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 think it's more than just jobs. It's quality of life.
Detroit hasn't realized yet that young people don't want suburbia, and metro Detroit built itself on the 20th century myth that cities are bad and driving 10 minutes for a gallon of milk is the pinnacle of happiness.
It's not, and the sooner metro Detroit stops celebrating sprawl as 'progress' and starts really investing in walkable, transit-oriented development with ample open space, the sooner young people will move to Detroit for all it does have to offer and start their businesses (or companies will see that it's a place that attracts talent and they will set up shop there).
There's been good progress made in places like downtown Detroit, Royal Oak, Rochester, Birmingham, etc..., but so long as Detroiters continue to build with a vision of the car as primary mode of transportation, they will fail and educated / entrepreneurial young people will not return. They simply value a different lifestyle than most of Detroit offers.
I think it's more than just jobs. It's quality of life.
Detroit hasn't realized yet that young people don't want suburbia, and metro Detroit built itself on the 20th century myth that cities are bad and driving 10 minutes for a gallon of milk is the pinnacle of happiness.
It's not, and the sooner metro Detroit stops celebrating sprawl as 'progress' and starts really investing in walkable, transit-oriented development with ample open space, the sooner young people will move to Detroit for all it does have to offer and start their businesses (or companies will see that it's a place that attracts talent and they will set up shop there).
There's been good progress made in places like downtown Detroit, Royal Oak, Rochester, Birmingham, etc..., but so long as Detroiters continue to build with a vision of the car as primary mode of transportation, they will fail and educated / entrepreneurial young people will not return. They simply value a different lifestyle than most of Detroit offers.
All of this is extremely true, and tough to hear for anyone who really wants this city to succeed... but we have to keep in mind that it's also true for many other cities.
The idea that by investing a couple billion dollars into their transit system would suddenly make Detroit viable again is wishful thinking. Even if a new commuter rail system opened up tomorrow, and the People Mover suddenly went all the way around Detroit, you're still not fixing any of the underlying problems of Detroit's industry.
Urban/suburban sprawl is a national issue, almost regardless of what city you're in. Transitioning into a society that builds vertically rather than horizontally is something that will take place over a couple of centuries probably. Detroit just happens to be at the tail end of those already slowly plodding towards the next type of city. That doesn't mean they could jump out to the fore-front of that march if they made it a priority (which they should).
Somehow I don't know if I ever see a million people living downtown again though...
All of this is extremely true, and tough to hear for anyone who really wants this city to succeed... but we have to keep in mind that it's also true for many other cities.
The idea that by investing a couple billion dollars into their transit system would suddenly make Detroit viable again is wishful thinking. Even if a new commuter rail system opened up tomorrow, and the People Mover suddenly went all the way around Detroit, you're still not fixing any of the underlying problems of Detroit's industry.
Urban/suburban sprawl is a national issue, almost regardless of what city you're in. Transitioning into a society that builds vertically rather than horizontally is something that will take place over a couple of centuries probably. Detroit just happens to be at the tail end of those already slowly plodding towards the next type of city. That doesn't mean they could jump out to the fore-front of that march if they made it a priority (which they should).
Somehow I don't know if I ever see a million people living downtown again though...
You are correct. Obviously simply building transit is not going to revive a city. But Royal Oak is a good example. Over the past decade or so, there has been a demand for lofts, farmers markets, walkability, density, etc... Royal Oak's transitioned from a city whose homeless population outnumbered shoppers on many evenings to what it is today. The next logical step would be a transit stop to take residents to jobs around the region and to take shoppers and revelers there without having to ever drunkenly touch a car (which itself increases quality of life for many).
If the hundreds of governments in the region could get together and focus development around such central hubs throughout the region, then a density would emerge in those hubs that would justify regional transit that would actually be used, which would then create more demand.
DC is a good example - it built a transit system around a base of density from a well-planned city. Then, everywhere they built a subway stop after that, entire cities sprung up around. Whole cities and neighborhoods were transformed almost overnight into mixed-use destinations for businesses, housing, nightlife, restaurants, etc... and DC has become a premiere destination city. Prices for housing near the Metro are exponentially higher than auto-dependent or even bus route housing.
Granted, DC's economy is built to attract the educated class in a way that Detroit's industrial economy simply is not, and I don't think Detroit City will ever be the economic hub of the region again, but there's a lot of "neighborhoods" disguised as cities throughout the suburbs and within the city that could serve as engines for focusing energy and at least becoming more like Pittsburgh.
Along this same vein, I do think Detroit is in a rather unique situation with regards to our society's sprawl... essentially, we were the "pushers" of the entire pandemic. We were the ones that provided the individual transportation in the first place, the entire means behind the sprawl away from central transportation hubs. We were the ones who benefited by providing these cars, that as we can see now they probably didn't even need.
Could this help Detroit bridge that hurdle faster? Unfortunately, I think not. I think it will end up being a crutch, and Detroit will probably be one of the last cities to give up on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. While everyone else will gladly do without their car if given the option, Detroiters will probably be the holdouts (along with LA), driving their "classic" cars everyday until they can't afford to buy the gas to put in them.
As a civil engineer (who is interested, but untrained, in urban planning), I find it absolutely ridiculous that developers of commercial spaces today (well, not today, but in the past decade) don't even blink at being forced to dedicate acres of land to parking lots and stormwater detention. To the point where they're forced to come up with all sorts of different solutions for combining those two (non-money-making) things into their plans (underground detention, permeable pavements, parking structures, etc). All this just because their customers have no way of reaching them except by automobile.
It's pretty disgusting actually, when you think about how land planning has made parking their primary function, rather than just some afterthought to go along with a good idea for a store. Frankly I still find it amazing that all these retail locations can make money at all, when they basically have to develop a dozen locations scattered all around the area just to be noticed.
You are correct. Obviously simply building transit is not going to revive a city. But Royal Oak is a good example. Over the past decade or so, there has been a demand for lofts, farmers markets, walkability, density, etc... Royal Oak's transitioned from a city whose homeless population outnumbered shoppers on many evenings to what it is today. The next logical step would be a transit stop to take residents to jobs around the region and to take shoppers and revelers there without having to ever drunkenly touch a car (which itself increases quality of life for many).
If the hundreds of governments in the region could get together and focus development around such central hubs throughout the region, then a density would emerge in those hubs that would justify regional transit that would actually be used, which would then create more demand.
DC is a good example - it built a transit system around a base of density from a well-planned city. Then, everywhere they built a subway stop after that, entire cities sprung up around. Whole cities and neighborhoods were transformed almost overnight into mixed-use destinations for businesses, housing, nightlife, restaurants, etc... and DC has become a premiere destination city. Prices for housing near the Metro are exponentially higher than auto-dependent or even bus route housing.
Granted, DC's economy is built to attract the educated class in a way that Detroit's industrial economy simply is not, and I don't think Detroit City will ever be the economic hub of the region again, but there's a lot of "neighborhoods" disguised as cities throughout the suburbs and within the city that could serve as engines for focusing energy and at least becoming more like Pittsburgh.
D.C. has government so comparison to Detroit is not the best example, the reasons for detroit's demise are complex and contrary to media influence, it goes way beyond just the auto industry although its a huge part, politics does play a role.
Royal oak has prospered because of politics, and white flight along with the Michigan GOP's demonizing of cities, which by the way the senate GOP is still in control of Michigan.
It is also attitude aks shifting the blame on other people too.
D.C. has government so comparison to Detroit is not the best example, the reasons for detroit's demise are complex and contrary to media influence, it goes way beyond just the auto industry although its a huge part, politics does play a role.
Royal oak has prospered because of politics, and white flight along with the Michigan GOP's demonizing of cities, which by the way the senate GOP is still in control of Michigan.
It is also attitude aks shifting the blame on other people too.
Oh no! You've followed me over to Detroit now! Haha.
I think DC's a fine example. I noted that its economy is geared to attract an educated global population (thus avoiding the brain drain), but DC was abandoned in the 70s and 80s due to white flight in much the way Detroit was (with similar leadership - Marion Barry and Coleman Young) and the inner-Beltway / city is thriving today for many more reasons than government. It's a multi-industry city now and one of the most culturally and economically vibrant in the country.
A well-planned design for an intentional city when it was established, blockage of an interstate through Dupont Circle when cities were being abandoned (unlike Detroit which plowed through many great neighborhoods that could be rebuilding blocks today), and a comprehensive implementation of a full subway system built over 40 years is certainly a model Detroit, in all its abandoned chaos, could adopt to retain and attract the sizable intellectual population that is either raised there or goes to school at the various universities.
It's not like DC was much more than a struggling one-industry town full of ghettos back in the 1970s when all this transition slowly began.
Oh no! You've followed me over to Detroit now! Haha.
I think DC's a fine example. I noted that its economy is geared to attract an educated global population (thus avoiding the brain drain), but DC was abandoned in the 70s and 80s due to white flight in much the way Detroit was (with similar leadership - Marion Barry and Coleman Young) and the inner-Beltway / city is thriving today for many more reasons than government. It's a multi-industry city now and one of the most culturally and economically vibrant in the country.
Sure, DC has made improvements, but one cannot deny, the government role in the economy, D.C. does however have to make hard choices but does not have the interference of the state as Detroit does.
Republican senators in the state legislature don't seem to not only want to care, but also pass laws restricting what Detroit can do and using rhetoric , of course I am not defending the Detroit city government , but it doesn't help when one does not want to contribute and help revitalize the downtown core and give more autonomy to the city.
A well-planned design for an intentional city when it was established, blockage of an interstate through Dupont Circle when cities were being abandoned (unlike Detroit which plowed through many great neighborhoods that could be rebuilding blocks today), and a comprehensive implementation of a full subway system built over 40 years is certainly a model Detroit, in all its abandoned chaos, could adopt to retain and attract the sizable intellectual population that is either raised there or goes to school at the various universities.
It's not like DC was much more than a struggling one-industry town full of ghettos back in the 1970s when all this transition slowly began.
I think detroit's issues have more to do than that, your suggestion is great though, if only the Michigan GOP can get on board and the legislature can repeal a lot of draconian laws and stop favoring the suburbs and creating tension- it harms the state.
Silicon Valley is suburban sprawl with many young, highly educated, wealthy engineers who prefer a car-centric suburban lifestyle, not a Luddite life in a decrepit city with mass transit and cabs and limited car infrastructure (like NYC)
Larry Page of google is U-MI engineering alum who grew up in Lansing and left MI for Stanford grad school; now lives/works in suburban Silicon Valley
Ballmer of Microsoft grew up in Farmington Hills (and went to Detroit Country Day); went to Harvard (and then Stanford B-school) and now lives/works in suburban Seattle (not in city)
Smart, ambitious people will go to best colleges they can enter and seek best career opportunities, as often in suburbs like SV as cities like Manhattan....almost no one smart stays in Boston or Phila post-grad from Harvard or Wharton
Need a culture that attracts smart, ambitious kids and high-powered employers....MI lost that war many decades ago; even Chicago (with a superb QOL and lower income taxes than MI or OH) has been marginalized over past 10-15 yrs as it lacks a powerful finance or tech industry vs NYC or SiliconValley....and lacks energy industry (and even lower taxes and lack of unions) of Houston or Dallas
detroit has no problem keeping "young people"
the problem is the shining stars are leaving like a meteor shower.
black flight.
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.
