HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 4:13 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Dallas is located in prairie land. I don't think there are a lot of native trees in that area. Older Detroit suburbs do have trees (example), but the newer Detroit suburbs are mostly converted from farmland.
Interestingly, Johannesburg is located on a dry, cold savannah and it has one of the best urban tree coverage in the world, including the famous Jacarandás: https://www.google.com/search?q=joha...nt=firefox-b-e, native from Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest. I like to green places, as long as they're not on desert.

Not sure if it's a false memory, but I remember to read somewhere that there was this big storm in Detroit that destroyed much of its tree coverage.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 4:47 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Dallas is located in prairie land. I don't think there are a lot of native trees in that area. Older Detroit suburbs do have trees (example), but the newer Detroit suburbs are mostly converted from farmland.
Yeah, Metro Detroit is tree-filled. Not like the Northeast Corridor, or Atlanta & Charlotte, but still pretty woodsy. Even the city proper has some very nice tree-filled environments. But the newer sprawl tends to be on farmland, and is kinda bleak. Macomb County sprawl, especially, is pretty bad. Hall Road northwards is kind of dystopian.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 5:36 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post

A lot of Detroit looks like Dallas, not just in built form, but demographics. Endless McMansions with tons of South Asians and Arabs, giant freeway-like surface arterials, megachurches, drive-thru everything, bleak, relatively treeless townships relentlessly consuming farmland. Places like Canton Township, Novi, Lyon Township, Commerce Township, Rochester Hills, etc. Kinda a Dallas-Toronto sprawl mashup, minus the Dallas Mexicans and the Toronto apartment blocks.
Shit sprawl exists in literally every major metropolitan area that didn't completely stagnate a la Pittsburgh and Buffalo.

These places as described only exist on the fringes in the exurbs. Other than that Detroit is built like a traditional city and looks nothing like Dallas.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 5:38 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Also Buffalo has plenty of the same sprawl, take a look at this crap. There's quite a lot of it too for a small city.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9844...7i16384!8i8192
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 5:40 PM
hipster duck's Avatar
hipster duck hipster duck is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,109
Quote:

Detroit

1950: 3,170,315
...
2020: 4,392,041
Quote:
Buffalo-Niagara Falls

1950: 1,089,230
...
2020: 1,166,902
You can see why Detroit's sprawl resembles a fast growth metro like Dallas, while Buffalo has leapfrog microsprawl developments of a few dozen homes here and there.

Metro Detroit gained 1.2M overall, while losing 1.2M in the city alone during that same time frame, so there was a suburban gain of an additional 2.4M people between 1950-2020, or an increase of ~170%.

Metro Buffalo essentially stayed the same, while losing 300k in the city proper, so essentially the suburbs grew by about 76%.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 5:47 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
Interestingly, Johannesburg is located on a dry, cold savannah and it has one of the best urban tree coverage in the world, including the famous Jacarandás: https://www.google.com/search?q=joha...nt=firefox-b-e, native from Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest. I like to green places, as long as they're not on desert.

Not sure if it's a false memory, but I remember to read somewhere that there was this big storm in Detroit that destroyed much of its tree coverage.
Dutch Elm disease wiped out a lot of large trees in the northeast quadrant of the U.S. in the mid 20th century. But inner-city Detroit still has very good tree coverage, IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 5:50 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri View Post
What's up with this lack of trees in Detroit (and Dallas)? To me US suburbs has always been associated with lots of trees on the streets, on the plots.
There is no lack of trees in Detroit or suburbs, he's making shit up. It's an extremely woodsy, forest biome. Crawford is a shit source on everything under the sun.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5668...7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4228...7i16384!8i8192


The exurbs will have less trees, because they're brand new sprawl built about 15 years ago, Macomb sprawl is usually the worst at this. He's over-inflating those areas.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 6:39 PM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
This first link has an Atlanta vibe.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 6:42 PM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Also Buffalo has plenty of the same sprawl, take a look at this crap. There's quite a lot of it too for a small city.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9844...7i16384!8i8192
Transit Rd is one of the busiest major suburban shopping stroads in Western NY that's actually a state highway going 73.5 miles through the suburban population centers from Amherst/East Amherst/Clarence down through Cheektowaga/Depew all the way down to Orchard Park and I believe East Aurora. This sprawl isn't new. Eastern Hills mall was built in 1971 for example.

Some of the highest income areas are within 1.5-2 miles West or East of this stroad in the East Amherst/Clarence area.

Clarence for example is small at 32,000 people but recently had 11 of the 47 homes (almost 25%) that have sold for over $1M USD in Erie county this year. Check out Spaulding Lake to see the wealth.
It used to be rare to have 5 houses total in all of Erie county to sell for over $1M. Now it's 10x that, meaning it's no longer a declining Metro.

Clarence, NY
https://www.realtor.com/realestatean...rence_NY/sby-2

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Route_78

Last edited by Wigs; Nov 25, 2022 at 7:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 7:03 PM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
If anyone wants to see how intact the city proper of Buffalo is, check out this drone video from 400ft above.
Beautiful tree lined residential streets and the "Elmwood Village" Elmwood Ave commercial strip. Old money mansions in city proper never emptied out and the vast majority are still standing even on Buffalo's"Millionaires Row" Delaware Ave (although most are office/not for profit uses)

Stark contrast to the East side that emptied out

Video Link


Here's a good overview of Buffalo
Video Link

Last edited by Wigs; Nov 26, 2022 at 4:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 7:40 PM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 3,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Docere View Post
Oh, my!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 9:46 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipster duck View Post
You can see why Detroit's sprawl resembles a fast growth metro like Dallas, while Buffalo has leapfrog microsprawl developments of a few dozen homes here and there.

Metro Detroit gained 1.2M overall, while losing 1.2M in the city alone during that same time frame, so there was a suburban gain of an additional 2.4M people between 1950-2020, or an increase of ~170%.

Metro Buffalo essentially stayed the same, while losing 300k in the city proper, so essentially the suburbs grew by about 76%.
Yes. Detroit's postwar land consumption was similar to Sun Belt metros, but it just wasn't supported by regional population growth.

The left image below shows the footprint of Metro Detroit in 1900. The middle shows it in 1950. The right shows it as of 2000. Metro Flint is also visible in the top left of the 1950 and 2000 images, and Ann Arbor the big urban spot to the left of Detroit in 1950:



source: https://www.theatlantic.com/national...inking/240193/

Between 1950 and 2000 the footprint of Metro Detroit grew by 200-300%, while the population only grew by 40%.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 10:12 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Yes. Detroit's postwar land consumption was similar to Sun Belt metros, but it just wasn't supported by regional population growth.

The left image below shows the footprint of Metro Detroit in 1900. The middle shows it in 1950. The right shows it as of 2000. Metro Flint is also visible in the top left of the 1950 and 2000 images, and Ann Arbor the big urban spot to the left of Detroit in 1950:



source: https://www.theatlantic.com/national...inking/240193/

Between 1950 and 2000 the footprint of Metro Detroit grew by 200-300%, while the population only grew by 40%.
Interesting comparison of Detroit with Sunbelt cities, and sprawl. I perceive that another similarity with the Sunbelt is that Detroit did not seem to have a strong or semi-dominant downtown like Chicago given it has been the second largest metro in the Midwest. Its downtown seems more like that of Dallas or Phoenix than even a city like Cincy, Pittsburgh, or Milwaukee and definitely not like Chicago. But I don't know the history of Detroit's downtown that much so maybe I am wrong about this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Nov 25, 2022, 10:41 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 9,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
Interesting comparison of Detroit with Sunbelt cities, and sprawl. I perceive that another similarity with the Sunbelt is that Detroit did not seem to have a strong or semi-dominant downtown like Chicago given it has been the second largest metro in the Midwest. Its downtown seems more like that of Dallas or Phoenix than even a city like Cincy, Pittsburgh, or Milwaukee and definitely not like Chicago. But I don't know the history of Detroit's downtown that much so maybe I am wrong about this.
In its heyday, downtown Detroit was way ahead of Dallas or Phoenix. In 1950s America, there wouldn't have been maybe 2 or 3 downtowns in America that were stronger than Detroit: NYC, Chicago, and arguably Philadelphia. That this is not apparent today says more about the scale of the loss of urbanity in Detroit than anything else.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 12:38 AM
AviationGuy AviationGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cypress, TX
Posts: 5,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Dallas is located in prairie land. I don't think there are a lot of native trees in that area. Older Detroit suburbs do have trees (example), but the newer Detroit suburbs are mostly converted from farmland.
Actually, parts of the DFW metro have plenty of native trees, particularly south DFW in the Duncanville area (cedar/oak hills), parts of Arlington, and a fair amount of Fort Worth. But other parts are very midwestern looking prairie, like Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois. It's a mixed bag regarding vegetation. Just depends on where you are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 1:49 AM
Yuri's Avatar
Yuri Yuri is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,478
Let's cross the ocean once more:

Glasgow


Expedia

Area: 3,347 km²

Population
1861: - 837,470
1881: 1,211,714
1911: 1,892,523
1921: 1,972,484 ---- 4.2%
1931: 2,008,714 ---- 1.8%
1951: 2,090,751
1961: 2,135,885 ---- 2.2%
1971: 2,101,135 --- -1.6%
1981: 1,878,406 -- -10.6%
1991: 1,779,818 --- -5.2%
2001: 1,749,319 --- -1.7%
2011: 1,787,515 ---- 2.2%
2021: 1,849,070 ---- 3.4%

Population peak: 1961

Decline from the peak: -13.4%

Biggest decline: -18.1% (1961-2001)

We discussed how Pittsburgh was unique for being the earliest US major centre to experience low growth, followed by decline. Well, as home of Industrial Revolution, British cities bring this to a whole new level.

Glasgow, the so-called "the 2nd city of the British Empire", an industrial powerhouse, world's largest shipbuilding centre. By the turn of the 20th century, it was already posting modest growth while Pittsburgh was still booming.

It peaked in 1961 and then followed the classical Rust Belt pattern, with the biggest decline we've seen so far (-18.1%).

There is a turning point in late 1990's, with Glasgow resuming its growth as other British cities, due Britain's economic resurgence, and of course, mass immigration. Here we have a divergence between British and American rust belts.
__________________
London - São Paulo - Rio de Janeiro - Londrina - Frankfurt

Last edited by Yuri; Nov 30, 2022 at 11:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 2:00 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 7,364
I had a good time in the two days I spent in Glasgow five years ago. The Kelvingrove Museum was quite delightful. Bit of a distinctive accent too, probably reflecting the influence of Irish immigrants.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 2:03 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
In its heyday, downtown Detroit was way ahead of Dallas or Phoenix. In 1950s America, there wouldn't have been maybe 2 or 3 downtowns in America that were stronger than Detroit: NYC, Chicago, and arguably Philadelphia. That this is not apparent today says more about the scale of the loss of urbanity in Detroit than anything else.
I don't think Detroit, even in 1930, was anywhere close to Philly, Boston or SF in terms of downtown vibrancy. Once there were cars, it was always a polycentric, auto-oriented model. There were very strong secondary districts, like Grand River-Joy and Grand River-Greenfield, not that different from LA.

Detroit probably had the third best collection of prewar highrises on earth, but the downtown was always pretty compact. There were never more than three department stores (albeit one was one of the world's largest), and the commercial core was only a few blocks. There were only two department stores by the late 1950's. There was never much of a prewar highrise residential lifestyle, outside of a few buildings along/near Woodward. The 1920's-era theaters and office buildings were incredibly grand, basically unmatched outside of NY and Chicago, but there wasn't much else. There were two streets worth a stroll - Woodward and Washington Blvd. Granted, Woodward was a pedestrian crush until the late 1960's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 2:33 AM
Wigs's Avatar
Wigs Wigs is offline
Great White Norf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 10,820
I wonder if Detroit had boomed earlier like Chicago if it would be in much better shape than its meteoric rise/decline of 1,217,104 people
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Nov 26, 2022, 2:50 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wigs View Post
I wonder if Detroit had boomed earlier like Chicago if it would be in much better shape than its meteoric rise/decline of 1,217,104 people
Probably. Detroit was unique in that it had the highest industrial wages on earth, which powered very high auto ownership levels, which powered sprawl. Auto industry workers could purchase deeply discounted vehicles via employee pricing. You had really strong auto-oriented suburban districts by the 1930's, not that different from LA. The streetcar system seemed stressed unusually early, and downtown retail was sinking even in the 1950's.

I remember reading a book about Hudson's, the premiere department store, and second largest on earth. The last addition to the flagship was completed around 1950. I think by 1955 or so, executives were alarmed that the store might not last. It survived until 1982, but sales shrank from the early 50's onward.

The second largest department store, Kern's, struggled and was sold in 1957, and shut down in 1959. A third department store, Crowley's, lasted until the mid-1970's.

There was a big marketing blitz called Downtown Detroit Days, to get people shopping downtown, beginning in 1954, and lasting into the 1980's. Downtown execs were worried very early in the postwar years. Detroit was basically a decade or two ahead of other U.S. cities in the suburban retail shift. In other major U.S. downtown cores, they were still building new freestanding flagship department stores in the 1960's and 70's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:45 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.