Ghetto burbs

[hudkina]

Also, as far as Taylor is concerned, there are a few apartment complexes along the Eureka Corridor that have become the modern equivalent of a "ghetto" (high crime, drugs, unemployment, concentrated poverty). As for the rest of the city (the actual neighborhoods) there are no ghettos.

[BarGal]

The only reason that neighborhood is "ghetto-like" is that the city has been buying up the lots one by one over the last four decades in an attempt to rezone that whole area for industry.

Thanks for the article...funny how the timing worked out on that. I don't read the news I get the Freep so I didn't even know it was written at the time of my post...weird.

Anyway...40 years is a long time, that's over a generation...I'd say long enough to say it's not a quirk that it's a norm for that area. And it doesn't look like it will be redeveloped into industrial parks anytime soon.

[tamias6]

Chicago's Bensinville on the east side of the city around Irving Park Rd. In the year 1984, I lived in an apartment complex next to a really big train yard there. SCARY!!! A Gang war between the Latin Kings and some other gang calling themselves the Royal Crowns happened there the day after I moved out.

Ciciro (Name speaks for itself.)

Chicago Ht. Project Housing. Very Scarry!! Enter at you own risk.

Same goes for Colument. Drove through there once. Drove out very quicky to avoid getting car jacked.

Now that I live in the much tamer city of Grand Rapids, MI the only really problem spot to steer clear of is the city's south side from Downtown to 28th St. In this area, you'll find your drive by shooting, assault, and domestic violence. The blocks on Wealthy St. just east of Divison Ave. is very bad.

[BarGal]

Also, as far as Taylor is concerned, there are a few apartment complexes along the Eureka Corridor that have become the modern equivalent of a "ghetto" (high crime, drugs, unemployment, concentrated poverty). As for the rest of the city (the actual neighborhoods) there are no ghettos.

If you're talking about "Sin City" and "Crack Ridge" over the last 7 years (give or take)...they'd been thinned out by tearing down buildings to make the population less dense to reduce crime. There's been beautification, reimaging and move more towards senior apartments and less subsidized housing in the Eureka Corridor.

Here's more about it at the City of Taylor's web site.

It's not perfect, but definitely not "Ghetto-like".

It sounds like you haven't been in that area for a while, may I suggest you take a drive down Eureka and pay a visit to Block's Nursery by the Airport before they sell out their flowers.

(I know Block's isn't in Taylor, but they are a good reason to take a drive and pick up some beautiful flowers at great prices.)

I guess I got Spring Fever !!

[hudkina]

Actually, I used to live out that way. I lived in Huron TWP which is just south of Romulus, I went to school with a lot of the kids who's families owned the greenhouses out there. (Block, Kurtzall, Schwartz, etc.) I still shop at Block's from time to time (mostly for vegetables, though). And I do drive the Eureka corridor often (where else is there to shop?). I'm not saying the entire strip has the appearance of a "ghetto", and in fact most of it is your average suburban stripmalls and outlets. However, there are a handful of apartment complexes (Go check out the Ponds next time you're over there) that are on the shady side. The fact that the city has taken initiatives to un-ghetto those complexes shows just how bad they were (and in some cases still are.)

In the case of the Dearborn neighborhood, it never had a high concentration of crime and poverty. It's basically a working-class neighborhood that the city has been slowly tearing down in an attempt to grow the industrial taxbase. It may have the appearance of an abandoned neighborhood, but the abandonment only occured because the city wanted it that way. If the city hadn't interfered, the neighborhood would have probably remained a stable working-class neighborhood.

[FromCityToRural]

Chicago's Bensinville on the east side of the city around Irving Park Rd. In the year 1984, I lived in an apartment complex next to a really big train yard there. SCARY!!! A Gang war between the Latin Kings and some other gang calling themselves the Royal Crowns happened there the day after I moved out.

Ciciro (Name speaks for itself.)

Chicago Ht. Project Housing. Very Scarry!! Enter at you own risk.

Heh, got lost in Cicero the first time I was in Chicago - was trying to go to Oak Park to the Frank Lloyd Wright house, got off three (I think) stops too soon on the El. Scary as hell. I walked around a bit before I realized that this DEFINITELY was not the right place to be. Luckily I carry a knife with me at all times, I figure it's better than nothing in case the worst starts happening. Usually I carry a S+W Combat Magnum, but Illinois unfortunately is very uptight about handguns, so I was not able to carry it there.

As for the projects...CHA projects are notoriously scary, awful places to be. I don't envy anybody who lives there.

[BarGal]

The situation in that Dearborn neighborhood sounds much like what the City of Detroit and the Water Department did and are still doing to the neighbor of Delray in southwest Detroit, where I grew up.

I searched high and low for a source of Crime Stats that could be customized by address in a mile range, but had no luck.

However, I did find a pretty good source for a city to city comparison...so I put together this little report using it.

Here is a comparison of Crime Statistics for the City of Dearborn compared to the City of Taylor:

The source is AreaConnect.com.

There are 7 different categories for crimes; Dearborn is higher than Taylor in 5 of those categories. And I know some people will be quick to point out that Dearborn has 31,000+ more people than Taylor, that's why I divided the number of crime for each city by that city's population to get a percentage. This makes it easier to compare the numbers, you know apples to apples...

So based on these stats someone is MORE LIKELY to have a crime happen to them in the WHOLE City of Dearborn than in the WHOLE City of Taylor.

Though I personally, would feel safe in EITHER one of them...

[hudkina]

With crime rates, the method of choice in creating an apples to apples comparison is to show the amount of crimers per 100,000 residents.

The murder rate of Dearborn is 2.06 per 100,000 residents, while in Taylor the murder rate is 1.52 per 100,000 residents.

Also, the difference is that despite having a higher overall crime rate, I'd surmise that the apartment complexes along Eureka Rd account for a greater share of the crimes in Taylor than that neighborhood in Dearborn does.

[PghUSA]

Since cities mean different things in different regions or states (Indianapolis and Louisville mean suburbs, exburbs, city, inner city etc., whereas Miami means inner city and coconut grove) wouldn't having a "metro" crime stats per capita be a better measure of how safe you are. Consider the city of Miami has some of the worst hoods in south Florida but it is not as dangerous as it looks since most of the safe hoods are NOT in the city of Miami. Unless you are a mayor, police chief or urban consultant delineating crime by wether you were shot on this block or that block (city limit line) is pretty useless, you can see the skyline, your in s. florida and you were shot. Wether that was in Hialeah or Miami doesn't mean much for the people and visitors of the region.

[hudkina]

In any case, Miami's metro has one of the higher violent crime rates in the country.

Memphis - 1,009.1

Baltimore - 886.1

Nashville - 872.4

Miami - 812.0

Tampa - 785.7

Charlotte - 763.3

Orlando - 754.6

Jacksonville - 730.9

Houston - 723.6

Las Vegas - 693.5

New Orleans - 673.4

Los Angeles - 654.7

Detroit - 612.1

Kansas City - 595.6

Birminghan - 578.6

Rochester - 566.0

Dallas - 554.9

Indianapolis - 533.3

Oklahoma City - 523.7

Atlanta - 521.9

San Francisco - 513.8

San Antonio - 511.3

Riverside-San Bernardino - 498.7

Phoenix - 493.1

St. Louis - 490.2

Buffalo - 480.9

San Diego - 468.4

New York - 458.6

Washington - 446.5

Columbus - 444.4

Denver - 434.0

Richmond - 431.7

Norfolk - 429.3

Boston - 400.4

Seattle - 399.2

Pittsburgh - 368.7

Austin - 364.5

Cincinnati - 360.5

Louisville - 360.4

Salt Lake City - 359.8

Providence - 357.5

Portland - 341.5

Minneapolis - 338.8

San Jose - 303.6

Rochester - 268.1

[tamias6]

Heh, got lost in Cicero the first time I was in Chicago - was trying to go to Oak Park to the Frank Lloyd Wright house, got off three (I think) stops too soon on the El. Scary as hell. I walked around a bit before I realized that this DEFINITELY was not the right place to be. Luckily I carry a knife with me at all times, I figure it's better than nothing in case the worst starts happening. Usually I carry a S+W Combat Magnum, but Illinois unfortunately is very uptight about handguns, so I was not able to carry it there.

As for the projects...CHA projects are notoriously scary, awful places to be. I don't envy anybody who lives there.

I can one-you in the Cicero department. We we're cazy enough to venture there. Someone shot out our car tire. Not wanting to become a statistic we drove the car bare rimed all the way home.

[SatownSTL]

Eastside san antonio, and sunrise area. and southside, harlandale.

[HartfordTycoon]

Hartford, CT has Bloomfield and Windsor

Originally these two towns were flocked to by people who made enough money in the city to move to the suburbs but these two towns border the city's north end which is infamous for crime (18th homicide of the year just occured two days ago and about 15 of these were in the north end) and soon people started spreading over into these two towns. Bloomfield now is about 75% black and Windsor is about 40% which may not be large but when compared to most of the other suburbs (about 1-10%) the number is large.

These towns used to have all American well known schools that eventually went down hill. The schools though are improving and just because they may be considered ghettos there are definitly numerous jobs and stores.

This is late, but Bloomfield and Windsor are not nearly ghetto. They have large black populations and if that is your criteria, something is wrong with you. Those towns have very little crime or urban decay and are generally middle to upper middle class. Plus your numbers are way off. Windsor may be about 30-40% Black, however Bloomfield is still about 50/50 white and black. Check the census. Get your facts right. Check median incomes and crime rates and then tell me that Bloomfield or Windsor are ghetto.

[Zonajones]

Apache Junction, the farthest east suburb of Phoenix, has always carried a stigma of being a whitetrash/biker/tweeker town. While the reputation is somewhat undserved as there are nice parts of town the main street, Apache Trail, is always filled with the sterotypes mentioned above.

[Mikejesmike]

This is late, but Bloomfield and Windsor are not nearly ghetto. They have large black populations and if that is your criteria, something is wrong with you. Those towns have very little crime or urban decay and are generally middle to upper middle class. Plus your numbers are way off. Windsor may be about 30-40% Black, however Bloomfield is still about 50/50 white and black. Check the census. Get your facts right. Check median incomes and crime rates and then tell me that Bloomfield or Windsor are ghetto.

Checking the stats I would have to agree with you. These cities are not ghettos, of the 2 Windsor seems like the better place in terms of crime.

[Recchia]

When is this thread going to be closed? It might be the most pointless thread on here. Let's all identify areas around our cities that we think are "ghetto" cause a bunch of minorities or poor people live there. What is this accomplishing? The term ghetto is outdated anyway, and serves no purpose now other than for ignorant people to identify areas they think are rough and undesirable.

[FromCityToRural]

I can one-you in the Cicero department. We we're cazy enough to venture there. Someone shot out our car tire. Not wanting to become a statistic we drove the car bare rimed all the way home.

Damn...yeah, you got me there. Although I did leave out the part where some woman there wanted to sell us "rocks and blow" (crack and cocaine) in broad daylight right on Chicago Ave. in Cicero...the best (worst) part is that it was right outside of a pregnancy clinic...

[CSP]

When is this thread going to be closed? It might be the most pointless thread on here. Let's all identify areas around our cities that we think are "ghetto" cause a bunch of minorities or poor people live there. What is this accomplishing? The term ghetto is outdated anyway, and serves no purpose now other than for ignorant people to identify areas they think are rough and undesirable.

I wasn't going to say anything but everytime I came past this thread I was thinking the same thing.

[damus]

Well it's not that poor people that make these areas "rough and tumble", it's that these people usually end up living poor due to their lifestyle. Most poor people are decent, and are stuck around the others. Usually, when you are in a "ghetto" you'd see garbage all over the street, hookers, drug dealers and users, and more police cars than in middle class neighborhoods.

It seems that everyone who has participated in this thread has been labeled as "ignorant". Just so you know, if a bunch of minorities (or people of an economically disadvantaged class) are clustered into one space it would be a "ghetto". How is the term outdated? Just because a lot of stupid people use it? That makes no sense. I feel that "evacuee" is a stupid term when used for the Katrina refugees who did not want to be called refugees as they seeked refuge from the city of New Orleans. Do I think all people who use the term "evacuee" is stupid? No. The fact of the matter is, "ghetto" is a word in American English that describes.... poor, disadvantaged neighborhoods that usually have a disproportionately high population of minorities.

Having said that, I also don't see a constructive point to this thread. If there was a real conversation about what to do about the problems in these "ghetto 'burbs", hopefully not while moving the problem elements to other areas, then there would be a constructive point to this. Then again, why not let people have their topic so long as they're not attacking anyone? Not every thread needs to have that much of a purpose, does it?

I feel in the long run it would benefit the quality of life of the "poor" in this country to legalize prostitution and drug use. There would probably be a short period of increased abuse, but it would level off.

[Recchia]

The term is outdated because its original use was to describe ethnic enclaves in pre WWII Europe. Nowadays it's become basically an offensive term. If we want to identify poor areas in and around cities (hopefully for a better purpose than this thread) then why not name the thread something other than "ghetto burbs."

[damus]

The term is outdated because its original use was to describe ethnic enclaves in pre WWII Europe. Nowadays it's become basically an offensive term. If we want to identify poor areas in and around cities (hopefully for a better purpose than this thread) then why not name the thread something other than "ghetto burbs."

Well, a lot of words have outgrown their old use. The "n" word meant poor, ignorant person in the past. I don't think ghetto will ever hold quite the same meaning as that does nowadays. People within black culture more than anybody seem to want to turn it into a black term, so its ascention into most idiots thinking it only has to do with black neighborhoods is ironically the doings of people like 50 Cent.

Not everyone seems to think it to be offensive to be called "ghetto". I've never heard of "ghetto" being an offensive term. It seems hip hop "artists" use the term all the time to glorify a lifestyle. This has a good generalization of the word. I really don't see how the term is any more offensive than the elongated version of the word, "poor, ethinically or socioeconomically segregated, sometimes dangerous neighborhood". Maybe it would be less offensive given that a lot of people wouldn't know what you're talking about with them fancy words in there. A lot of people have said to be proud to come out of the ghetto and into the middle/upper class world.

I'd also like to point out by just looking at the first and last pages that a lot of the people who run and/or moderate the site have participated in this thread. Why is everything that might be negative is increasingly something that should not be said? Soon enough we're not going to be able to say the word "obese" because it's too hurtful if we continue down that path. It'll be "weight-challenged". There's a difference between being a nice person and being so afraid to hurt someone's feelings that he/she won't mention anything that is wrong with society or people.

This also brings to mind when people say "fudge" or "heck". We all know what they mean, I hate it when things like that are sugarcoated. Either say the word or don't say it, just because you're putting it into more PC terms doesn't mean that it's different in any way.

[Recchia]

Yes yes I get what you're saying. My point is that in my experience, labeling an area "ghetto" has been a way for privileged people to point out areas that are worse off than their own neighborhood in order to make themselves feel superior. Some posts in this thread seem to follow this mentality (obviously not all...).

And with that, it's back to laying in the sun in my strip of grass backyard in my ghetto neighborhood in Pawtucket.

[HartfordTycoon]

Checking the stats I would have to agree with you. These cities are not ghettos, of the 2 Windsor seems like the better place in terms of crime.

They really are not. In Hartford we laugh at people from Bloomfield and Windsor who think they are "ghetto." Windsor does have less crime and the Schools are better. Bloomfield can be kind of backwater and is less expensive or exclusive. Both still have very expensive neighborhoods and you would be hard pressed to find a house for less than $275k in either town. I consider them, Windsor especially, to be models of integration and multi-culturalism. I think them both to be very attractive towns and would gladly raise a family in either.

I however would not raise a family anywhere I considered to be the "ghetto."

[NcSc74]

In Fayetteville NC we have Spring Lake and East Fayetteville.

[VistaLakes01]

Orlando definetely has Pine Hills, which the city will not annex. They have skipped over this community of nearly 100,000, leaving it in unicorporated Orange County. Orlando mainly annexes undeveloped land and develops wealthy new communities to their liking. They have skipped over Azalea Park and S. Goldenrod road areas and have developed the new Vista Lakes (upscale) and Lake Nona (upscale), skipped over Pine Hills and developed MetroWest (upscale). By just adding Pine Hills and Azalea Park the city of Orlando's population would actually be near 400,000. We now have a "Downtown Orange County" near the Convention Center/I-Drive area and now have a new tile "Orange County Mayor." Also the huge developements in East Orange (Waterford Lakes/UCF Area) are trying to incorporate their own city which will be the largest in Orange County, called either "East Orlando" or "East Orange" with a population of over 300,000. That area feels they are not getting the services they deserve from Orange county and want to form their own city.