Metro Detroit home ownership plunges by 40,000

Empty residences in Michigan grew by 210,000 since 2000

Ron French and Mike Wilkinson / / The Detroit News

The recession, high unemployment and the foreclosure crisis turned tens of thousands of Metro Detroit homeowners into renters, with far-reaching implications for schools, the economy and neighborhood stability.

New 2010 census data released today reveal a steep decline in home ownership, with 40,000 fewer owner-occupied homes in Wayne, Oakland, Macomb and Livingston counties than 10 years earlier.

Almost all communities suffered a decrease in home ownership, with the biggest losses in inner-ring suburbs, such as Oak Park [[14.2 percentage points), Harper Woods [[11 percentage points), Hazel Park [[9.1 percentage points) and Dearborn Heights [[7.4 percentage points).

The data reflect the hard reality Metro Detroiters have faced in recent years, as the state struggled through an almost decade-long recession.
Thousands lost their homes to foreclosure and, unable to get loans, turned to rentals. Thousands more were saddled with homes they couldn't sell when the housing bubble burst and turned their houses into rentals.

"It was the American Dream to own a home," said James Malott, 55, of Whitmore Lake. "Then everything fell apart, and it turned into a nightmare."

Continued at: http://detnews.com/article/20110505/...#ixzz1LUmYmRJD

http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi...5050418&Ref=H3

I just finished watching a movie with Jerri Ryan [[7 of 10, Trekkies), called in the walls. She bought a house in Ferndale, yada yada, point is that a single mom with 2 kids and no credit could buy a beautiful mansion. Filmed in Detroit, which is why I watched, but I would kill for that house. So many gorgeous, old mansions.

This is probably a good thing in the long run. Michigan's homeownership rate has long been too high and unsustainable.

But obviously the distribution of rentals is worrying. Detroit and the inner suburbs with Detroit spillover are becoming renter communities.

That's Seven of Nine, thank you very much! :rolleyes:

Pathologies and blight. I spoke recently with an acquaintance in Wayne County Treasurer's office who said that another approximately 4000 properties in WC joined the foreclosure ranks this Spring. In the Fall they will be offered in two tax auctions. What doesn't sell will be offered to the renters/squatters or any interested party for $500 and back taxes forgotten.
Look around, if you live in Detroit, and see how much the residential situation has changed for the worse and 4000 more to go this year alone. I for one have been puzzled about how houses full of young men sitting on porches all day have been lately proliferating in SW Detroit. Think the transfer to rental culture and willingness to take any rent has caused this. I am very discouraged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by txlady

I just finished watching a movie with Jerri Ryan [[7 of 10, Trekkies), called in the walls. She bought a house in Ferndale, yada yada, point is that a single mom with 2 kids and no credit could buy a beautiful mansion. Filmed in Detroit, which is why I watched, but I would kill for that house. So many gorgeous, old mansions.

---

DPS Graduate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

This is probably a good thing in the long run. Michigan's homeownership rate has long been too high and unsustainable.

---

How can home ownership be TOO high?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bham1982

this is probably a good thing in the long run. Michigan's homeownership rate has long been too high and unsustainable.

But obviously the distribution of rentals is worrying. Detroit and the inner suburbs with detroit spillover are becoming renter communities.

---

your comment is illogical. If you think michigan homeownership rate is too high and also concerned about rental, then what is your stance!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meddle

How can home ownership be TOO high?

---

Homeownership can definitely be too high.

Homeownership isn't for everyone. It only benefits some folks.

Many researchers and public policy wonks believe that the U.S. overemphasizes homeownership through the mortgage interest deduction, HUD loans, and other direct subsidies.

In other countries, these subsidies don't exist, and their market is more in balance, without all the foreclosures, overleveraged folks, and nonsense with 25-year-olds owning six homes.

Michigan has one of the nation's highest homeownership rates, which can be problematic at times. It certainly limits mobility, and has caused disproportionate personal wealth losses relative to other areas of the country.

If the U.S. leadership [[both Republicans and Democrats) didn't emphasize homeownership so much, the nation would probably be much better off, IMO. It's good for some folks, but there's no way in hell that 80% [[or whatever it was at the market peak) of Michigan residents should be homeowners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HistoryNotHisStory

your comment is illogical. If you think michigan homeownership rate is too high and also concerned about rental, then what is your stance!

---

I think Michigan's homeownership rate MAY be too high relative to its economic situation.

I'm also concerned about the very rapid growth of rentals in certain communities. It speaks to rapid economic decline and "unsellable" homes.

All I'm saying is that neither homeownership nor renting is a panacea. For some reason, we in the U.S. tend to lean towards th homeownership ideal, but many other successful countries [[such as Germany) tend to be majority renter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

I think Michigan's homeownership rate MAY be too high relative to its economic situation.

I'm also concerned about the very rapid growth of rentals in certain communities. It speaks to rapid economic decline and "unsellable" homes.

All I'm saying is that neither homeownership nor renting is a panacea. For some reason, we in the U.S. tend to lean towards th homeownership ideal, but many other successful countries [[such as Germany) tend to be majority renter.

---

True. We're moving from HW. House is worth $85,000 less than what I paid. We're renting, can't sell it.

Back to Detroit specifically: as far as I can tell Detroit does not have a "robust" [[I notice now that City management are using that word a lot - They used to use disingenuious a lot) protocol for inspecting, managing, citing, and monitoring of rental homes and properties. You'd think they do to look at the website - but it turns out that the property owner himself must register a rental property. if he/she does not - then too bad. No way for it to be reported. Blight and illegal uses grow exponentially. If detroit is getting to be a city of renatl homes - then the city is going to have to adapt and put more money and staff into keeping the housing stock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Homeownership can definitely be too high.

Homeownership isn't for everyone. It only benefits some folks.

Many researchers and public policy wonks believe that the U.S. overemphasizes homeownership through the mortgage interest deduction, HUD loans, and other direct subsidies.

In other countries, these subsidies don't exist, and their market is more in balance, without all the foreclosures, overleveraged folks, and nonsense with 25-year-olds owning six homes.

Michigan has one of the nation's highest homeownership rates, which can be problematic at times. It certainly limits mobility, and has caused disproportionate personal wealth losses relative to other areas of the country.

If the U.S. leadership [[both Republicans and Democrats) didn't emphasize homeownership so much, the nation would probably be much better off, IMO. It's good for some folks, but there's no way in hell that 80% [[or whatever it was at the market peak) of Michigan residents should be homeowners.

---

I totally agree. Even within the U.S. there is a correlation between high local homeownership rates and underperforming local economies. But homeownership for all has been the policy bullhorned from the federal level since World War 2. It's very expensive and the Obama administration has already signaled that it would like to change course. If he gets elected to a second term, I suspect that getting rid of the mortgage tax credit will be on the table as a way of reigning in the deficit.

It is a shame there aren't more apartment buildings in Detroit. What happens when you have a city of mostly single-family homes with a population of 1.8 million, and then loose half your population? That is half the buildings vacant. If we had mostly apartment buildings, rather than houses, we could just half-vacant buildings, but the buildings would still stand, and there would be very little visible vacancy. This seems to be closer to what happened in NYC, where there was once big population losses but because of the diversity in housing stock, there wasn't wide-spread abandonment of buildings. This, coupled with excellent transportation, allowed the city to regain its population and redevelop fairly rapidly.

I hope Detroit can learn this lesson. Perhaps placing a moratorium on new single-family construction, and encourage development of apartment buildings, townhouses, brownstones, etc as well as encouraging development of carriage houses to increase density in existing single-family neighborhoods. We should also allow for more mixed uses, so we can have ground-floor retail with apartments on top, which is very rare in Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by casscorridor

It is a shame there aren't more apartment buildings in Detroit. What happens when you have a city of mostly single-family homes with a population of 1.8 million, and then loose half your population? That is half the buildings vacant. If we had mostly apartment buildings, rather than houses, we could just half-vacant buildings, but the buildings would still stand, and there would be very little visible vacancy. This seems to be closer to what happened in NYC, where there was once big population losses but because of the diversity in housing stock, there wasn't wide-spread abandonment of buildings. This, coupled with excellent transportation, allowed the city to regain its population and redevelop fairly rapidly.

I hope Detroit can learn this lesson. Perhaps placing a moratorium on new single-family construction, and encourage development of apartment buildings, townhouses, brownstones, etc as well as encouraging development of carriage houses to increase density in existing single-family neighborhoods. We should also allow for more mixed uses, so we can have ground-floor retail with apartments on top, which is very rare in Detroit.

---

Not bad advice. Of course, the city is absolutely determined to go in the opposite direction ...

Dense shared buildings would make a sea-change for people here. Having had TERRIBLE neighbors, I am very reluctant to share a wall or common spaces with anyone else. And a little single mother just moved in to the house next door to me [[she is renting from an abentee landlord) and told me how wonderful it is for her children to have space and a yard to play in. She has four small children and had been in an apartment previously. Now with rent dropping, she could afford a house. I think she is typical of families around here. As a matter of fact, i see that Mexican people, as soon as they get a house of their own, they put a chain-link fence or iron fence all around it, front and back, to keep it entirely seperate.

That said, although I don't want to live in such housing, I can see how it might make an improvement.