball if it doesn't have to.
Detroit is also bouncing back a little bit at least in some areas. I went to school here in the early 1980s and it was a horrible place then. The downtown area is much improved now as are a few other pockets. Unfortunately some other areas seem to be getting worse.
Many Cities have learned that preservation and restoration of historic buildings is imperative to creating an attractive downtown atmosphere. Large historic buildings is one of the few things that a city can offer that suburbs cannot. I do not think that Detroit values its historic buildings. Mostly it tears them down. The historic and beautiful Hudson's building was blown up and replaced with a parking lot. Other historic buildings that I remember are now gone, many for vacant lots or parking areas (with all this parking, why is it so expensive?).
There is a little restoration in Brush park, but mostly tear down and build new. Wayne State considered tearing down the old main building, but thankfully it is still there. That whole area is massively improved. The old tiger stadium is headed for demolition for a vacant lot or parking lot unless someone heads that off soon. The new stadium displaced some historic buildings. They did move a theater rather than demolish it and the stadium incorporated part of the old Hudson warehouse. I am not really sure why they needed a new stadium anyway, it is not like they fill it up and needed the space. The Mariners church is still here nestled amongst modern development.
So while there is some effort at preservation, there seems to be a greater propensity to tear down historic buildings than to restore them. The problem with most new buidings is that they lack architectural significance (design is sacfrificed to reduce costs) and when they get old, they are just old, not charming. Many historic buildings add charm and livability to a city as well as preserving history.
Hopefully Detroit will wake up and preserve what is left. The progress that has been made is a start, but there is a long way to go. The city is still not attracting significant numbers of residents to downtown. The City has a reputation for insane taxes, poor municipal services, no shopping, high crime, and blight. Even when the problems go away, the reputation will remain for a time. read various threads here and you will see that many people unfamiliar with downtown are still terrified of it despite the improvements. People will not come until they believe it is safe, nice and worthwhile. They will not believe that it is safe, nice and worthwhile until they spend some time downtown. A vicious circle results and it is hard to break the chain. It is a long road to recovery for Detroit.
Recovery is not likely with the current government who appear only interest in making a name and/or some money for themselves. The city is not likely to make really significant further advances toward recovery unless they get some decent leadership. The attitudes of the government are soundly entrenched the staff however and even new leadership may not be enough unless they basically clean house and replace everyone at the upper levels.
I like this city a lot, but it is going to be a rough road to recovery and unless a truly impressive leader steps up to the plate, the City may be doomed to incremental recovery in a few areas while other areas continue to fail.
A lot of cities, unfortunately, don't value their architecture. That needs to change.
New buildings can be unique, but you can't match having buildings from different decades with such intimate details. And the history behind them is often very interesting.
There's a lot more work that goes into building a new building than remodeling an old one. That means more contracts, jobs and money spread around to those who get the contracts......
It also costs money to demolish old ones, and new buildings often aren't as beautiful as older ones. Older buildings, especially large businesses, tend to have intricate details that new buildings don't. And sometimes you can get special tax discounts for restoring old buildings. Why destroy a sound old building that you can restore? It's much more beautiful. It may create fewer jobs, but it may be more attractive to potential patrons as well. Older buildings are unique and often tell a story. They can tell a lot about city. For example, a lot of older buildings in St. Louis are made of brick, whereas newer buildings may not be. Restoring an old building may require fewer jobs, but it may cost the city less, too, especially if they get tax breaks from the government. And it probably won't take as long to restore an old building, meaning the shop/restaurant/condos/hotel is open sooner.
My comment on race in Detroit is on the fact I am moving from a racially diverse school district to one that is probably not. Jackson schools are a model of diversity spanning the rich suburbs and the poor inner-city. We are probably moving to Royal Oak or Livonia, and I'm concerned about putting my kid in a school where all of the kids look alike.
We had the same concern. However having gone through part of their schooling in a diverse school, our kids maintained their appreciation for other cultures. They do sometimes scold other kids for making inappropriate racial statements and that does ntoalways make them popular, but they are fine.
Jackson schools are among the worst funded in the state.....there are no "suburbs" in the Jackson area, and none that are rich at all. Most "outer" areas in Jackson boast the lowest per-capita income in the state. The average per-capita income in the Jackson area is below 15,000/year which is near poverty (retail work). Most every millage that was proposed in the Jackson county area was struck down, except a very small number. The experience that your children will have with moving to suburban schools of Detroit is that they will be behind due to the curriculum offered by a more rural area. Search most any demographic site and Jackson will come up as one of the poorest towns in the state next to Flint. I had the unfortunate opportunity of growing up in that area and I'm glad I was able to relocate.
Three years ago I drove every single street in Detroit.
I was working for a Silicon Valley [CA] company that was making advanced interactive GPS/Video maps for the entire US. The guys in the office wanted to film Detroit because of its large population base yet none of these "ivy league" types had ever been there. Well I HAD been there and I tried to convince these guys that filming Detroit would be a colossal waste of time and money...regardless of 'population'.....
One...No one in Detroit is going to log onto the internet for anything....many probably don't even know what the internet IS....
Two...Detroit is a dead city....a city going back to woods...[perhaps a good thing, though sad]
Well...the brainiacs insisted...so I filmed Detroit...all of it....every burned out house....ruined factory....decimated neighborhood....and every totally useless 'dollah' store....'hair and nail' salon....street bar-b-q and junk shop....absolutely all of it.....
Two months later when we reviewed the films back in the safety of our cute Silicon Valley 'hipster' office...the guys were stunned....No one could believe that a city in the U.S. would look LIKE THAT!!!....There you have it.... film does not lie...[though it does make you look 'fatter'...]
My personal favorite was the gas station on Fort Road....with the bullet holes in the sun shades....by the pumps....
NICE!
And then...there's Gary...and D.C.....YO YO YO!
Last edited by Coffee Mate; 01-22-2008 at 07:11 PM..
Reason: ....hollah for da dollah.....gangster style.....
1) I've lived in the Jackson school district for 12 years, where my kids go. We have yet to turn down a millage, including one that totally renovated the high school and another that provided millions to upgrade the other buildings. I don't know where you grew up, but I grew up in the 'burbs in wealthy western Summit Township, which is part ofthe Jackson district.
There is one district in the county that constantly turn down millages. There are suburban districts in the metro area that have the same collection of tax nuts that don't pass millages.
Jackson is impoverished to some degree, but it is not Flint. We are proud of the good education our kids are getting.
2) Jackson invested $40 million in an beautiful old school building with very good results. We gutted the old structure, built a new science wing and upgraded the rest to modern standards. Everyone was pleased with the results.
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.
Moving from Jackson
