What are some cities/neighborhoods that are so decayed that they're actually reverting back to the way they were before urbanization?

- Cairo, Illinois
- Parts of Detroit
- Parts of St. Louis

Not trying to single out the midwest with my list at all, it's just that the top 3 examples I can think of happen to be there.

While you can argue 3,000 ppsm is "rural", that would mean that many suburbs and even urban neighborhoods in many cities are "rural". BTW, the very definition of "ghetto" implies the opposite of "rural". A "rural ghetto" is an oxymoron...

^^While you can argue 3,000 ppsm is "rural", that would mean that many suburbs and even urban neighborhoods in many cities are "rural". BTW, the very definition of "ghetto" implies the opposite of "rural". A "rural ghetto" is an oxymoron...

There are definetly rural ghettos and there can be rural neighborhoods in cities.

Dude, it's called an "Urban Prairie" and planners all over the country are grappling with their implications. Communities have experimented with urban farming, returning the land to nature entirely, and landbanking and de-mapping utilities and infrastructure to "shrink to greatness".

Dude, it's called an "Urban Prairie" and planners all over the country are grappling with their implications. Communities have experimented with urban farming, returning the land to nature entirely, and landbanking and de-mapping utilities and infrastructure to "shrink to greatness".

This is exactly what I was talking about, thank you.

"Parts of St Louis"? Exactly what parts are you referring to? The fields and woods of Forest Park? The community gardens? I am puzzled by your statement because I know of absolutely NO rural area in St Louis. I live here, and I guarantee it's 100% urban.

"Parts of St Louis"? Exactly what parts are you referring to? The fields and woods of Forest Park? The community gardens? I am puzzled by your statement because I know of absolutely NO rural area in St Louis. I live here, and I guarantee it's 100% urban.

St. Louis has no urban praries or areas that are so decayed that vegetation is taking over?

fixed title as well as your other thread with less provocative phrasing

St. Louis has no urban praries or areas that are so decayed that vegetation is taking over?

Maybe only in small pockets, but by no means is the vacant land in Saint Louis nearly as widespread as say, in Detroit. The City of Saint Louis is highly urbanized, even in areas that have suffered decline. Sure, there are some neighborhoods with a lot of vacant lots, but they are peppered into the otherwise built-up landscape. Urban prairies exist in East St. Louis and some inner-ring suburbs moreso than in the City.

Even in Detroit, the emptiest neighborhoods have densities in the 3,000-5,000 ppsm range. While they were originally built for much higher densities, the fact remains that they aren't as prairie-like as some imagine.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3289/2799078401_fdf4fe8ed6.jpg?v=0

That's in Detroit. Looks like a pretty big urban prarie in that area. I'm not saying the whole city is like that, but there are definetly areas of Detroit that are abandoned and have less than 3,000 people/sq mile.

It depends on how large or small of an area you are referring to. You can find a few blocks here and there with a population density of zero, but the more blocks you add on to those, the denser the area becomes. Once you start talking about square miles, the emptiest residential areas of Detroit have densities in the 3,000-5,000 ppsm range. The only exception is neighborhoods that the city has been clearing and rezoning for industry.

To give you an example, Poletown is often noted as being ground zero for Detroit's "urban prairies". The neighborhood is basically bounded by I-94 to the north, Mount Elliott to the east, Gratiot to the south, and the railroad tracks to the west. As of 2000, the total area of the neighborhood was 1.56 sq. mi. while the population was 6,966. The population density was 4,463.0 people per square mile.

Here's a map:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4416382576_310cc33925.jpg

To the south of that is the McDougall-Hunt neighborhood, home to Detroit's "famous" Heidelberg Project. In 2000, the neighborhood had a population of 1,832 in 0.38 sq. mi. for a density of 4,839.7 people per square mile. Again, these are the neighborhoods that people site when talking about Detroit's urban prairies. To the east is a neighborhood I'll call Kettering, though I don't know if it has an official name. Kettering (bounded by I-94 to the north, Van Dyke to the east, Gratiot to the south, and Mt. Elliott to the west) is home to Detroit's most famous industrial ruin, the nearly 3/4 mile long Packard Plant. The population of the neighborhood was 2,661 in an area of 0.77 sq. mi. While the density is only 3,443.9 ppsm, that is largely due to the fact that about 1/3 of the neighborhood is taken up by the Packard Plant as well as a large cemetary and high school.

It's not that hard to figure out guys. All he is saying is can you think of more towns and cities that are beginning, or have decayed, and now have grass and nature consuming them. Vacant lots, untended homes and buildings now sprouting with weeds, etc.

Sheesh, you make it so complcated. ;)

Newark has some, so does Buffalo, Chicago, even parts of Jacksonville. . . . even New York.

You can see a lot, and learn a lot about this topic from this site.

http://www.jamesgriffioen.net/index.php?/prairies/lost-neighborhoods/

^^Wow...those photos are both captivating and beautiful. Some of those abandoned streets make it seem as if humanity has disappeared from the earth completely.

My guess is that the vast majority of those images were taken in the old St. Cyril's neighborhood. It was actively cleared out by the city of Detroit and rezoned for industry. While much of the land is still empty, it has seen a decent amount of industrial development. The ironic thing about those pictures is that they could only take them at certain angles or else they'd see large new factories in the background...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2693/4420051329_9917d91051_o.jpg


Here's the overhead view. You can see where the newer factories have replaced the old residential streets:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4022/4420806508_7f4d0baaf6_o.jpg

My guess is that the vast majority of those images were taken in the old St. Cyril's neighborhood. It was actively cleared out by the city of Detroit and rezoned for industry. While much of the land is still empty, it has seen a decent amount of industrial development. The ironic thing about those pictures is that they could only take them at certain angles or else they'd see large new factories in the background...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2693/4420051329_9917d91051_o.jpg


Here's the overhead view. You can see where the newer factories have replaced the old residential streets:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4022/4420806508_7f4d0baaf6_o.jpg

Thank you for the pictures, I wasn't trying to insult Detroit, or any of these cities for that matter, by the way.

Are there any areas in the south like that? Obviously industry wasn't as a major industry unlike the north and midwest but I'd still think that there are some areas that were once industrial that are now decaying.

Parts of Jacksonville were mentioned.

http://www.jamesgriffioen.net/index.php?/prairies/lost-neighborhoods/


WOW...those pictures are spooky!

WOW...those pictures are spooky!

I LOVE pictures like that, great find

WOW...those pictures are spooky!

I don't find them spooky at all...rather, I find them really beautiful. There's something really fascinating to me about how nature takes over, especially in completely man-made environments.

Nature didn't technically take over. The city actively cleared that neighborhood for new industrial development. While it's true that people aren't clamoring to build new factories in the city, it's not as if this happened naturally.

^^Oh, Hudkina. Always needing to argue. :)

I'm just saying...;) Those pictures give the impression that much of the city looks like that. Even in neighborhoods where vacancies are higher, that's not what it looks like. That particular neighborhood is the one and only neighborhood that looks like that and it looks like that because the city made it a point to "clean and clear" that entire neighborhood for non-residential purposes.

That's the problem I have with those types of photos. Those are cherry-picked selections to give the most dramatic possible image of the city. The reality is that most neighborhoods are far more mundane than that.

Most neighborhoods with high vacancy rates look like this:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3045/3085749808_650cf879a4_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3002/3085750880_1dfd8f80cf_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3212/3117721202_f9e0e89b26_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3260/3084910583_d0325f4911_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3276/3084910169_025334890a_o.jpg

One street will like like this:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3115/3117721088_116f0b7729_o.jpg

But the next will look like this:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/3117720652_25b11059da_o.jpg

You'll see this:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3289/3116894069_39004736f2_o.jpg

and then a block later you'll see this:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3271/3117720366_42942520bd_o.jpg

When people hear the word "urban prairie" they think vast sweeping areas where virtually nothing exists. The reality is that a LOT of people still live in these supposed urban prairies. Condon and Poletown are the two neighborhoods pictured above. They have two of the lowest residential densities in the city.

^^ Some cities like Buffalo have proposed demolishing many of those kinds of stubborn 'block sentinels' and landbanking the parcels for future uses or for a return to a natural state. But the natural state option is the least likely because wooded lots within blighted areas quickly become havens for crime.

Does anyone know if there are urban praries in New Jersey? It has a big industrial/ manufacturing past just like some of the more abandoned areas of the idwest, so it seems plausible.

My guess is that most would be in the Newark and Camden areas.

My guess is that most would be in the Newark and Camden areas.

I scoured google maps for urban prarie, but all the urban prairie i could find in Newark turned out to be developed when i got to streetview mode.

CAMDEN PICS

the lonely rowhouse:
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/Picture2-4.png

Urban prairie makes for great free parking!
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/Picture3-3.png

My guess is that the vast majority of those images were taken in the old St. Cyril's neighborhood.

Hi everyone. I'm the photographer who took the images being discussed here.

First, let me thank those of you who had kind words.

Second, I want to defend myself against some of the accusations being leveled here by hudkina, particularly the one above. hudkina is 100% correct about the story behind st. cyril's abandonment (something I have never shied away from writing about myself). In fact, hudkina echoes the very point that I made to Vice Magazine when they came to Detroit to write about journalists and photographers swarming the city for ruin porn. I was trying to make a more subtle point with Vice than the article states, that is, a camera doesn't lie about what's in front of it, but it does keep mum about what's behind it. I explained to them how I was guilty of taking one photo in a particular spot (the ONLY photo in that set from St. Cyril) that ignored the thriving industrial park behind me. I was trying to express how you can portray the city with your camera one way, but it can't possibly transport the viewer to the city himself to see the "complete" picture. . .this is the point hudkina is making and it is a good one.

I have a wide angle lens but I still haven't figured out a way for it to capture the entire city. What these photos show is only one way of telling a truth, which is the truth I am here most interested to tell.

That said, my photos in the "lost neighborhoods" set were taken ALL OVER the city. In fact, despite hudkina's accusations most are clearly identified where they were taken. The only one that came from St. Cyril was the car in the abandoned intersection from a higher vantage point. There are shots in there from all over the east side, from Brightmoor, from Southwest, and even Briggs and Poletown. I actually don't like shooting St. Cyril because most of the infrastructure has been removed and it doesn't look like a neighborhood at all. I do love going to St. Cyril with my birddog for pheasant "hunting." The streets are blocked off with Jersey barriers and the light posts, electrical wires, and abandoned homes are all gone. Even Jane Cooper School is dust now.

Detroit is an amazing city. Parts of it are disappearing and parts of it are just like any other city. My documentation comes from a point of view skewed towards highlighting how nature is reclaiming what is gone, and it is only one part of the city's story. Sadly, if there were more interest in well-kept blocks of suburban-style housing like you see in parts of the west side, I'm sure someone would be telling that part of the story too. And look, here's great article about just such a neighborhood:

http://wunderkammermag.com/politics-and-society/essay-detroit

This pic is almost surreal!

http://www.jamesgriffioen.net/files/gimgs/33_3016861981bc047d6164b.jpg

Maybe only in small pockets, but by no means is the vacant land in Saint Louis nearly as widespread as say, in Detroit. The City of Saint Louis is highly urbanized, even in areas that have suffered decline. Sure, there are some neighborhoods with a lot of vacant lots, but they are peppered into the otherwise built-up landscape. Urban prairies exist in East St. Louis and some inner-ring suburbs moreso than in the City.

St. Louis is one of the cities which has lost well over half its peak population. That being so, it's really helped that most of the city was built of brick. Brick cities were built to last, Pittsburgh' another good example. At least they'll be standing in hopes of the next population wave.

^^ Some cities like Buffalo have proposed demolishing many of those kinds of stubborn 'block sentinels' and landbanking the parcels for future uses or for a return to a natural state. But the natural state option is the least likely because wooded lots within blighted areas quickly become havens for crime.

On the other hand, there's poor Buffalo, it must rank among the top among US cities when it comes to proportion of housing made out of wood. Its just the opposite of St. Louis in terms of housing stock. Both cities are left with well under half of their population. But I'd guess that Buffalo's chances of retaining or restoring its housing stock are are much less.

I don't think that Hartford has any "urban prairies". Areas with vacant lots scattered abound on the North End, sure, but nothing to the extent like some parts of Buffalo's east side, which I've only been to once and that was through a bus.

I don't think that Hartford has any "urban prairies". Areas with vacant lots scattered abound on the North End, sure, but nothing to the extent like some parts of Buffalo's east side, which I've only been to once and that was through a bus.

That Hartford isn't as depopulated as Buffalo owes mostly to that while its lost a of older residents, its also attracted LOTS more newcomers over the past several decades: Puerto Ricans, Jamaicans, other immigrants from the Caribbean, Latin America etc.

Contrast with Buffalo's East Side, lots have left it, but no new big groups have come in since the southern African American migration ended circa 1960s.

It's very much the same story with Cleveland, Detroit, St, Louis & other badly depopulated cities. There's been no big in-migration to replace the outflow.

On the other hand, there's poor Buffalo, it must rank among the top among US cities when it comes to proportion of housing made out of wood. Its just the opposite of St. Louis in terms of housing stock. Both cities are left with well under half of their population. But I'd guess that Buffalo's chances of retaining or restoring its housing stock are are much less.

you make some interesting, assumptions about wood vs brick.

both have advantages. certainly brick does not rot, nor does it need to be painted and sealed the way wood does.

one should remember that brick houses still have wood frames, wood roofs, wooden support beams, etc. if these aren't maintianed in the same fashion as an entirely wood house, they will rot, and render the brick around them weak and crumbling.

you should also consider the affects of extreme climates. wood can flex and expand or contract with weather conditions. brick cannot. over the long term this can place an incredible amount of stress on brick as the frame supporting it will flex, but the brick will not.

consider san francisco, where much of the housing stock is wood. were much of it brick it would not survive the strain placed on it during earthquakes. wood survives quite nicely there.

A lot of inner OKC is like this.. just blight and rotted out neighborhoods that noone cares about anymore.

VP, yes, San Francisco has a significant amount of wooden housing. But as you mention that owes to wood having better flexibility in earthquakes, which are not a problem in Buffalo.

I'm not sure why Buffalo ended up becoming such a wooden city. May have to do with a large lumber mill in Tondawana. Or early zoning ordinances meant to discourage apartment & tenment houses of the type that predominates in NYC.

But whats really pitiful is all the recent houses that have been built in Buffalo, nearly all wooden or vinyl, & wearing out quickly. Rather than any effort to upgrade the housing stock to brick, which in predominant in cities like Chicago, with similar weather conditions.

Seems more like a short-sighted program to keep the contracters in business, rather than creating a more sustainable city.

VP, yes, San Francisco has a significant amount of wooden housing. But as you mention that owes to wood having better flexibility in earthquakes, which are not a problem in Buffalo.

I'm not sure why Buffalo ended up becoming such a wooden city. May have to do with a large lumber mill in Tondawana. Or early zoning ordinances meant to discourage apartment & tenment houses of the type that predominates in NYC.

But whats really pitiful is all the recent houses that have been built in Buffalo, nearly all wooden or vinyl, & wearing out quickly. Rather than any effort to upgrade the housing stock to brick, which in predominant in cities like Chicago, with similar weather conditions.

Seems more like a short-sighted program to keep the contracters in business, rather than creating a more sustainable city.

i agree. the modern woodframe crap that seeing built in buffalo as infill(mostly through low income housing programs) is probably just a scam to keep construction moving along.

from what i've read, most great lakes cities were building predominately from wood, until large fires caused them to change building codes.
because buffalo never had one of these far reaching fires, it never made the move to more brick construction the way chicago or cleveland did.

detroit is still predominately wood, though it may have a higher proportion of brick than buffalo.

I would say Detroit is predominantly brick, at least after 40 years of housing deconstruction. While much of what was built in the 1910's and 1920's is woodframe housing, most of the stuff built in the 30's, 40's and 50's is brick.

A few examples from around the city:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4413010976_63f4a1daa5_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4413010818_442f309a3a_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2778/4412242727_bd45929399_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2798/4412242599_76deb54336_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4096477609_48bc2c4873_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4037/4351755306_7f3f07c6a6_b.jpg

In fact one of the biggest factors in what causes a particular neighborhood to decline is whether or not it was built in brick. The vast majority of brick neighborhoods in the city are in fairly good condition. It's only the areas where woodframe housing dominates that you'll see the stereotypical Detroit abandonment.

So I don't know if this would be considered an urban prairie, let me know what you guys think.

The Menomonee Valley in Milwaukee used be an abandoned industrial area off of downtown along the Milwaukee river. But in the last decade the city cleaned up the brownfields, incorporated some of the old buildings into natural parks, and built new industrial parks in it. So now it's cleaned up, partially natural (but definitely planned), with new buildings. Around 60 acres, used mostly for stormwater treatment from the surrounding new industrial parks.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2337/1515986344_324e8b298f.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3236/2728201824_80f5c85870.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1108/1344538860_a47326537b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1192/1343647731_7ef24f18f5.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1246/1343647613_1da385746d.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v739/milwunseen/HPIM1481.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4413010976_63f4a1daa5_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4020/4413010818_442f309a3a_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2778/4412242727_bd45929399_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2798/4412242599_76deb54336_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2519/4096477609_48bc2c4873_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4037/4351755306_7f3f07c6a6_b.jpg

In fact one of the biggest factors in what causes a particular neighborhood to decline is whether or not it was built in brick. The vast majority of brick neighborhoods in the city are in fairly good condition. It's only the areas where woodframe housing dominates that you'll see the stereotypical Detroit abandonment.

Sometimes a few good pictures are worth a thousand words!

Hudkina what you've reported about Detroit confirms my sense that brick neighborhoods & cities tend to outlast wooden ones. While Detroit is often in the news about its economic troubles, the city's predominantly brick housing stock provides hope for a brighter, repopulated future!