Detroit is shrinking, but not in the media

Shrinking has been the hot button topic for Detroit in the media lately. Blog after blog, newspaper after newspaper (running the same Associated Press release) are talking about making Detroit smaller. Some thing it's a good idea, some think it's a terrible idea. Here are a two from the New York Times and our friends over at Time (and it's not written in their "Detroit Blog" for a change).

Excerpt from the New York Times:

If the residents of largely empty areas aren't willing to sell and move, then we are back in the same quandary that always faces large public changes in urban land use, like the construction of G.M.'s Poletown plant. To what extent should a city put perceived citywide interests ahead of the wishes of individual property-owners?

If removing a largely vacant neighborhood really generates significant gains, then some sizable fraction of those gains can be given to the citizens who will have to give up their homes. If generous payments, rather than eminent domain, are used to move the remaining residents, then right-sizing can be win-win.

But if Mayor Bing tries to do too much, too quickly, without giving enough to the residents who have to move, then right-sizing will justly be seen as yet another example of the public insensitivity and folly that has unfortunately marred too many past efforts at dealing with urban distress.

Read the entire article here.

Excerpt from Time magazine:

These are heady days in Detroit. After decades of false starts, the city is finally starting to see movement. Major efforts are under way to consolidate neighborhoods (one-third of Detroit's residential parcels are vacant lots or empty homes), close failing schools (one-third of Detroit children attend schools that rank among the state's bottom 5%), invest in new-economy job creation (one-quarter of Detroiters are officially unemployed) and improve its woeful public-transportation system.

Detroit can't possibly accomplish all these goals on its own. Nor can the philanthropies. Even if the dozen or so major foundations currently active in Detroit were to pitch in a billion dollars over the next decade — which is possible — it wouldn't begin to fill the bucket. But Rapson believes the right private dollars in the right public places can get things rolling. It's a delicate game. The philanthropies, says Rapson, need to show "a sense of long-term politics that understands how incredibly divisive this work can be if it's done without sensitivity and skill."

Read the entire article here.