Page 1 of 2
Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:02 pm
by Gob
Detroit, whose 139 square miles contain 60 percent fewer residents than in 1950, will try to nudge them into a smaller living space by eliminating almost half its streetlights.
As it is, 40 percent of the 88,000 streetlights are broken and the city, whose finances are to be overseen by an appointed board, can’t afford to fix them. Mayor Dave Bing’s plan would create an authority to borrow $160 million to upgrade and reduce the number of streetlights to 46,000. Maintenance would be contracted out, saving the city $10 million a year.
Enlarge image Half of Detroit’s Lights Might Go Dark as City Shrinks Itself
Other U.S. cities have gone partially dark to save money, among them Colorado Springs; Santa Rosa, California; and Rockford, Illinois. Detroit’s plan goes further: It would leave sparsely populated swaths unlit in a community of 713,000 that covers more area than Boston, Buffalo and San Francisco combined. Vacant property and parks account for 37 square miles (96 square kilometers), according to city planners.
“You have to identify those neighborhoods where you want to concentrate your population,” said Chris Brown, Detroit’s chief operating officer. “We’re not going to light distressed areas like we light other areas.”
Detroit’s dwindling income and property-tax revenue have required residents to endure unreliable buses and strained police services throughout the city. Because streetlights are basic to urban life, deciding what areas to illuminate will reshape the city, said Kirk Cheyfitz, co-founder of a project called Detroit143 -- named for the 139 square miles of land, plus water -- that publicizes neighborhood issues.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-2 ... rinks.html
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 11:49 pm
by dales
"Panic In Detroit"
He looked a lot like Che Guevara,
drove a diesel van
Kept his gun in quiet seclusion,
such a humble man
The only survivor of the National People's Gang
Panic in Detroit, I asked for an autograph
He wanted to stay home, I wish someone would phone
Panic in Detroit
He laughed at accidental sirens that broke the evening
gloom
The police had warned of repercussions
They followed none too soon
A trickle of strangers were all that were left alive
Panic in Detroit, I asked for an autograph
He wanted to stay home, I wish someone would phone
Panic in Detroit
Putting on some clothes I made my way to school
And I found my teacher
crouching in his overalls
I screamed and ran to smash my favorite slot machine
And jumped the silent cars that slept at traffic lights
Having scored a trillion dollars,
made a run back home
Found him slumped across the table.
A gun and me alone
I ran to the window. Looked for a plane or two
Panic in Detroit.
He'd left me an autograph
"Let me collect dust."
I wish someone would phone
Panic in Detroit
~David Bowie
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:08 am
by Scooter
They should just raze huge swaths of the city to the ground and plant it with turnips hoping that it can reinvigorate the rest of the city and recreate growth in an orderly and sustainable way.
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:21 am
by rubato
Historically cities have grown up and collapsed or at least contracted a number of times when the reason for their existence disappeared or when geography dictated their end (desertification (Timbuktu), loss of building materials (Chaco Canyon), loss of water supply (Moche? coastal S. America), loss of a trade route (Petra), changing water levels (Ankor Wat?) ).
Detroit has been an aching open sore for 50 years now, all of our instincts were developed with the underlying idea that everything grows and expands and that shaped the skills we learned. We never learned how to retreat gracefully. Now the USPS is having to learn the lessons of retraction and finding it painful (even for the best postal system in the world, bar none). And we will have Detroits of the future to contend with. What will happen to the populations of Arizona, Texas, and Florida when rising sea levels and a dying population base combine? We already have the overbuilt inland California cities extruding post-modern ghost towns (all conservative as hell and all doomed because of it).
The avoidable mistake was to deny reality.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:24 am
by dales
Yeah, rube.
Those rock-solid GOP conservatives sure ruined Detroit!
LOL!
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:29 am
by rubato
dales wrote:Yeah, rube.
Those rock-solid GOP conservatives sure ruined Detroit!
LOL!
San Bernardino, Riverside, Inland San Diego, Stockton, Merced, Modesto, Fresno all have the worst problems from stupid housing construction.
Try to approximate cogency, ok?
yrs,
rubato
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 2:30 am
by Lord Jim
San Bernardino, Riverside, Inland San Diego, Stockton, Merced, Modesto, Fresno all have the worst problems from stupid housing construction.
And yet, with the exception of Stockton, every single town on that list is a safer place to live than that bastion of proper liberal governance Santa "Dodge City" Cruz....Go figure...
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/santa-cruz/crime/
The Mayor of Santa Cruz ought to go to Riverside or Fresno and take notes to try and figure out what he's doing wrong ....
Oh, and I almost forgot...
Try to approximate cogency, ok?
yrs,
rubato
GRATUITOUS INSULT ALERT!!!!
GRATUITOUS INSULT ALERT!!!!
GRATUITOUS INSULT ALERT!!!!
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:16 am
by Jarlaxle
dales wrote:Yeah, rube.
Those rock-solid GOP conservatives sure ruined Detroit!
LOL!
Rube and reality have only a passing acquaintance.
Detroit should be rented out by the acre for target practice.
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:19 pm
by rubato
3 people none of whom could read and comprehend the orig. post.
All running to form.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:20 pm
by rubato
rubato wrote:Historically cities have grown up and collapsed or at least contracted a number of times when the reason for their existence disappeared or when geography dictated their end (desertification (Timbuktu), loss of building materials (Chaco Canyon), loss of water supply (Moche? coastal S. America), loss of a trade route (Petra), changing water levels (Ankor Wat?) ).
Detroit has been an aching open sore for 50 years now, all of our instincts were developed with the underlying idea that everything grows and expands and that shaped the skills we learned. We never learned how to retreat gracefully. Now the USPS is having to learn the lessons of retraction and finding it painful (even for the best postal system in the world, bar none). And we will have Detroits of the future to contend with. What will happen to the populations of Arizona, Texas, and Florida when rising sea levels and a dying population base combine? We already have the overbuilt inland California cities extruding post-modern ghost towns (all conservative as hell and all doomed because of it).
The avoidable mistake was to deny reality.
yrs,
rubato
I'll give you another chance at it.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:49 pm
by Crackpot
How's grossly oversimplified and ignores major contributing factors (riots, corruption, mismanagement)
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 1:16 pm
by rubato
Ok, four people who cannot read.
1.
The opening paragraph points out that cities have come and gone over time for different reasons, climate, geography, &c (politics is not mentioned).
2.
The second paragraph says that we are not skilled in dealing with population declines or declines in general (the USPS for example) because our experience is mostly that of growth.
3.
As an aside it is mentioned that we have several candidates for future population declines due to lack of regulation of the housing market, and as it happens all of them are the most conservative parts of Calif.
Most of the post was not read or understood by any of you. Now Dales was just trying to be a smartass but all of you fell into the hole he dug on your own.
Irrational hatred is not an excuse for lack of cogency.
yrs,
rubato
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 1:59 pm
by Lord Jim
LOL
We already have the overbuilt inland California cities extruding post-modern ghost towns (all conservative as hell and all doomed because of it).
As an aside it is mentioned that we have several candidates for future population declines due to lack of regulation of the housing market, and as it happens all of them are the most conservative parts of Calif.
If you believe that saying the towns were "doomed because" they are conservative has the same meaning as saying "as it happens" they are conservative, then there's only
one person in this exchange with a reading comprehension problem...
And for you to try to claim that the gratuitous swipe at conservatives in your post was an "aside" is too laughable for words...
That is never an "aside" with you rube....
Anyone that has read your posts for the past 12 years, knows that expressing your seething, loathing, deep and abiding hatred for any and all things conservative is no "aside"....
It is the primary, defining characteristic of your presence here...it is expressed in 90% of what you post....it is your whole raison d'art....(though I think it's also pretty clear that most of the time your attacks on conservatives are really something you use as a surrogate fora attacking the conservative
people on the board that you hate...including of course, your humble corespondent....ditto your attacks on Christianity...though it's probably some of both...you have exhibited a pretty much limitless capacity for hatred...)
And if you're going to claim, (as you frequently do, and did in this case) that there is some causal link between conservatism and a place being poorly run, it is perfectly fair game for someone, (as I did here) to present evidence that the place where you live, (which happens to be run by liberals) ain't exactly paradise....
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 2:27 pm
by Crackpot
I just waht to know what the USPS has to do wwith this thread
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:24 pm
by dgs49
When flying commercial airlines at night I have often wondered what is the point of having so many cities lit up like mid-day in the middle of the night. The idea that neurotically brilliant street-lighting suppresses criminal activity has long proven false. More cities should take a second look at their lighting expense and scale it back a bit.
Ironically, Detroit has a lot going for it. There remain very nice UMC and MC neighborhoods where very desirable housing can be purchased at quite reasonable cost. For those with skills, a good work ethic, or a relevant education, the job market is fine, thank you very much. There is a lot to do, and the rivers and lakes provide not only scenic pleasure, but the opportunity for various sorts of recreation. The ability to pop over to Canada for dinner or shopping is a nice plus. The professional sports teams are doing quite well, as are sales of luxury boxes and whatnot.
There are incredible real-estate investment opportunities, though not without some risk, and a resurgence to some extent is inevitable, given the city's great location, good roads, and the now-thriving auto industry (along with the related industries that support it).
But City government is poor-third-world, largely due to a level of corruption and self-dealing that is astounding to outsiders. The city is economically and legally bankrupt, and like everyplace else that is run by Democrats, in hock to its unions. One can only hope that the City government is shortly ushered into a benevolent form of receivership, in which all existing contracts can be renegotiated, services can be out-sourced, and the school system turned over to a competent management firm.
I can dream, can't I?
Honestly, I visit the Detroit area 4-5 times a year, and I like it. The depressing statistics about the City's population and economy mask pockets of prosperity and culture that are attractive and thriving.
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 3:53 pm
by Jarlaxle
Crackpot wrote:I just waht to know what the USPS has to do wwith this thread
Ask rube & his gin bottle.
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 5:08 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
Gin? Gin? But that's no raisin d'art I tell you!
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 11:43 pm
by Econoline
Crackpot wrote:I just waht to know what the USPS has to do wwith this thread
Jarlaxle wrote:Ask rube & his gin bottle.
rubato wrote:we are not skilled in dealing with population declines or declines in general (the USPS for example) because our experience is mostly that of growth.
(You might agree or disagree with it, but he did explain it.)
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 11:55 pm
by dales
Lord Jim wrote:San Bernardino, Riverside, Inland San Diego, Stockton, Merced, Modesto, Fresno all have the worst problems from stupid housing construction.
And yet, with the exception of Stockton, every single town on that list is a safer place to live than that bastion of proper liberal governance Santa "Dodge City" Cruz....Go figure...
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/santa-cruz/crime/
The Mayor of Santa Cruz ought to go to Riverside or Fresno and take notes to try and figure out what he's doing wrong ....
Or to
Antioch, CA ....where I live....not really known as a "safe communtiry".
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/antioch/crime/
Re: Detroit in the dark.
Posted: Sat May 26, 2012 12:25 am
by Crackpot
Econoline wrote:Crackpot wrote:I just waht to know what the USPS has to do wwith this thread
Jarlaxle wrote:Ask rube & his gin bottle.
rubato wrote:we are not skilled in dealing with population declines or declines in general (the USPS for example) because our experience is mostly that of growth.
(You might agree or disagree with it, but he did explain it.)
Explain what? I still don't know what his post is about, unless, is was some self aggrandizing pontification that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. (and I would not put it past him) Beyond that he's also wrong because there are many cities that can deal with a rather large population contraction. Detroit and other cities that came of age post industrial revolution are somewhat special in that housing is by and large single family homes which create a lower population density. Meaning any population contraction is highly visible and harder to deal with. Detroit is an extreme example of this in that the City has been in decline for almost 50 years now even though the region has grown for most of that time. If it was not for Racist policies which lead to the riots the "white flight" and the subsequent horrible governance which lead to the continued drive of the population to the suburbs Detroit would be in a much different situation than it is now. THe good news is is they now have a largely responsible governance in place that is trying to fix the problems rather than punting it down the line while lining their pockets with as much cash as they can.