Detroit is my city and I love it. Despite me growing up in the suburbs and never actually living in the city itself, I consider it my home.
Detroit is a city filled with pride. Whether it be those attached to the city because their great grandparents came here to seek the $5 a day pay rate, or the youth that are attempting to rekindle the “classic” Detroit our parents reminisce about.
I never witnessed the Detroit that was completely functional. And ironically, most of the youth who live in the city that are attempting to revive it never did either. Despite that, those people are attempting to add grease to the gears and transform it back to the well-oiled machine it once was. This is a passionate demographic. The most successful people I’ve ever met or read about are not necessarily the most intelligent or sharpest, but the most passionate.
Having visited many of the major cities in the US, I can confidently say that Detroit is the most unique. “Unique” is a unique word. The definition of that word should ultimately remain undefined by Merriam-Webster with any conventional definition. In fact, if anything, it should simply say:
Unique (yu-neek): Adjective, noun, and verb: 1. Detroit (Please visit the city for definition).
The interesting thing about Detroit is that it still remains one of the more popular cities in the Midwest. It’s not popular in the sense that people are flocking to it (obviously), but in the sense that people know it. Not only do they know it as one of the larger and populated cities in the country, but also for its inability to shun the negativity that seems to coattail it in the national media. Anytime a negative report breaks headlines, people in Detroit and the suburbs have the same shocking response; ‘all the national media does is report what’s bad.’ Well, no shit. Maybe it’s because there really isn’t a lot of positive to report.
I’m beginning to think that the real problem with Detroit is that those who are trying to revitalize it have blinders up to the real issues that need to be resolved before it can reestablish itself as a legitimate city. Instead of asking the national media why they only report negativity, we should thank them for offering us an outside perspective as to why our city is the way it is.
There are positive things happening. I have many friends who have moved downtown and do their best to support the local economy. That’s great and they’re making a difference, but is that something that the national media can make a headline about?
It’s not the national media that segregates Detroit. It’s not the national media that’s the cause for the high crime rates. It’s not the national media that employs corrupt decision makers. It’s not the national media that [re]elects a criminal mayor. It’s not the national media that is responsible for all the unpaid property taxes.
My point is that Detroit doesn’t need TLC. Enough of the billboards with the mayor telling the citizens that all they need to do is “believe.” Enough of the bumper stickers that imply Detroit can be ‘lifted in prayer.’ Enough of the belief that a statue of a cyborg-movie-icon will fuel Detroit’s ‘comeback.’ Enough with the thought that Detroit can be reconditioned with small vegetable gardens. Enough of the opinion that Detroit doesn’t need the schools reformed.
I more than anyone else want the city to become respectable again. The bottom line is that the curent approach is flawed. I’m not saying that the above contributions are poor ones, but the resolutions to all the problems in the city aren’t going to be fixed with these.
This isn’t the 1950s; the hub for all things “automotive” is no longer Detroit. Infrastructure needs to be created and needs to be done rapidly. The youth movement and passion that is engrained in them is amazing, but not a reasonable solution to put a city back on the map. This generation will eventually move out of Midtown, Corktown, and the other trendy areas of Detroit when they’re ready to settle down with life. When this happens, who is going to take over the reigns?
It’s not difficult to be 25 and live a semi-bohemian lifestyle attempting to make a small difference for a large cause, but when you have children, it’s not the same. The school system is broken, nearly beyond recoverability, and when theses educated youths (which most of them are) want what’s best for their children, the answer won’t be Detroit – not this Detroit.
I love Detroit, but as I visit city after city that has so much more to offer than this one, how can I not be frustrated in these attempts that aren’t permanent solutions? How much longer can I live near or within this decomposition and deterioration?
If people want to revitalize the city, they need to think bigger. I know it’s not easy, but it’s the only way the city will change.
The Solution:
Before you read my solution, I want to inform you that’s it’s radical and I already know that. I’m all about people’s rights and they shouldn’t be taken away. Unfortunately, this is an atypical situation that we’re dealing with and an atypical solution needs to be applied. Also, I don’t want to write a piece how nothing is working and not offer my opinion for what could work.
The 2000 US Census results revealed that the population of Detroit is 951,270. The 2010 results will reveal a smaller number, but for the sake of conservatism, we’ll use this number.
The land area of Detroit is 370 square kilometers. This equates to 2,570 people per square kilometer. Let’s compare this to another Midwestern city, Chicago.
Chicago is 606 square kilometers with a population of 2,695,598. This equates to 4,448 people per square kilometer (versus Detroit’s 2,570). Obviously, Chicago is more populated than Detroit. That’s not what I’m trying to prove here. What I’m trying to prove is that the city of Chicago (which not many would consider as “overpopulated”) is able to pack roughly 40% more people per kilometer than Detroit. This equates to a larger tax base – which a city desperately needs to function. We all know Chicago has short comings. The school system is grossly flawed (read Freakonomics) and many of the other public sectors are also struggling. I wanted to use an imperfect comparison because we’re an imperfect city.
If Detroit packed a similar number of people that Chicago has per square kilometer, it could be done with only 215 of the 370 available square kilometers.
So what’s this mean and where am I going with this? This is where the radical part comes in. I think Detroit needs to take its population and concentrate it into a smaller area. Between the dilapidated housing on both the East and West side of Detroit, and the fact that there are several neighborhoods with only a few houses being resided in, I think that these people should be given housing in the several other areas between 6 mile (roughly) and Midtown along Woodword stretching roughly 6 kilometers both East and West (this is a lot larger of an area than you may be picturing).
Having the population concentrated allows for two things:
First, there won’t be as much sprawl as there is now. It’ll allow the police and other public services to better serve the people. Bus routes, for a example, would be more streamlined.
Second, the proposed cuts to close schools could be implemented with more ease. Concentrating the population would allow the schooling system to operate within those confines. This can be done in the same form it was done in the 1950s when the population was just as high as it would be moving forward.
After this, we can begin on infrastructure. Detroit would have 155 square kilometers both on the East and West side to play with. What do we do with this? Bulldoze it and create farmland; progress with digression.
I realize that the state can’t come in and tell people that they need to move. It’s in direct confliction with the constitution. But here’s how it could work. Anyone who is willing to move will be provided a job in farming or similar industries. And for five years, all children within these families will be provided the means to enroll into school. Reconditioned computers will be distributed (which wouldn’t be costly – computers with the ability to use the internet and type documents).
This farmland could be created to grow any and all crops that are grown in the rest of the Midwest. You could even go as far as saying that wineries could be opened. Michigan has the climate to grow grapes and there are several wineries on the West side of the state. Another part of the plan would to become California of the East. Michigan could very easily become the main producer of marijuana and beat the rest of the states on this side of the country to the punch.
There will never be a lessened demand for food and crops. It’s vital for survival and it’s a need; more valuable than oil or gold. The number of jobs created would be incredible.
Realistically, this would never happen - I'm aware of that. I do think that if the means were there to push a plan similar to this would work though. This addresses a multitude of social and economic issues for the city in the long-term. Simply, I’m becoming tired of people who think Detroit will be what it was 60 years ago. It won’t be and there’s no indication it ever will be. If we want Detroit to thrive, it needs to be reinvented entirely.
No comments:
Post a Comment