 
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4425
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 9:33 pm: |    |
Correct, Focus. that would only happen in Ohio. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 428
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 9:35 pm: | |
For those having a hard time understanding how geography affects development, go to San Francisco. When your city is slightly larger than a standard township (7 x 7 miles) and surrounded by water on three sides, packing almost 800,000 people into such a space requires you to build dense and build up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I mage:San_Francisco_Landsat7_%2 8Lg%29.jpg
Same with New York City.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I mage:Aster_newyorkcity_lrg.jpg
Compare with Detroit where growth has spread out and continues to spread out over hundreds of square miles. Neither SF or NYC could function without mass transit. Here in Detroit, the lack of density is one of the prime deterrents to effective mass transit systems. |
Jb3
Member
Username: Jb3
Post Number: 263
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 9:37 pm: | |
http://americancity.org/articl e.php?id_article=318 |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5110
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 9:51 pm: | |
The Allegheny River did have a oil fire once, but it wasn't due to pollution. A tank-farm town on the river burned to the ground and took a few days to burn itself out--way back in 1879, a few years before the EPA was hastily formed to combat such future catastrophes. |
Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal
Post Number: 104
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:13 pm: | |
The Pittsburgh fire was more recent than that, 30 or so years ago? Johnny Carson made fun of it, something like "Now you really know a city is polluted when its river catches on fire!" Now that I'm thinking of it, I think the fire was caused by floating debris, not a flammable liquid that was mixed with the river water.
The point was that Pittsburgh used to be a poster child for a decayed and dirty city. |
Detrola
Member
Username: Detrola
Post Number: 67
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:34 pm: | |
If you've been to Pittsburgh, you know. One trip to Cleveland and you'll see. Take in the Taste of Chicago, there is no doubt. Go for a stroll along Milwaukee's Riverwalk and you'll understand.
I love Detroit. I want only the best for the city I lived in for most of my life. I waited nearly 30 years for the "renaissance". I bought into the "New Detroit" From my exile I looked forward to the "Next Detroit" The sad but all too real truth is Detroit can not begin to compared to most other "big cities".
Detroit is and continues to be viewed as a punchline and the joke is on all of us in Southeast Michigan. Detroiters, stop telling us about how improved downtown is. Yes, we get it. It is better. But my former home on Lafayette and Green certainly has not seen the benefits of the casinos, and ballparks. Demand more for your neighborhood. Take pride in your homes whether you own or rent.
The world is watching and believe my they are laughing. Detroiters, stop voting for city officials that continue to waste your tax dollars and mire "your city" in scandal. Demand better than Monica CONyers. She may have your back in a bar brawl, but should she be representing your city. You elected Lonnie Bates after he bilked the Recreation Department. (let us not speak of the racial slurs he used against the person who caught him at home while on the Rec department clock) Barbara Rose Collins wasted untold federal tax dollars, during her stint in DC. How do reward such malfeasance. In Detroit you elect that person to city council. You reject Freeman Hendrix as too "suburban" And now you feign outrage at the actions of your "hiphop" mayor. Perhaps it's time to send the clowns home and pack up the circus tent. City hall should be a place of business not entertainment.
Sorry, but Detroit is no Pittsburgh. Gary,IN and Trenton,NJ may be better comparisons. It makes me sad to write these things. So, Detroiters, bring on the personal attacks, this former SW sider can take it. I would hope that you first take a look in the mirror. Detroiters, you've told us you do not want our help. The problem is that to the rest of the world Southeast, Michigan is Detroit.
Please, stop the laughter. (they are not laughing with us, they are laughing at us) |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5111
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:35 pm: | |
Pittsburgh was home to bus-swallowing potholes most springs. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2657
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:38 pm: | |
quote:Sorry, but Detroit is no Pittsburgh. Gary,IN and Trenton,NJ may be better comparisons. It makes me sad to write these things.
It also makes you look silly to write such things. |
Clayton
Member
Username: Clayton
Post Number: 5
Registered: 02-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:47 pm: | |
Did the blacks riot and start fires in Pittsburgh? I wonder if that's why Pittsburgh is nicer??? |
Clayton
Member
Username: Clayton
Post Number: 7
Registered: 02-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 10:54 pm: | |
Sorry if that was offensive. I am new here. |
Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1
Post Number: 11324
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:09 pm: | |
quote:Something tells me you will be surprised by the results, both in the numbers of suburbanites, and their support for the city.
Let's make sure that we differentiate support for certain institutions in the city and the city itself.
Claiming that one going to a Tigers game is a supporter of the city is just being dishonest to yourself. Let's try to be honest with the entire picture. |
Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1
Post Number: 11325
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:12 pm: | |
It wasn't offensive, just incredibly stupid. |
Crystal
Member
Username: Crystal
Post Number: 105
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:14 pm: | |
I'm confused... My family does claim to be a supporter of Detroit because (among other things) we go to Tigers games. It's not as big a support as, say, living in Detroit, but it is one form of support, right? |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 4526
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:15 pm: | |
Pittsburgh, like Chicago and many other metropolitan areas, did not ghettoize all of its problems in the original core city and then turn its back on it.
Detroit carries almost all the problems, poor and homeless, disabled and felons for the entire metropolis on its strained shoulders. The surrounding family of cities have been content to avoid their share in this burden and many of its residents have been openly scornful of Detroit's plight.
This is not as bad as it was a couple of decades ago, thanks to a younger generation with less poison and a reviving downtown. However the essential problem remains the same -- all the problems, few of the assets.
No other American city labors under the burdens and consequent funding, attitudes, insurance redlining, tax strangulation and image disadvantages that the City of Detroit does.
It needs all our love and championing and more. Without it we are a hollow tree and a mere confederation of subdivisions and strip malls. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1679
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:16 pm: | |
quote:The Pittsburgh fire was more recent than that, 30 or so years ago? Johnny Carson made fun of it, something like "Now you really know a city is polluted when its river catches on fire!" Now that I'm thinking of it, I think the fire was caused by floating debris, not a flammable liquid that was mixed with the river water.
The point was that Pittsburgh used to be a poster child for a decayed and dirty city.
No, the point is, again, that incident didn't happen in Pittsburgh, but in Cleveland. |
Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1
Post Number: 11326
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:18 pm: | |
quote:I'm confused... My family does claim to be a supporter of Detroit because (among other things) we go to Tigers games. It's not as big a support as, say, living in Detroit, but it is one form of support, right?
I am not saying that all people that go to Tigers games are not supporters of the city. I am claiming that not everyone that goes to Tigers games are supporters of the city. The simple fact of the matter is that there are many, many people that enjoy Tigers games but could not care less about the city as a whole.
Supporting the Tigers does not automatically equate to supporting the city as was implied. If that were the case I would not get into so many confrontations with the 'city supporters' pissing all over after games, throwing their trash around, etc.
Along the same lines there are many that live in the city that are not supporters of the city with their actions day to day. |
Mike
Member
Username: Mike
Post Number: 1243
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:20 pm: | |
hmm... over 3.5 million suburbanites surrounding their central city, but i have to get excited about the few thousand that go to the games, theaters, and such? i am one of the suburbanites who knows how to enjoy his central city outside of parking in a structure, enjoying the show, then hitting the freeway to go back home. and when i am at those shows, i hear many people bitching about walking, parking, crime, the peddlers and such.
not sure what my point is that its supply vs. demand. the suburbs say that they like "real" cities like pittsburgh, chi, nyc, and others, but the truth is that they could experience in detroit, but choose royal oak instead.
detroit right now has everything that it needs to be vibrant, the infrastructure (other than mass-transit) is there. The roads, the sidewalks, the parks, the events (winter, jazz, autoshow, hoedown, electronic fest, etc), the clubs, bars, restaurants, theaters, arenas, etc its all downtown.
I do concede shoping, but again, its market supply vs demand. suburbanites are not crowding the jewels that detroit currently has, whats to make us think that they would rather shop at a Gap, Target, etc in downtown rather than a no-name strip mall in whatever heights.
detroit has many problems, and many that need to be sovled in order to prosper (jobs, education, crime, govt structure, city services, etc) and compete with global cities (heck, even regional cities such as cleveland, indy, etc) but its a chicken and the egg argument. it needs support from the suburbs. does the city have to market to the suburbs better without alienating its black population, of course. but without central city pride, detroit dies, and so does its burbs.
rant over. |
Jt1
Member
Username: Jt1
Post Number: 11327
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 11:29 pm: | |
So to clarify my post above I would certainly say that Mike is a Detroit supporter. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4426
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 1:05 am: | |
I'm basically with Mike. If a much greater proportion of suburbanites started treated Detroit seriously and looking at it like you, then boom, we'd be like Pittsburgh and most other fine cities in no time. But people are persistent in their ways...
Lowell is pretty much right too. |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5112
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 2:12 am: | |
In the final analysis, cheerleaders don't win any football games. Games are usually won by those with talent who put in long hours of practice and hard work--and cooperate when that's necessary. Although, there's a luck factor, too.
But many Detroiters don't put in any real effort (schooling when young, continuing education/retraining when adults, etc.), yet they want to be compensated royally for whatever it is that they don't do (or do well). And that's primarily why Detroit is and will be Detroit. The same applies to many of its burbs.
Much of the education stats of Michigan schools can easily be observed on the state of Michigan Web sites--concerning a school's average MEAPs and grade-11 MMEs (ACTs). Even the private or charter schools' data are open for inspection on those sites.
For example, the difference between DPS schools and the others is like witnessing the difference between day and night. DPS's MMEs (ACT) scores of last year were pathetically low (some 13s, many 14s, some 15s, etc.).
(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 11, 2008) |
Greatlakes
Member
Username: Greatlakes
Post Number: 144
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 2:48 am: | |
To change that would require a change in a youth culture that views fighting crime as "snitching" and "conventional" career-building activities such as studying as "acting white." This kind of change requires leadership and active involvement from within the community affected, not just suburbanites "supporting" the city with "central city pride." I remember tutoring a student at Western International High School, one of the city's better schools, and this child had simply given up during a test right from the beginning. I asked him why he didn't even try. He was honest. He didn't plan on going to college and didn't see the point of wasting his time. The problem was he was already closing doors without even seeing what he could accomplish. I hope my words of encouragement have led him to a new direction, but who knows if they are enough to counter whatever negative and real factors made him feel so despondent. Even the students at Renaissance HS acknowledged this problem when they joked about DPS and how things worked in Detroit and in their communities.
Some areas still have a strong sense of community, but unfortunately they are the exceptions. Until that change sweeps across the rest of the neighborhoods, the real city made of families, not the shiny 1-square mile downtown, will continue to wither away as parents continue to move their children to nicer schools, safer streets, and simply better places to raise their children.
Unless, of course, "Detroit" is simply its old skyscrapers and street names and not its poor and illiterate/uneducated populace as well to these supporting suburbanites.
(Message edited by GreatLakes on February 11, 2008) |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 675
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 3:41 am: | |
Detroit has Jim Leyland, Pittsburg dose not.
Tigers in 08!•••
Need I say more? |
Swingline
Member
Username: Swingline
Post Number: 1021
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 10:50 am: | |
Lowell's Pittsburgh/Detroit comparison is a very good one. Also, those who dismiss the geography issue simply do not understand how cities develop. It has been much more difficult for Pittsburgh to sprawl because of the rugged terrain. Also sprawl has been limited (relatively) because that region is simply not as populous as many other regions in the country that are blanketed with conventional suburban development. Another factor that has helped Pittsburgh is that the city itself is not that large geographically. "Suburban" bedroom communities are not that far from the central business district and this has allowed the traditional commuting patterns to remain intact. Pittsburgh simply does not have any suburban office districts approaching the size of Troy, Southfield, Farmington Hills or Novi. Business leaders and management level families who sought more exclusive living outside the city limits have not had to settle 30 miles away. In turn, there hasn't been an exodus of commercial activity that followed the owners out of town.
Make no mistake though. Not everything is rosy in Steeltown. Pittsburgh is struggling mightily with its school district. As in virtually every urban school district in the country, Pittsburgh has had to work very hard to maintain achievement levels. They have instituted some very controversial magnet programs in an effort to retain middle class (read white) students. Issues with the schools have negatively affected some middle and working class (mostly white) neighborhoods. But if there is a city that can solve its schools issues and achieve a sustainable racial balance along with acceptable achievement levels, it is Pittsburgh. As others have mentioned, that city's residents have a lot of pride and loyalty to their town. Race relations, while not perfect, are not nearly as difficult as they are in the Detroit area. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2660
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 11:30 am: | |
quote:Lowell's Pittsburgh/Detroit comparison is a very good one. Also, those who dismiss the geography issue simply do not understand how cities develop. It has been much more difficult for Pittsburgh to sprawl because of the rugged terrain. Also sprawl has been limited (relatively) because that region is simply not as populous as many other regions in the country that are blanketed with conventional suburban development.
I understand how geography has been a sprawl deterrent in some US cities, but what about places in Europe like London and Paris, or even right down the road in Toronto. These are places which also aren't seemingly as geographically limited as San Francisco or Pittsburgh, but have managed to not allow sprawl to flow out of control and upset the economic balances of their respective regions, unlike Detroit.
ETA: This is something I Googled on how London was planned to expand smartly, as opposed to sporadically.
http://www.londonlandscape.gre.ac.uk/1829.htm
(Message edited by iheartthed on February 11, 2008) |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 5074
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 11:55 am: | |
If you look at Toronto, you have the whole different ball of wax - the metropolitan style of government, etc. If you look at Chicago, many of its "neighborhoods" were once independent areas that the city took over. the surrounding Detroit area quickly incorporated to prevent that. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 430
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 12:10 pm: | |
Did anyone mention that population-wise, Pittsburgh is only a third as large as Detroit and one-third the size geographically? That means that Pittsburgh has the benefits of density that Detroit doesn't enjoy? It also has a completely different racial make-up than Detroit which probably explains why race issues aren't as pronounced. |
Buddyinrichmond
Member
Username: Buddyinrichmond
Post Number: 273
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 12:18 pm: | |
quote:Pittsburgh is only a third as large as Detroit and one-third the size geographically? That means that Pittsburgh has the benefits of density that Detroit doesn't enjoy?
No it doesn't. You don't even sound sure yourself. |
Umstucoach
Member
Username: Umstucoach
Post Number: 155
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 12:59 pm: | |
Well, I thought I might add something considering I'm living in Pittsburgh right now.
Since moving here two years ago for school, I really enjoy this city and I think those of you who would come and see the city, not just the downtown, would like it.
Although some exists, I do not see much animosity between suburb and city because the city itself is very sectional. Because Pittsburgh annexed many cities during the 19th century, many of these areas maintain quite a local flavor in the city itself. There are many sections of the city with 19th century business districts with old store fronts such as the South Side (formerly Birmingham borough) and Lawrencevile and Deutschtown on the North Side. For me its a ten minute walk or a two minute car ride to a walkable shopping district which isn't in downtown. That, plus outrageous parking rates make downtown Pittsburgh less than what it could be. There is still a large downtown department store (Macy's, which used to be the locally owned Kaufmann's until a couple years ago) downtown. Also, many of the suburbs were factories towns which were not spared from the decline of steel production and therefore are in bad shape themselves.
While the downtown goes to sleep, the South Side and its main drag, Carson Street, stays up all night. You couldn't bar hop from one end of the street to the other or you'd pass out trying. There are A LOT of bars here, and it is helped by the fact that 60,000 college students live in and around the city. They hop on a bus, don't worry about driving, and make themselves look like fools.
Public Transportation is ok (it isn't the greatest, but I use it everyday so it is functionally useful) , with a train (called the trolley by locals) which services the southern suburbs and is a subway in the downtown area. They are also tunnelling to connect the trolley with the baseball and football stadiums and the local community college with a hope of extending it northward. There are also dedicated busways which use converted rail right-of-ways, although I believe they are not being used as effectively as they could.
Pittsburgh historically has had horrible pollution problems. Unless cleaned, most homes and building built before 1960 have a layer of black soot on them. But there has been a concerted effort to improve the environment here, and although I can't link anything here, it seems that Pittsburgh is one of the leading cities in green building.
It isn't all peaces and cream out here though. The area still struggles with population loss (the City of Pittsburgh is now close to the population of Toledo). There are plenty of areas that struggle with crime and poverty, especially in areas that are the traditional racial ghettos of the Hill and Homewood. The school system also struggles and there is talk of a Kalamazoo Promise-esque program for Pittsburgh public schools. Urban Reform projects of the 1950s and 1960s (labelled Renaissance I and Renaissance II) did more to hurt the city than help it by destroying neighborhoods such as the lower hill district to build the Civic Arena, and destroy retail on the Northside and East Liberty (the largest areas of white flight in Pittsburgh). Pittsburgh also has a young mayor who has been involved in some scandals since coming into office. Local leaders are trying to keep local college students in the area, but many still leave once they graduate. However, the housing crisis in this country that has hit metro Detroit rather hard has had a minimal impact on the Pittsburgh region. The housing boom of the late 90s didn't really hit Pittsburgh and therefore there hasn't been the glut of homes as there have been in other markets and there were not a lot of people getting sub-prime loans for large McMansions which they really couldn't afford.
Those of you who like and support Detroit would really like Pittsburgh. There is a lot of great history in the area and they still have fantastic examples of fine architecture. I don't know if it is exactly fair to label one city "better" than the other. Pittsburgh and Detroit each have their own problems to deal with, some of the them are similar, some of them are different. However, the same things that attracted me to Detroit attract me to Pittsburgh, even if the Pirates have been MLB's version of the Lions(ha ha!).
Google maps has most of Pittsburgh on street view if you ever want to look at the city. |
Ffdfd
Member
Username: Ffdfd
Post Number: 254
Registered: 09-2006
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 1:27 pm: | |
quote:Pittsburgh one of "America's hidden gems", a city that has rebounded quite strongly from their struggles in the '70s and '80s, whereas Detroit seemingly stagnates.
Pittsburgh has lost half it population over the past 50 years, like Detroit. And it continues to bleed residents, like Detroit. Fastest shrinking cities April 2000-July 2006: 1) New Orleans -53.9%, 2) Detroit -8.4%, 3) Cleveland -6.9, 4) Pittsburgh -6.5, 5) Flint -6.3. And Pittsburgh is the only large metropolitan area where the death rate exceeds the birth rate.
http://www.citymayors.com/stat istics/us-cities-growth-2007.h tml |
Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard
Post Number: 5115
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, February 11, 2008 - 1:47 pm: | |
Back in 1955, I started to deliver newspapers in Milwaukee. And of course, I read those papers too.
I was a [very wee] bit saddened upon reading that the Census Bureau interim report back then had reported that Milwaukee was knocked out of ninth place in population by both San Francisco and Pittsburgh. [Detroit was fourth back then.] But hey! Life goes on... |
Royce
Member
Username: Royce
Post Number: 2542
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 1:23 am: | |
Someone on here said that Pittsburgh has diversified from steel. Diversified into what? |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4428
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 2:01 am: | |
Lots of little things. It also is a financial center and has a good top-to-bottom service sector. Go there, and you'll see some decent money flowing. A basic wikipedia search will reveal the corporations that are there.
Ffdfd, there's a big difference between 8.4 percent and 6.5 percent. We should also consider the amount of inflow in each city, and the number and size of neighborhoods that are growing. Pittsburgh has a lot of stable non-central neighborhoods. Both Detroit and Pittsburgh are losing population, but at a decreasing rate over time (the second derivatives are positive). Both are leveling off, Pittsburgh more than us. |
Vetalalumni
Member
Username: Vetalalumni
Post Number: 932
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 3:37 am: | |
In the late 90s, Pittsburgh had a small developing software corridor in or near the old downtown district. Several 2-story warehouses were converted into modern office space. In that area were many old-style brick streets and a nice "restaurant row". While it was no Austin or even Boulder, it was very pleasant.
Carnegie Mellon conducts a large amount of research and provides many Information Technology professionals. |
Ffdfd
Member
Username: Ffdfd
Post Number: 256
Registered: 09-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 8:36 am: | |
quote:Ffdfd, there's a big difference between 8.4 percent and 6.5 percent.
How does one format the rolleyes? |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4430
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 10:46 am: | |
8.4 x 950,000 and 6.5 x 325,000 are much different numbers.
They are partly superficial too; let's look at tax base, and the services which are supported by it in each city. Seeing what Pittsburgh offers, again, you'd put it above Detroit, and you probably wouldn't freak out about the population loss.
But I'm not going to pretend I don't see your point. It's totally legit. Both cities have had five straight decades of population loss (although none of Pittburgh's decades matched Detroit's loss of 20 percent in the 80s) resulting in their populations being cut in half. One city is, somehow, way more stable than the other, and has retained most of its character better than the other.
It's confusing, but this would provide a great study about the role of regional perception of center cities and the importance of diversification in economic rebound. |
|
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.