 
Crawford
Member
Username: Crawford
Post Number: 208
Registered: 10-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 6:37 pm: |    |
Fury, none of your claims are backed by fact. For some reason, Chicagoans are always running away from comparisons with Detroit, but have no problem comparing themselves with much bigger and more prominent cities.
You claim that Detroit has few brick bungalows. Half of Detroit's West Side consists of brick detached housing. Who cares about exact style, I am talking about housing stock, and both Chicago and Detroit are dominated by detached semi-suburban housing, while NYC is dominated by apartment housing.
According to the 2006 Census, the most common housing stock in Chicago consists of single-family detached homes (just like in Detroit), while in NYC the most common housing stock consists of apartment buildings with more than 20 units.
Chicago housing data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US1714000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP4&-ds_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog =false&-_sse=on
NYC housing data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US3651000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP4&-ds_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog =false&-_sse=on
This mean's Chicago's housing stock is more comparable to Detroit's stock than to NYC's stock.
As for Chicago's declining population, I am talking about the present, not the past. Chicago's population showed some growth in the 1990's but it has (like Detroit) been declining since 2000. It's likely that (like Detroit), Chicago's population has been slowly declining for about a half century. The 1990's "growth" in many cities was just a recalculation of Census figures using sampling methodology for missed residents.
Regarding auto-orientation, of course Chicago is much less auto-centric than Detroit, but it is definitely closer to Detroit than to NYC.
According to the 2006 Census, (like Detroit) a solid majority of Chicago households own at least one car (and many have two or more), while a strong majority of NYC households do not own a car. In fact, more households in Chicago have 2+ vehicles than have no vehicles!
Chicago car ownership data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US1714000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP4&-ds_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog =false&-_sse=on
NYC car ownership data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US3651000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP4&-ds_name=&-_lan g=en&-redoLog=false
Also, the below Census data shows a majority of Chicago households commute alone by car, while a majority of NYC households commute by transit:
Chicago commute data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US1714000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP3&-ds_name=&-_lan g=en&-redoLog=false
NYC commute data:
http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id= 16000US3651000&-qr_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_DP3&-ds_name=ACS_20 06_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-redoLog =false&-_sse=on
This means Chicago is closer to Detroit than to NYC in terms of auto orientation.
Another major difference is in demographics. Like Detroit, Chicago's largest ethnic group is obviously African American. NYC has far more whites and Latinos than African Americans and NYC has a huge Asian population that is not present in Chicago or Detroit.
Also, NYC's black population is completely different than the populations in Chicago and Detroit. Slightly more than half of NYC blacks are immigrants from the West Indies or Africa, while in Chicago, like in Detroit, blacks are overwhelmingly from the Deep South. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1668
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 7:53 pm: | |
quote:According to the 2006 Census, the most common housing stock in Chicago consists of single-family detached homes
Well, sort of. The majority of the housing stock, as Fury indicated, is the 2-3 flat (+/- basement unit). The Census data bears this out.
1 unit, detached: 305,852
2 unit + 3 or 4 units: 381,804
It is true that the vast majority (land-wise) of Chicago resembles Detroit, pre-1960s. Miles and miles of bungalows with commercial strips every 1/2 mile (where Detroit mostly went every mile), and pockets of high density around transit lines. |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1507
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 8:02 pm: | |
Actually, Detroit had a lot of those Chicago flats too. Problem was, many of them were either burned down (namely during the riots), or demolished from abandonment. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1669
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 8:07 pm: | |
Detroitrise, the Detroit 2-flat is very different from what is in Chicago. But yes, Detroit has them too.
One thing Chicago has is a very unified style by neighborhood. Sometimes this is good, other times (particularly if you don't care for the style) it makes neighborhoods very depressing.
(Message edited by focusonthed on February 05, 2008) |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1670
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 8:24 pm: | |
Selected examples (very quick Street View search...there are probably better examples):
Detroit
Chicago (in areas that were more a bit more wealthy at construction time)
Chicago (more working-class neighborhoods)
|
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1508
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 8:28 pm: | |
Interesting.
Detroit does have the homes found in the second photo I think somewhere around Highland Park (they're just bigger in height). |
Dbest
Member
Username: Dbest
Post Number: 90
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 10:19 pm: | |
Interesting photos Focus, also thanks for the info Crawford that was refreshing to see you take the time to link those statistics. |
Mayor_sekou
Member
Username: Mayor_sekou
Post Number: 1878
Registered: 09-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 05, 2008 - 10:54 pm: | |
"My opinion is that historical perceptions don't matter anymore."
By that logic the soon to be historical perception of Detroit as declining rust belt city wont matter anymore when it is being validly compared to Chicago in the future. Nothing last forever. |
Illwill
Member
Username: Illwill
Post Number: 108
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 2:53 am: | |
I can't believe how overly consumed people get when comparing U.S. cities. I don't understand why people just don't realize that all of these cities were built and developed throughout different era's. Over the decades, many unexpected events have changed the make up of these great cities which lead them to where they are now. Each one of these cities has a great historical tale. Chicago is fighting with everything it has in it's powers to stay alive and to reinvent itself so that it continues to compete globally and have strong dominance in the future to come. Detroit is fighting tooth and nail to make the greatest comeback America has yet to ever be seen...and I think it will. Many other cities and suburbs are creating these cheesy downtowns and remain completely envious of Detroit no matter what they say about us along the way, because of our great urban landscape, our resilience, our Detroit strength and our pride. At least they're still talking about us. Just be glad that you weren't raised in Arizona or Jacksonville or someplace that has no historical significance to this country what so ever. Of course being from a city like Detroit, Chicago, New York, Boston, Philly or Baltimore we're gonna have extreme pride because we're all tough cities in our own right. So I understand why we defend Detroit (the best city in the world in my opinion) and Chicagoans will defend their city. But realistically, how can one compare any of these cities placing on city above the next? Yes, one has better means of transportation, the other has a larger population, the other has taller buildings etc... Each one is an individual and yes NYC is media ground zero, so what else would you expect? But you cannot compare apples to oranges and that's exactly what you get when trying to compare a Cleveland to Detroit, Detroit to Chicago or Chicago to New York. |
Mind_field
Member
Username: Mind_field
Post Number: 856
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 3:37 am: | |
By comparing cities, we can glean from others ideas on how to manage and run our own cities. We can't shut ourselves off to the rest of the world for fear that we won't measure up. There is a lot we can learn from how other cities across the country, and even the world are run.
On that note, Chicago has some powerful assets that will strengthen it's global status in the future. Chicago has a proactive government that gets things done. Chicago has a world class lake front. It has amazing high rise architecture, is a global financial and law center, a mass transit system that will hopefully be overhauled should it be awarded the 2016 games, and innovative government initiatives to combat crime, become sustainable, and keep the streets spotless. |
Wolverine
Member
Username: Wolverine
Post Number: 415
Registered: 04-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 7:17 am: | |
If Chicago is losing population (which isn't very much) then the city sure isn't showing it. New construction throughout the neighborhoods is pretty strong. Literally thousands of new infill structures going up around the city in the past few years.
As far as architectural comparisons, don't even bother comparing NYC, Chicago, and Detroit. They are all very different.
I've begun putting together some photo sets of Chicago neighborhoods, if you are interested in some of the less seen areas click on the links below
Chicago's North-most Neighborhood
Rogers Park
Warren Ave Rowhouses
East Garfield Park
There's a couple vacant houses here, but the neighborhood is rebounding. They are recently foreclosed properties, and their listings show them at $139,000 - $180,000. Not bad since the neighborhood is still less than desirable.
An interesting mixed income infill project
Roosevelt Square
I might add some more here later.
(Message edited by wolverine on February 06, 2008) |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 7112
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 10:09 am: | |
Chicago just keep all the ethnic bags in one basket. While Detroit lets all the ethnic eggs spill out the basket. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1671
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 3:52 pm: | |
A similar directory of pictures of Chicago neighborhoods is here: http://neighborhoods.chicago.i l.us/
Some are better than others, some significant neighborhoods are missing, and some have few pictures. But alas, here you go. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 4998
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 4:02 pm: | |
"Comparing cities, Detroit has 900K-1 million people, Chicago has 2.8 million, NYC has 8.25 million, so again Chicago is basically in the middle."
900K 2.8 million 8.25 million
yep. smack dab in the middle |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2641
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 4:05 pm: | |
quote:900K 2.8 million 8.25 million
yep. smack dab in the middle
LOL. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 4999
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 4:09 pm: | |
"It has amazing high rise architecture"
frankly, once again, i find most of the additions of the last 30-40 years to be boring. the great stuff they do have certainly has its equals in detroit. I will take Ford Field any day over the way the destroyed Soldier Field. I would take the Chicago government any day over Detroit's. |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1515
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 4:22 pm: | |
Well Chicago does have us beat in one area (in contradiction to what Rb336 is stating), they do have a taller, denser and larger downtown in square miles than Detroit (Chicago is 3 or 4 sq. mi). |
Slybird
Member
Username: Slybird
Post Number: 26
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 06, 2008 - 7:17 pm: | |
Nah... I was merely poking fun at Dbest. Apparently, I need to refine my lighthearted approach.
My main view in comparing D to Chicago (or, more accurately, reading about it) is wondering where the paths of two such similar areas - in more ways than one can count, really - diverged.
In my experience (and I lived IN each city 4 years in Detroit, 11 in Chicago) is that honestly, there is an intangible "impersonableness" here in Chicago. I never felt that in Detroit. As far as the rest of the state, I miss miss miss Michigan. Illinois is indeed dull. I forget who said we would say we never go there, but they were right - we never go there. If it was like MI, I sure would... |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2643
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 7:33 am: | |
-impersonableness
Can you define that? |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 5005
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 8:34 am: | |
"they do have a taller, denser and larger downtown"
I never said they didn't, i just said that most of it bores me to tears and that comparing the old stuff, our architecture can go head to head with theirs |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 3843
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 9:41 am: | |
"...our architecture can go head to head with theirs..."
For starters, I don't think Detroit has anything like the Auditorium, the Reliance Building, the Manhattan Building, or the Rookery.
We have precious little 19th century commercial stock left here in Detroit. Sure, we have some of the best '20s stuff, but that's it. |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1524
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 11:36 am: | |
"I never said they didn't, i just said that most of it bores me to tears and that comparing the old stuff, our architecture can go head to head with theirs"
I never said their scrapers and buildings weren't boring. Many of the older buildings were designed by the same architecture that designed several Detroit buildings or scrapers.
My point is apparently, the employers and job seekers don't look for architecture in this day and age for work or living, they just look for tall, dense, bustling cities. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 5013
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 11:45 am: | |
Never been a fan of late 19th century architecture, although I do like the rookery. half of me likes the Wright lobby, half of me hates it |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 3849
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 12:02 pm: | |
Aha, then that's it... that's where we diverge. Late 19th century architecture (especially Richardsonian Romanesque) is my favorite, while I find 1920s buildings passe in general (my exception would be the Guardian Building, which is fantastic). |
Crawford
Member
Username: Crawford
Post Number: 209
Registered: 10-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 1:21 pm: | |
"yep. smack dab in the middle"
RB, how old are you? Are you able to do basic math? Have you ever heard of the word "proportional"?
Let me break it out in terms you might be able to understand: Chicago has about 2.5-3 times Detroit's population, and New York has about 2.5-3 times Chicago's population.
This means that, population-wise, Detroit is to Chicago as Chicago is to New York. Therefore your population-based claim that Chicago cannot be compared to Detroit yet can be compared to NYC is silly. |
Slybird
Member
Username: Slybird
Post Number: 27
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 1:22 pm: | |
"-impersonableness
Can you define that?"
Sure, Iheartthed
I guess you could say it is an amalgamation of impersonal and personable, with the "-ness" added to make it a noun. The quotes mean that I actually know it is not a word. Most people who read a bit can gather that, but you knew that, didn't you? Or do you lack a keen grasp of the obvious?
Man, some of y'all are really touchy... |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 2645
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 1:42 pm: | |
quote:Sure, Iheartthed
I guess you could say it is an amalgamation of impersonal and personable, with the "-ness" added to make it a noun. The quotes mean that I actually know it is not a word. Most people who read a bit can gather that, but you knew that, didn't you? Or do you lack a keen grasp of the obvious?
Um no, smartass. I'm really asking you to clarify what you meant by that... Since it's not a word I can go look up in the dictionary. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 5024
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 1:43 pm: | |
you did not talk ratios previously. had you said that the Ration of population put Chicago in the middle, you would have been correct. however, you laid it out as a spectrum, so you have essentially done the mathematical equivalent of mixing metaphors |
Mauser765
Member
Username: Mauser765
Post Number: 2465
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 1:44 pm: | |
Chicago is awesome. |
Slybird
Member
Username: Slybird
Post Number: 28
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 4:54 pm: | |
Iheartthed, sorry.  Maybe I am touchy meself. ;)
"Impersonableness" - Maybe call it the feeling of being a very little fish in a very large pond. I wouldn't call it unfriendliness, but it is maybe a little colder here at times. Maybe with Detroit it is adversity forming stronger bonds, as in "we're all in this together," I don't know. I arrived in Southfield from living in the Philippines at 10 yrs old. After a hectic Navy existence spent mostly in the Far East, Southfield was home to me for the next nine years (1973-1982). So, I consider myself a Michigander (do they still say that?) mostly, if not a Detroiter. My time living in Detroit was 1985-1989, at Six Mile and Lahser. Some would say that isn't really Detroit, and I probably wouldn't argue. Still, I remain deeply affected when I see, visit and think of Detroit. It is why I frequent this site, if I don't post a ton. I do think that the Chicago-Detroit comparison is valid - if one must compare. One huge advantage I see in Detroit is the international border right there. What a great asset for any city, and Detroit is (I believe) pretty unique in having it.
Some things I definitely do not like about living in Chicago? OK - it's fookin' expensive to live here. The city has it's hands so deep into my pockets that they can scratch my knees. Parking is always an issue - a $23 issue. Don't even get me going about the sorry state of local live music... Some amazing bands in Detroit. Liz Larin, for one.
Mauser - thanks for the kind words, as if I can take any credit for what you say. |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 524
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:20 pm: | |
Why would 6 and Lahser not be Detroit? |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1531
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:24 pm: | |
Bearinabox, probably because it's near Old Redford. |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 525
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:32 pm: | |
...which is part of Detroit. |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1534
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:34 pm: | |
It's all Detroit. You can probably ask OldRefordette, but it was a portion Detroit annexed which originally belonged to Redford, so it's pretty low density, suburban in style. It kinda justifies REdford High School just a mile up the way.
(Message edited by detroitrise on February 07, 2008) |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 526
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:40 pm: | |
That's all ancient history, though. Every part of Detroit except the CBD was annexed from a township at one point or another, and none of those annexations happened after the late 1920s. It is a bit lower-density than more central neighborhoods, but it's as much a part of Detroit as, say, 7 and Gratiot. |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1535
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, February 07, 2008 - 5:52 pm: | |
That's true, If that's the case, you could say the same for 7 Mile and Greenfield.
Oh, and correction, I meant Redford Township. 6 Mile and Lahser was it's downtown.
https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/110596.html?1182629131 |
Dove7
Member
Username: Dove7
Post Number: 2050
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 09, 2008 - 12:02 pm: | |
Detroit and Chicago is like night and day. There are some similarities with the homes. But overall Chicago is more similar to NYC. The best way that I can define Chicago is a blend of Detroit and NYC. The neighborhoods that I've been in remind me of Detroit with a Brooklyn and NYC twist. The transit system is similar to NYC. |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1676
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, February 09, 2008 - 2:28 pm: | |
As a Chicago resident, I can assure you that New York's MTA is FAR FAR FAR superior to Chicago's CTA. However, Chicago's is second in the US. DC's Metro is nice, but it doesn't have the coverage of the CTA or NY Subway, and it closes way too early. Chicago also has direct rail service to two airports, something few cities in the entire world can claim. |
Dove7
Member
Username: Dove7
Post Number: 2051
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 09, 2008 - 5:14 pm: | |
San Francisco has direct rail services via BART. San Francisco, near where I reside has one of the best transit systems in the country. Damn BART can take you near San Jose. They are now talking about connecting the BART between both cities. They need it. Traffic here can be a nightmare. |
Mauser765
Member
Username: Mauser765
Post Number: 2495
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 09, 2008 - 5:48 pm: | |
"...our architecture can go head to head with theirs..."
Yeah, ALL of Detroits architecture vs. ONE BLOCK of downtown Chicago. No comparo. |
Dbest
Member
Username: Dbest
Post Number: 91
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 12:30 am: | |
Mauser heres a site that I think may be of some assistance to you:
www.chicagoyes.com
Btw, maybe if you took some time to learn about Detroit architecture you would realize why people on this forum hold it in such high regards. |
Wolverine
Member
Username: Wolverine
Post Number: 419
Registered: 04-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 12:54 am: | |
^ Actually he knows plenty about Detroit architecture. Probably more than you'd ever imagine. |
Dbest
Member
Username: Dbest
Post Number: 92
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 3:43 pm: | |
Who are you Wolverine? Actually nevermind I dont care, let him defend himself your little testimonial means nothing to me because you have no credibility, furthermore I was just glad to see you didn't add anymore pictures of projects in Chicago that no one cares about. Also Mouser (notice I spelled you like the nickname for a cat) all you are is Pussy trying to find some rodent to devour. If you know so much about Detroit's architecture why all the disrespect? Hope you two like the chicagoyes site and feel free to delete Detoiletyes from your bookmarks, you wont be missed!
Best Wishes, DBEST |
Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed
Post Number: 1677
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 4:27 pm: | |
lol |
Wolverine
Member
Username: Wolverine
Post Number: 420
Registered: 04-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 10, 2008 - 7:50 pm: | |
Leave DYes and miss this drama? No way!
I was only posting the Chicago neighborhood photos for people to see how different one built environment was from the other. There's no point in discussing architecture when there is nothing to see of the other cities being discussed. In no way did I hold one city's architecture in higher regard over the other. Look at my posts. I stated that all cities are different. Each city is unique in what they posses, and have their own value.
Actually in my opinion, my very OWN opinion, I love Detroit's pre-depression architecture the best. So I have no idea why you would bother to suggest I go elsewhere. Sure I've had increased interest in Chicago, but shouldn't everyone try to learn about other cities?
I'm trying to explain to people why it's not valid to make certain comparisons. I'm also providing resources to where they can see architecture in other cities.
The only reason why I defended Mauser was because you claimed he had little knowledge of Detroit architecture. Go back through his years of posting and you will see otherwise. I don't think you can challenge my credibility when you haven't done the research yourself.
(Message edited by wolverine on February 10, 2008) |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.