Cities that would be better off in somewhat different locations than they are

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Wasn't this a city building exercise to revitalize central Detroit? In contrast, Scotiabank Arena in Toronto re-enforces downtown as central meeting place, adjacent to subways and regional rail. This is where Detroit is lacking. The infrastructure is not there.

Yes. Little Caesars Arena was an urban revitalization exercise. It was funded with taxpayer dollars.

The Palace, the predecessor arena, was absolutely NOT an urban revitalization exercise. It was in sprawl hell. And was privately funded. But it was a goldmine for Pistons ownership.

Another difference - Little Caesars Arena was exclusively built for the Red Wings; the Palace was exclusively built for the Pistons. There are some quirks that distinguish hockey and basketball arenas. The Pistons, under new ownership, joined the party once the arena was under construction. So it's actually built as a hockey arena, not a dual-use arena.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And this is exactly the point. The Palace was convenient to the attendees. The new arena isn't, which is why attendance has plummeted, especially in the expensive seats, which is what matters.

There's no wealth Downriver, so who cares? If 1% of the HNWI in MI live Downriver, I'd be shocked.

The Pistons used to lead the league in attendance, basically every year. The Palace used to be among the two most profitable arenas in the U.S. every year. It was convenient to all the wealth, and that's basically all that matters.

This is less important for other events, though. Concerts attract a more broad cross-section of attendees, and they're a one-time deal. Also hockey and other events are less tied to wealth. But season ticket and suite holders, people/corps paying 50k or whatever to reserve space, are the bread and butter of the NBA. People have a hard time justifying 50k if you can't attend on weeknights.

Now the Palace made no sense from a regional planning perspective. The new arena has greater regional benefits. But for the Pistons, it's been a big issue. Dr. Joe from Neurology is no longer attending Wed. nights.

I'm pretty sure the reason they chose that site for the Palace is because the land was cheaper at the time than trying to build in a more central location. All of that was farmland before the Palace was built. Auburn Hills didn't even incorporate until 1983, which was just three years before they broke ground on the arena. The Palace also would've flopped without I-696, which was completed in 1989, the year after the Palace opened.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'm pretty sure the reason they chose that site for the Palace is because the land was cheaper at the time than trying to build in a more central location.

No, Bill Davidson lived in Bloomfield Hills, 10 minutes away, and wanted an arena close to his house. And he got it. And it made a ton. The Palace was built in that location because of Bloomfield Hills. You could never build an arena in Bloomfield Hills.

Yeah, the land was cheap, nothing land. Auburn Hills is mostly Pontiac schools, so not great for residential, and Chrysler hadn't yet relocated, so not hot for commercial. It's basically Pontiac, but with land. But he wanted an arena close to wealthy attendees, and his plans worked.

I-696 has nothing to do with the equation. He only cared about proximity to money, to fill the (at the time) largest number of suites in any arena on earth. He wasn't thinking about whether someone from St. Clair Shores found the arena inconvenient, as it was essentially irrelevant to the bottom line.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

No, Bill Davidson lived in Bloomfield Hills, 10 minutes away, and wanted an arena close to his house. And he got it. And it made a ton. The Palace was built in that location because of Bloomfield Hills. You could never build an arena in Bloomfield Hills.

Yeah, the land was cheap, nothing land. Auburn Hills is mostly Pontiac schools, so not great for residential, and Chrysler hadn't yet relocated, so not hot for commercial. It's basically Pontiac, but with land. But he wanted an arena close to wealthy attendees, and his plans worked.

I-696 has nothing to do with the equation. He only cared about proximity to money, to fill the (at the time) largest number of suites in any arena on earth. He wasn't thinking about whether someone from St. Clair Shores found the arena inconvenient, as it was essentially irrelevant to the bottom line.

Yes, he chose cheap land near his house as opposed to cheap land in southern or western Wayne county, but the reason it went there is because of the cheap land. I-696 was critical to the Palace, as even to this day it remains pretty isolated from the population center of Metro Detroit, and there was no good east-west connector that didn't go through the city. In the early/mid 1980s northern Oakland County was pretty much a rural backwater.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Canada really dropped the ball by not letting us annex them back in 1812. Look at all of that metro Detroit sprawl they inadvertantly caused. Blame Canada!

Actually, that's makes for an interesting alt history thought experiment.
Would some bigger Canadian cities even of been realized had that happened?
With the freedom of movement, would some of them grown larger?
Most Americans already think that Buffalo may as well be in Siberia, so I don't know for sure.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Razor

Actually, that's makes for an interesting alt history thought experiment.
Would some bigger Canadian cities even of been realized had that happened?
With the freedom of movement, would some of them grown larger?
Most Americans already think that Buffalo may as well be in Siberia, so I don't know for sure.

I think if Ontario and Quebec were in the U.S. then Montreal would probably be bigger and Toronto would be smaller. New York City would also likely be smaller, as it would've made the Erie Canal less critical (and it may not have even happened). Buffalo probably also wouldn't be much more than a village.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think if Ontario and Quebec were in the U.S. then Montreal would probably be bigger and Toronto would be smaller. New York City would also likely be smaller, as it would've made the Erie Canal less critical (and it may not have even happened). Buffalo probably also wouldn't be much more than a village.

Interesting..Maybe Halifax would be radically smaller as well, and Windsor wouldn't exist.Quebec City may of grown more significantly as well..Just too many darn variables to even try to imagine.

[PhilliesPhan]

This is tangentially related to the thread: when looking at the Lehigh Valley, why did Allentown become the largest city over Easton? Easton sits at the confluence of the Delaware and Lehigh Rivers, is closer to New York, and would have arguably been closer to Philadelphia via rail. Maybe it was due to geography more than anything? Allentown seems like it had more flat land to expand along.

Also, Philadelphia is at a perfect location, but I often wonder how differently the city would have developed if the historic core of Center City were in the Navy Yard. It makes me wonder if the city would have multiple skylines between the Delaware and Schuylkill like Manhattan.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think if Ontario and Quebec were in the U.S. then Montreal would probably be bigger and Toronto would be smaller. New York City would also likely be smaller, as it would've made the Erie Canal less critical (and it may not have even happened). Buffalo probably also wouldn't be much more than a village.

Montreal (and much of the rest of Quebec) would have been rendered mostly English speaking under a USA scenario.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Montreal (and much of the rest of Quebec) would have been rendered mostly English speaking under a USA scenario.

Yeah, probably something like what happened to the former Mexican territories that switched from Spanish to English.

[pdxtex]

Originally Posted by black beatle

San Francisco should be flipped so that the downtown is on the foggy west side of town and the boring suburbia is on the sunny east side.

All those cockeyed streets south of market need to be straightened out too! That ×÷=/ confuses me. Denver too!

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Montreal (and much of the rest of Quebec) would have been rendered mostly English speaking under a USA scenario.

"Listen up, you cheese-eating surrender monkeys, y'all are gonna start speaking American from now on, and you're gonna like it! Now shut up and make me some goddamn freedom fries."

[/redneck]

[JManc]

I actually like the sound of Mount Royal, Kwahbeck. None of that silly French stuff here in America!

[JoeMusashi]

Originally Posted by Crawford

GR began as an industrial center with river-borne commerce, so unlikely.

And moving it to the coast would give it epic snowfalls, which would probably reduce desirability. That's the lake effect bullseye in Michigan.

I just think it would be a more impressive looking city with a coastline, not too knowledgeable about its development actually.

[The North One]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And this is exactly the point. The Palace was convenient to the attendees. The new arena isn't, which is why attendance has plummeted, especially in the expensive seats, which is what matters.

Attendees ≠ northern OC exurbs, there are millions more people in the metro that go to hockey and basketball games. A much greater population is FAR closer to the LCA in Midtown than they ever were to Auburn Hills. Which is the point here, downtown Detroit is centrally located, it's not in an odd spot at all. And attendance pre-pandemic did not plummet either.

There's no wealth Downriver, so who cares? If 1% of the HNWI in MI live Downriver, I'd be shocked.

Setting aside what an insanely pompous ass you sound like right here, like truly caricature cartoon levels even for you. You're being dishonest as usual, and spewing lies. There is tons of wealth in downriver, Grosse Ile is full of well off families for example. And places like Grosse Pointe were just as far away. So there goes your whole bullshit idea, even if we are entertaining the laughably absurd premise that only really rich people go to basketball games and concerts. Nobody is buying your crap.

Also the LCA wasn't supposed to do anything other than replace the old Joe Louis Arena. The Pistons abandoned Auburn Hills all on their own.

[ChiSoxRox]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Montreal (and much of the rest of Quebec) would have been rendered mostly English speaking under a USA scenario.

We can see this in what was once the southern mirror to Montreal: Nouvelle-Orléans, Louisiane

[Razor]

It's just a good thing that our brave historical heroes' actions like horse mounted Tim Horton shouting and warning villages across lower Canada "The Americans are coming, the Americans are coming" , followed by Margaret Trudeau's seduction and drugging of President James Madison, swiftly turned the tide from that war of 1812 into the British's favour, otherwise we would all be speaking American right now, and getting stoked for baseball. Good Nite!

[Manitopiaaa]

Growing up, I always felt if my hometown of Tulsa had been located HERE, it would be so much more beautiful. It would be near Fort Gibson Lake (lakefront town), on the Ozark foothills, would still be in the Arkansas River (so trade would continue) and would still control Green Country.

Alas, the first oil rig was in Glenpool (suburban Tulsa), so it boomed there and the rest is history. Also, the Arkansas River is navigable through the Tulsa suburb of Catoosa, so Tulsa is deeper inland and more convenient to export inland goods from.

The good thing about Tulsa though is it's not perfectly placed, but its boom was perfectly timed. Wound up with so much beautiful art deco:




Boston Avenue United Methodist Church, Tulsa by Mitchell Tillison, on Flickr



















So it's more of a trade-off. A Tulsa on the Ozarks would have been a less oil-boom wealthy Tulsa, without the beautiful architecture. Maybe a large Fort Smith or another Oklahoma City. Yuck!

[suburbanite]

Agreed about London, Ontario being located on Lake Erie. Not like it would've turned into Cleveland or anything as there isn't really enough around to justify significant industry/steelmaking, but the setting would've been far nicer. A Toronto that started where St. Catharines is and stretched all the way to Lake Erie would be pretty cool as well.

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

I feel like Phoenix should have been located where the airport is now, and the airport should have been located somewhere else.

Idk, just my take on it.

Good take. And if I remember correctly, roughly where the airport is located was the other option--Jack Swilling, generally seen as the "founder" of Phoenix, owned land around where the airport is now, and wanted the townsite there, but was outvoted in favor of the current location.