 
Jelk
Member
Username: Jelk
Post Number: 4602
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 4:25 pm: |    |
Oh and Mt. Clemens would be well advised to drop "The Clem" branding campaign. I don't think most people would want to live, work, or play in a place that sounds like something treated at the free clinic. |
Dabirch
Member
Username: Dabirch
Post Number: 2406
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 4:29 pm: | |
quote:I agree with Fury on Macomb County for the most part but the one exception may be Mount Clemens. The downtown Mt. Clemens area has a ways to go but the Main Street area is primed for a Macomb version of Royal Oak or Ferndale.
The traditional neighborhood housing stock in Mount Clemens is very good. I know Mt Clemens even has a couple loft projects. Their political class is trending progressive and green which is usually a good thing for urbanist planning. Hell Mt. Clemens even has openly gay city council members - good luck finding that in most Wayne County and Oakland County communities. I'd go so far as to posit an openly gay candidate for Detroit City Council would have a hard time getting elected and Detroit is supposed to be the most liberal big city in America or something like that.
And don't forget about all the sherpa's that hang around at the base of Mt. Clemens looking for people to assist... |
Jelk
Member
Username: Jelk
Post Number: 4603
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 4:39 pm: | |
Good call Dabirch those Sherpas are part of the entrepreneurial class so essential to creating a cool city. I know because Dick Florida told me so. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3685
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 5:04 pm: | |
Yo TJ, those people will all be singing the blues and wanting the president/governor/whoever to take action when gas gets even pricier and their center-less, clusterfuck townships become cages because it will be too expensive to leave their superblock in a car.
You just repeatedly state the obvious, yes, of course people have a preference for that lifestyle (that's why they live there), but does that make it equal to urban living? Is it not a degenerate, wasteful form of living, consuming land, fuel, and degrading quality of life? Like I said before, truth exists. Some things are absolutely better than other things, even through the lenses of this type of relativism.
Of course not everyone wants to live right downtown or in the busiest areas of their city, but the point is that entire cities/townships in that county and elsewhere don't even present that option, because they are completely amorphous clusters of single-use pods. There is no sense of direction, no focal point. Every city should have lower-density, quiet neighborhoods, Detroit has plenty, but every city should have a plan and a downtown to gather residents into, and every city should have walkable corridors by which a resident can get there. Sterling Heights and Livonia don't have this, whatsoever. It has rendered them characterless, and in the coming decades we'll either see these places become the new ghettos, or they'll totally rebuild themselves.
I can think of a lot of inner-city neighborhoods, btw, that have far more peace and quiet than a standard suburban neighborhood, where you're confronted with more high-speed traffic. Either you're off of a major collector road like Mound or Gratiot that has tons of loud traffic and pollution, or you're near an interstate, where 24/7 road noise can generally be heard within a 1/4 mile radius.
Find a good, safe neighborhood on the urban grid and you'll have all the benefits of suburbia plus so much more. Plus, you might actually see PEOPLE biking, running, or WALKING on your street rather than an endless stream of cars, because your street will actually be connected in a mixed-use fashion to various destinations that you can walk to. Most of modern suburbia is devoid of destinations. Plus even a quiet suburban neighborhood is hemmed in by multiple wide, high-speed collector roads often lacking sidewalks, so if a destination were just outside of your subdivision, good luck trying to get their alive.
Why is the modern suburban landscape just as good as the city again? |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3325
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 5:13 pm: | |
A-fricking-men, Mackinaw!
I could expound upon what you just posted, but I think you've phrased it quite beautifully. |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5379
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 5:14 pm: | |
Jelk,
Mt. Clemens has a great collection of housing stock going back to the 19th century. Lots of cool Victorian homes there.
Sadly the biggest loss for Mt. Clemens was that every one of the stately Spa Hotels that used to dot Mt. Clemens when it was a spa city are now gone. I remember as a kid in the 70's seeing the last one along Gratiot (in a stately Georgian style with columns) before it too was razed.
Has Arcadia done a book on Mt. Clemens? They've done them on other Macomb Co. cities. I've seen one on Eastpointe. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3686
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 5:29 pm: | |
Thanks, Dan. ...and I haven't even read Kunstler for a few weeks.
Mt. Clemens should be the focal point for Macomb County, but it seems like a place a lot of people still shun. All the new money has chosen to buy their goods at Lakeside, having no interest in a downtown shopping district. But this is par for the course in metro Detroit. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1321
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 6:06 pm: | |
One of these scenes comes from big bad, loud, congested Detroit. The other comes from quiet, pastoral St. Clair Shores.
Which is which?
|
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5380
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 6:21 pm: | |
Is there some point where urban meets suburban? I mean I live in SCS, and all the streets are on the same grid plan like in Detroit... so you have an urban feel with retail along the main roads. Ditto for the communities around me (Roseville, Eastpointe, etc.).
But at what point does this devolve into limited access subdivisions with strip malls found mainly at main street crossroads? 15 Mile? 16 Mile? I know past that point most subs have limited access, but from 8 Mile to at least 14 Mile, most northern suburbs have wide open street systems just like in Detroit (north Warren is an exception to that).
Perhaps a map of built up areas of the late 50's or early 60's would show that kind of demarcation, since limited access subs seem to have started around that time. |
Dabirch
Member
Username: Dabirch
Post Number: 2407
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 6:44 pm: | |
Mackinaw -
Are actually claiming MORAL superiority for city dwellers?
That there is an ABSOLUTE in living choice?
Are you saying that those that consume "more fuel and land" are morally inferior those that chose to live in a city?
I want to make sure that is exactly what you are saying before I respond.
Wow. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3687
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 7:05 pm: | |
You should know the answer to that, Gistok. I look at it more strictly than most and say that, for the lakeshore communities, it devolves at Moross in GP Farms, where Charlevoix and Ridge/Vernor end, with Kercheval ending soon thereafter. GP Woods and Shores, and the east side of SCS, feature irregular streetscapes with occasional culdesacs and plenty of unneccesary curves. In the photos Focus uploaded, you can tell the bottom one is SCS because there are some small curves in the roads (and there is no retail strip cutting through the neighborhood as in the above photo.)
SCS is in SE Macomb county, is relatively older, and is a poor example if you're looking for the very worst in modern suburbia. You can take a slice of it (especially along Harper) like Focus did, and it looks pretty normal. Let's not kid ourselves, though, it has plenty of irregular street paths, IS NOT based off the Detroit grid as you suggest Gistok (seeing as to how only three streets connect directly to the city), and once your actually there in person, you see that the homes are large garages fronting the street with attached homes to the side, and that some streets do not have sidewalks. It's not an urban space, it's a 1950s-vintage transitionary suburb. It's not the target of my polemic, but it's not a model for good urban design. It's downtown is anemic and highly suburbanized with parking lagoons between the street and storefronts. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3688
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 7:22 pm: | |
Perhaps an argument based on ethics, Dabirch. Not the same as moral, to me.
Our society is not in very good shape as a whole, and have our living arrangements (which enforce stratification) and our insatiability when it comes to creating new things which aren't as good as old things had anything to do with this? I think so. And is it ethical that we divide ourselves, create arrangements that allow racism to linger, and that we use earthly resources so inefficiently?
But mostly I'm advocating that the two living arrangements are not equal just because a lot of people like one and a lot of people like the other. One of them has to be better, based on facts and cost/benefit analysis. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 155
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 12:43 am: | |
" 8 Mile to at least 14 Mile, most northern suburbs have wide open street systems just like in Detroit "
Not true west of Royal Oak. Even Southfield, as dense as it is, is very non-gridlike, especially on the west side of the city. |
Drankin21
Member
Username: Drankin21
Post Number: 121
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 11:59 am: | |
Mackinaw,
All valid points and well said, but why should cost/benefit analyses and "facts" have anything to do with the way in which people choose to spend their money? If morals and ethics dictate that I spend in one way or another, than we should all aspire to do ONLY what is beneficial for the common good and never for what we believe to be best for us, right? Morals and ethics are private and multi-faceted self control systems that are created/developed by a lot of nature/nurture mechanisms throughout our lives. We are all not the same. And thank God for that.
I have just moved to Detroit from a good size European city where I lived in the city center and did all of those things that Urban dwellers do. (Walk a lot, bike, go to the market, walk to cafes) and absolutely loved it (Miss it terribly already). I just recently bought a pretty good size home in Shelby Township because I am about to start a family. That is how I have chosen to live my life at this point and time because it is not unlike the upbringing that my wife and I enjoyed in metro Detroit. I chose to do that because I like the amenities that this lifestyle will give our children during THEIR self-formation.
My point is this, I don't think that there is an absolute "better way to live" but that the choice to live one way or another is a personal decision that rational people make based on what they think will give them and their family the best quality of life. |
Fareastsider
Member
Username: Fareastsider
Post Number: 604
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 1:20 pm: | |
I live north of Hall road and all summer I have seen plenty of people biking and walking in many different neighborhoods. Many good points are made about the non grid pattern of the suburbs. I agree that people will move where they want. If Detroit was safer and did not look like a war zone in so many places I bet a lot more people would choose to live there. You cant compete with Detroits housing stock.
I think it is important to remember that Detroit wasnt built overnight. Most of Detroits growth after the forties was in its outlying areas. It took years for all of those homes and stores to get put in. Im sure there were many non connected neighborhoods and places as it grew. Im sure that todays suburbs are worse than Detroit was but slowly but surely the sidewalks and separate neighborhoods are getting connected.
Two big questions I have is why do developers back houses up to major "collector roads" besides for some mundane traffic control ordinance. Also why does no developer make a grid street system anymore. Why only curvilinear streets? Is there a demand for that? Does it make more lots on the land available. I have seen that it does in a book I have somewhere. |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5383
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 1:44 pm: | |
Mackinaw, you have to admit that even Detroit has some ridiculous street plans in some areas. Being an east sider like myself, you've seen the awful formation of dead end streets along the east side of Cadieux from Warren to Mack. I wonder why such streets such as Detroit, Minneapolis, Cincinnati were built the way they were. I also always wondered why so many streets dead end between University and Hereford.
As I mentioned, generally built up areas of the 1950's and old have street grid patterns, and those from the 1960's and newer have irregular "subdivision patterns" with cul-de-sacs and curvy streets. Now granted there are exceptions to that rule, such as in Beverly Hills, where someone in the 50's got really creative with the street layouts into a giant circle labyrinth (I believe either Greenfield or Evergreen bisect that layout).
My whole position is that many (not all) inner ring suburbs have the same feel and general residential versus commercial layout as found in much of Detroit. And whether you live in Harper Woods, or SCS, or Eastpoint or other close suburbs or in Detroit... there's really no difference in how the physical urban fabric affects ones life. |
Bob
Member
Username: Bob
Post Number: 1570
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 1:48 pm: | |
Another plus for Birmingham is they are planning a new train station (in conjunction with Troy) that will connect bus service with taxis, trains, and possibly future commuter rail. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1322
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 1:51 pm: | |
quote:Two big questions I have is why do developers back houses up to major "collector roads" besides for some mundane traffic control ordinance. Also why does no developer make a grid street system anymore. Why only curvilinear streets? Is there a demand for that? Does it make more lots on the land available. I have seen that it does in a book I have somewhere.
Because no one wants to FACE the collector roads.
Regarding more lots, I'm sure using cul-de-sacs gives more lots than rectilinear grid T or X interchanges, but I don't know otherwise. Curved street plans were all the rage in the 60s with people fleeing the structure and rigidity of the city grid plan. It stuck, and hasn't entirely left us yet...even most new-urbanist developments do not use grid plans. |
Patrick
Member
Username: Patrick
Post Number: 4952
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 3:08 pm: | |
Why is it so hard for people on DY to realize that thousands of people in metro Detroit do in fact enjoy the McMansion, cul-de-sac, 60-minute commute way of living? I personally do not care for that way of life, but thousands do enjoy it. Something must be working. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3694
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:28 pm: | |
Gistok, it's because the current landscape along Cadieux there was developed post-war. From a physical standpoint, it's suburban. The entire east side is not homogenous. I would not trade where I grew up for a lot of other places just miles away. I thank my parents for making a great decision a couple decades ago.
Drankin21, as someone who loves freedom, believes in rational self-interest as the correct way to drive efficient markets, and is against unwarranted government interventions, you know that I agree with the statement that people should be allowed to purchase whatever their preference is, and live whereever they want to live, as long as it doesn't hurt other people. This does not preclude judging individual/group behavior and drawing conclusions. Call me judgemental, maybe. The market activity that is suburban sprawl has shredded the American landscape, ruined or weakened once-great cities, and has had numerous other societal effects. It's not inappropriate to assess the consequences of our market system, or to try to persuade people to spend their money another way, or to point out where market distortions (from the 1950s Federal Housing Acts, to government spending on interstates, to tax imbalances and school funding flaws) have made sprawl much more than just a function of the free market.
Europe to Shelby Twp., that's harsh. You do realize that, unless you've found a really amazing neighborhood that I have not seen, the lifestyle that you've chosen to immerse your kids in is one where they cannot walk to school (I'm willing to bet), cannot walk to friends' houses unless the friends are in the same sub., and certainly will not be exposed to diversity. To think you have to be in such a far-flung place in order have an ostensibly safe place to raise kids (I have a feeling that this is the concern at the root of everything) is incorrect. |
Bob
Member
Username: Bob
Post Number: 1571
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:32 pm: | |
Actually, not that I am a huge fan of Shelby Township, but they are trying to make the Township more pedestrian friendly by adding sidewalks on al the major roads. They in fact added pedestrian bridges across the Van Dyke X-Way at 21 and 22 Mile Roads. I believe this is paid for by the sidewalk millage they passed a few years ago. Not that it compares to the walkability of areas like Detroit, but at least they try a little bit.
(Message edited by bob on September 21, 2007) |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 2417
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:37 pm: | |
"...and those from the 1960's and newer have irregular 'subdivision patterns' with cul-de-sacs and curvy streets."
I'm convinced these subdivisions were drawn by half-mad "planners" while drunk and blindfolded -- hence the free-form curves on the landscape that go nowhere and don't even follow any existing topography. Curves for curves' sake. "Gee, it's so creative!"
If you look at aerial photographs of such newer subdivided areas, they look suspiciously like cancer cells under a microscope.
I think that's a good simile. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3695
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:37 pm: | |
Read what you said, Patrick. Consider it. I don't think any rational person on Dyes does not realize that thousands of metro Detroiters love modern suburbia. It's the fact that this is so obvious and in-our-face every day that we are led to rail against it. Yes alot of us complain about it, that's what you want to say, but you can't say that we pretend that people don't like it. Perhaps if they were more informed they wouldn't like it as much, though. |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 2418
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:46 pm: | |
"...why do developers back houses up to major 'collector roads'?"
This mystifies me as well. Why not install commercial zoning along the collector roads, and plug in retail along those thoroughfares' frontages, instead of having people's backyards abutting busy streets?
Typical is this new development in Warren:
http://www.winnickhomes.com/he ritage_village.asp
Fairly sickening, IMO. I didn't think they were still designing "communities" like this. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3331
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:48 pm: | |
Amazing! It's neither a village, nor does it have any heritage!
Fury and Mackinaw, you guys are making too much sense. You might have to surrender your Michigan passports. |
Professorscott
Member
Username: Professorscott
Post Number: 779
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 4:58 pm: | |
Fury, developers do development that accomplish two things and only two things: (1) make them money, and (2) obey the rules of the community. They can't develop that which doesn't fit #2, and they won't develop that which doesn't fit #1. So when you see that admittedly ridiculous configuration, check the community's zoning ordinance for clues as to why it is that way.
Nobody is designing communities, for the most part. We are stuck in metro Detroit with the post war mentality that houses should be over here and nothing but houses, and retail should be over there, and everybody should drive everyplace.
It was a Birmingham city planner who recently remarked in an article (which I read, linked from one of the DY threads) that you can't have dense urban lifestyle without good transit, and nowhere do we have good transit. (I had to get that in, of course.) |
Drankin21
Member
Username: Drankin21
Post Number: 123
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 5:28 pm: | |
Mackinaw,
Agreed on your market points. And thank for the clarification. This would be a conversation I would love to have over a few beers some day.
As far as the reason we have chosen the style of life in Shelby Township; it has NOTHING to do with safety. My wife and I both grew up in inner ring suburbs and have lived with more than the average modicum of trust for those around us. While I know the common belief is that a false sense of security is a precursor for danger, I personally do not think that always looking over my shoulder is the way to live a life. Call me naive I guess. Don't assume that because I do not live in Detroit that I am afraid of Detroit or what has a higher likelihood of happening. That is ridiculous.
No, our children will not walk to school, they will take the bus with the other children in their sub (who will ALSO be amongst their friends). And even though I have not closed on my home yet, I already know that there is an Italian family next to me (one out of three speak English), a Chaldean family across from me and a very nice Macedonian man kitty corner from our house. Diversity takes many forms. Did I not experience diversity in Europe because there are very few people of differing skin color? |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 5387
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 5:42 pm: | |
And speaking of awful main streets where houses back up to main thoroughfares... I recently took Hayes from where it starts up again at Martin Rd. (11 1/2 Mile), where it is a nice boulevard past Macomb County Community College south campus.
Just north of 12 Mile it loses the boulevard and slowly starts to dissolve into some strange semi residential street where the speed goes from 35 MPH to 30 MPH and then before 14 Mile it's down to 25 MPH. Lot's of gravel shoulders, 2 lanes in some areas, 2 lanes with passing lane in some areas, and 4 lanes in other areas. That road running between Warren and Roseville/Fraser is just AWFUL!!!
And on the flip side, one of the nicer roads I've come across (and live only 1 long block from) is Little Mack Ave. in St. Clair Shores (9 1/2 to 12 Mile). It has evolved from a 4 lane residential street with crummy retail at the mile & half mile roads to a really nice 5 lane mixed street with residential and architecturally pleasing medical office buildings. The retail strips (mostly closed by 10PM) at the mile/half mile roads have been really nicely rebuilt, and only the 11 Mile/Little Mack corner (near the I-696/I-94 interchange) is a 24 hour intersection (gas stations/video store/7-Eleven). Little Mack is one of the nicer upgraded areas in an inner ring suburb.
Of course, once you take Little Mack north of 12 Mile (into Roseville), that street becomes residential/commercial/industrial mayhem, with a poorer housing stock to boot.
St. Clair Shores, unlike a few of its' neighbors does seem to do a better job of upgrading itself with better urban planning.
(Message edited by Gistok on September 21, 2007) |
Dabirch
Member
Username: Dabirch
Post Number: 2408
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 5:43 pm: | |
quote:This would be a conversation I would love to have over a few beers some day.
Make sure to card him. Probably gonna have to be O'Douls...
I am still taken aback at the thought that the choice of where to purchase a home somehow has something to do with "truth". That a Platonic form exists in regard to housing.
Clearly if such an archetype did exist, hunting and gathering would be much more popular. Consume what you need. Leave the rest for somebody else. Just ask my friend the mind reading gorilla. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3696
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 5:58 pm: | |
Diversity goes wayyy beyond skin color, you're correct. I was assuming that there were not very many minorities in ST, as was the case where I am originally from; furthermore, though, I was hinting at income segregation by housing pod. I.e. subdivisions have standardized products that are all in the same price range, with a minimum home value normally being set when they're first built (i.e. $399 and up, from the $180s, etc.). This has the effect of breaking up all the different stratas that make up the "middle class," and, of course, isolating the richer among us (who insist on being called the upper middle class so as to not sound elitist.)
I can show you some of the most successful cities in the area where mansions have small frame houses right behind them, where 5-10,000 square foot houses stand a block from townhouses and apartments, and where some blocks have houses with as much as $300k or more seperating their values (I'm not talking 1.3 mil v. 1 mil, but 200k-500k, 300k-600k), and vast differentiation in terms of price and style. All this makes for socioeconomic diversity in close quarters, and can yield other forms of diversity more easily.
Dabirch likes to discredit me for my naivety. But I can vote, go to war, AND drink, so I'm pretty sure I can discuss these interesting topics with anyone who wants to join me on this forum. I regret most of my 'put-downs' that are over the top -- I have a gift for polemic -- but I'm not going to refrain from such an interesting discussion because of attempts at intimidation. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 2189
Registered: 06-2006
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 6:13 pm: | |
"Why is the modern suburban landscape just as good as the city again?"
Sorry Mackinaw, but you're just wrong. I didn't say suburban landscape was just as good as the city. I said many people prefer it to the city. YOU'RE the one claiming one is better than the other.
Ask any of the millions of people living in the suburbs of metro Detroit, and they're tell you that the people living in the region's urban areas would like to live in the suburbs too but they simply can't afford it. Are they right? Nah, it's not about right or wrong. But do they believe everyone wants what they want? Absolutely. Just like you believe everyone wants what you want.
Nobody forced the suburbs to develop the way they did. They developed that way because that's the way the people who created them wanted them to be. And the people who CHOSE to move there were obviously attracted to something, maybe something you can't understand, but from their perspective, it was good enough for them to CHOOSE to live their lives there instead of some place else. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3697
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 6:22 pm: | |
"Nobody forced the suburbs to develop the way they did"
Zoning? Subsidies for new homes? Infrastructure?
It wasn't completely forcible. But it was more than the invisible hand, my friend.
I agree with you, many people prefer the suburbs. I must not have read you close enough. There's no doubting that fact, though. |
Drankin21
Member
Username: Drankin21
Post Number: 126
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 6:34 pm: | |
That's a "chicken or the egg" argument Mackinaw. Demand dictated the law. While I do agree that in some instances it is chaos (Hall Road), at least it's organized chaos (Zoning). |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3698
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 7:54 pm: | |
Zoning laws that forbid traditional grid-like neighborhood development, forbid multi-use tracts (everything must be either all housing or all retail-- big box/strip mall), require large setbacks, attached garages, and the like, control and channel demand, because they do not allow developers the option of anything but a tract of culdesacs and standard modern homes. You may say, "where are all these traditional-minded developers?" Well, first off, they aren't in Michigan because there is absolutely no push for traditional developments on greenfields, because there is little to no new urbanism here. But where smart growth and regional planning, with revised zoning standards and more options for developers, have been enforced i.e. out east and some cities in Florida, you have seen traditional, urban new development even in far-flung suburbs. There would be more traditional-minded developers, but after working on the same formula of single-use neighborhood development for the past 50 years, the industry is set in its ways, and has a predictable formula for profitability. Additionally, society at large has become set in its ways. People looking for "safety," schools, and reasonable prices as they raise their family are so settled on moving to new suburbs, unless they have particular taste for those old houses in the inner ring that everyone thinks are such a costly pain to keep up. The repitition of the sprawl pattern over the decades, which makes it seem like new suburbs are in high demand (so why get in the way of that?) are purely a result of continued government support of the status quo (especially in Michigan), and a hesitancy on the part of middle America to think outside the box and demand other models. Plus, entire generations now have grown up surrounded by suburbia, often at great distance from inner cities, so they have no/little exposure to non-suburban models, and/or the city is viewed as a distant thing for people unlike themselves to live in, and a generally unsafe place. Only recently have large quantities of people started to object to the status quo models (even some people in SE Michigan), but by and large they simply move to one of a nice big city like NY or Chicago, because it just isn't worth it to try to change the way our new frontiers are being built.
I recommend the book Suburban Nation, which expands on many of my usual themes. |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 2422
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 10:37 pm: | |
"Only recently have large quantities of people started to object to the status quo models (even some people in SE Michigan), but by and large they simply move to one of a nice big city like NY or Chicago..."
Personally, that's what I recommend. There will only be pockets of new urbanism here and there within our lifetimes, and no mass transit to speak of. Yes, that's bleak, but that's the truth. |
Jazzstage
Member
Username: Jazzstage
Post Number: 115
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 - 11:32 pm: | |
The suburbs are far more diverse than both the city of Detroit I grew up in and the modern version. For example, my block has Asian Indians, Albanians, Italians, African Americans, Polish and mutts like me. The lack of diversity is more related to the generic quality of suburban living. I attribute that as much to the cultural wasteland that the media presents to us as much as any geographic location.
All my east side Detroit neighbors did move past Hall Road. Mount Clemens has more problems than Gabe Anton could ever fix. One of the worst for me is the rock and roll stoner mentality and the good ole boy network. Of course, Ferndale was very similar at one time.
(Message edited by jazzstage on September 22, 2007) |
Mind_field
Member
Username: Mind_field
Post Number: 784
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 1:38 am: | |
Is too much value placed on diversity? What does it really accomplish, promote, or solve? Now, I am NOT advocating segregation at all. I think it is good to learn about and be educated by other cultures and races.
Take Japan for instance. Japan is a nearly homogenous society composed of 99% Japanese. I don't know all the factors as to why Japan is such a homogenous and insular society. I'm not sure if they are hostile to foreigners, or what other reasons that country has remained foreigner-free.
But they have created a dynamic, enviable society with many technological advancements and a superb quality of life. Japanese cities are ultra dense (insanely dense) and serviced by a comprehensive and efficient mass transit network. Education is emphasized greatly, nearly everyone in Japan is middle class, and violent crime is nearly non-existant. All of this WITHOUT diversity.
While here in America, which is very diverse, violent crime is unnacceptably high, our public education system is lackluster at best, and poverty remains a big problem.
But to counter my own argument, Toronto is VERY diverse with relatively low crime. I'm not sure of the economic diversity of Toronto...is there a lot of poverty there? |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3699
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 2:35 am: | |
Jazzstage, that does characterize metro Detroit, because Detroit itself is fairly devoid of immigrant groups. Most immigrants to Michigan settle in the burbs. Nonetheless, you still have SW Detroit, and Hamtramck and vicinity with lots of SE Asians.
Mind_field, it's a really hard question to answer. All I'll say is that America is really diverse, but not very well mixed/integrated. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 157
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 4:12 am: | |
The Japanese actively work to keep out non-Japanese. They treat Koreans and others that they see as lesser like second-class citizens. There's lots of good things about Japan but race relations isn't one of their strengths. |
Jazzstage
Member
Username: Jazzstage
Post Number: 116
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 7:33 am: | |
There was an African American actress (I don't remember her name) doing the talk show rounds speaking about the Detroit of her youth. She was talking about how Detroit had the German section, The African American Section, The Italian section etc. She spoke of how losing this has really taken culture away from the city. I can only imagine the wonderful smells, music etc. Funny how we insist people Americanize and only after they do we long for their cultural influence.
Mindfield wrote:
While here in America, which is very diverse, violent crime is unacceptably high, our public education system is lackluster at best, and poverty remains a big problem.
I disagree that our education is lackluster. The kids are learning things beyond what we were taught. Teachers are using methods to teach to several learning styles. On average the materials (computers, manipulatives, video, textbooks) are better. Due to a low demand for teachers, a 5 year program and required ongoing education, the teachers are more able to deal with the diverse problems our society gives them.
But what can you do with the dirty kid with ill fitting clothes whose father is in jail for selling pills when he spends the entire class under a table? Or the kid whose parents look to the teacher to babysit their child and offer little to no support or attention at home?
The fact is under no child left behind the schools are even more underfunded than they were before. A full time counselor is usually not available. Despite these and many other problems, teachers are doing their best to give many of these kids the most stability, love, positive role modeling and safe learning environment. Most schools are doing a stellar job with the resources they have given the baggage that many of the children bring to school with them. |
Mind_field
Member
Username: Mind_field
Post Number: 785
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 8:15 am: | |
What was this thread about again? Oh yeah, Birmingham's triangle district. Good for B'ham in their drive to become more urban.....Got Woodward? |
Lowell
Board Administrator
Username: Lowell
Post Number: 4166
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 10:27 am: | |
Yuck. This from the .pdf proposal. It has all the charm of a soviet era 'people's park' surrounded by faceless apartments. The backdrop of cars adds to the 'intimacy'. What a ghastly rendering. It looks like something from a mid 90's consumer 3d program.
|
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3701
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 22, 2007 - 11:16 am: | |
You would hope that that just displays the scale and shape of the housing, and they might actually be adorned or present some color.
How hard is it to follow a successful model and re-create turn-of-the-century townhouses or rowhouses?
BTW did anyone here about the developers that will be razing some of the old rental flat brick houses on Lakepointe St. in GP Park (3rd street after Alter) to build townhouses? Sounds good at first, but then you see the renderings and how they are giving them a massive setback with a big front lawn, totally out of context for the street. The developers have developments in Canton and Rochester as their credentials, and they claim that young people living in that area want something like what they will be building. I found their reasoning egregious. If I can find the article I'll post it.
Anyway, let's talk about Birmingham. |
Ray
Member
Username: Ray
Post Number: 1020
Registered: 06-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2007 - 11:08 am: | |
Wow. Thanks for the insightful responses to the post on the Triangle district. I never cease to be amazed and the quality of the ideas on this forum.
I think the most interesting ideas (and my responses) are:
1. Suburban vs. Urban. I am slowly coming to accept that most American's prefer a suburban way of life, so as long as we have to have them let's at least make them as good as possible.
2. Macomb County. I think they are coming along, but maybe 20 years behind Oakland (which is 20 years behind Chicago) in appreciating urban living. Mt. Clements is a neat town with I hope a bright future. I wish St. Claire Shores and its neighbors would do a better job with the waterfront, which could be really nice.
3. Detroit. Of course Detroit is where we want to see development channeled. But, its not necessarily a zero sum game in that successful urbanization in places like Birmingham don't hurt (and I think really helps) the city. We can have it all.
I see Birmingham and Detroit as part of the same urban continuum along Woodward, a connection that will be made even tighter if and when we get mass transit. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3365
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2007 - 2:25 pm: | |
quote:1. Suburban vs. Urban. I am slowly coming to accept that most American's prefer a suburban way of life, so as long as we have to have them let's at least make them as good as possible.
I'm going to take issue with this comment, because it seems to come up on these boards a lot.
It may very well be true that most people "prefer" a suburban lifestyle. In Southeast Michigan, though, such a suggestion is bunk. For the most part, an urban lifestyle in the Detroit area just isn't an option, between dilapidated housing stock, lack of retail, and poor transportation options (including ridiculous car insurance rates). You can't make a valid comparison or assessment of preferences between urban/suburban when the former is hardly an option.
Interestingly enough, where there is a thriving central city, the housing values in the urban core tend to be far higher than for comparable real estate in outlying areas.
I take no issue with Birmingham (or Royal Oak or Ferndale, etc) building in a more urban form, and in fact, I applaud it. After all, they are only following the historical precedents of villages. Creating such communities is healthy for the region, and helps reinforce the strengths of other communities. It's the parasitic automobile-dependent, segregated land-use suburbs that, because of their incessant need for ever-more expensive infrastructure, complete servitude to automobile traffic, and damaging health and environmental effects, drain otherwise-productive resources. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3717
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 30, 2007 - 7:45 pm: | |
I pretty much agree with point #1. Especially if we're talking about middle America and regular households with family.
That sad thing is that people view urban areas as highly desirable, and therefore go on vacation in these places (NY, Boston, Chicago, Georgetown, San Fran, Philly/Baltimore...even Disneyworld because, after all, it's an imitation of small, dense town), but don't see any reason to live in such places. It's as if people want to deny themselves that which is good in these places (culture, walkability, beautiful architecture, parks) because of perceived hassles. It's really hard to explain. On the other hand, many people are ignorant about city life, or unable to recognize the special features of it. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 3368
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, October 01, 2007 - 12:31 am: | |
Mackinaw, I agree with you to a point. Having interacted with a lot of tourists in DC, most of them seem to really enjoy the time they spend here, but then they return to their tract housing development off the six-lane highway, and don't draw the connection. A real problem in most of those cities you listed is that housing is ungodly expensive, making it incredibly difficult for a working class family to even consider living in the city. Hell, houses in the very worst and most dangerous neighborhoods in DC go for over $200,000. How many blue collar families can afford that? It's a real problem for everyone who isn't an attorney or a lobbyist. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 3722
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Monday, October 01, 2007 - 10:49 pm: | |
Yes, even some of our better cities lack large middle class neighborhoods.
Amusingly, some of Detroit's finest neighborhoods have houses that compare in price to standard subdivision houses (of often half the size). That's just how messed up our real estate preferences are. |
|
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.