Ferndale in 5-10 years

[bartock]

Granted it's been years since I lived there, but what's Plesant Ridge's tax base like? Through experience, I know a city can't live on property tax alone.

The police force there certainly pays for itself. That area of Woodward, especially going under 696 has to be the most desireable speedtrap spot in the area [[uh oh, another topic).

...and to stay on topic, like the other poster I think the City of Rochester will be fine...there really isn't much of a "fringe area," as most of the City is near or considered part of the downtown. As for Rochester Hills, for the same reason that "midtown" will continue to develop...an anchor educational institution...I think Rochester Hills will be fine as well. Hopefully, Pontiac will improve.

[Savoyard]

Your constant propaganda about gays or homosexuals amazes me.Its the same thing with all issues regarding race. Just come out and get it over with.

Since you're fairly new to DY [[10 posts) you need to understand the rule for dealing with Danny. You skip his reply and move on to the next one.

Next!

[surenowinlife]

I visit and read every day but was taught that if I didnt have something nice to say Keep Quiet!

[JBMcB]

Granted it's been years since I lived there, but what's Plesant Ridge's tax base like? Through experience, I know a city can't live on property tax alone.

Grosse Pointe Shores doesn't have a single business. Not one. There might be a snack stand at the city park, but I think that's it. All of their revenue is from property tax.

I think it's in a records book somewhere, as the largest populated city with zero businesses.

[Big Dog]

I'd really like to know, what Detroit will be?, in 5 years.

[casscorridor]

FERNDALE [[GROW) -- This neighborhood probably won't decline. It will probably improve. It is located along Woodward Ave, and if there is ever a third phase of the light-rail project, the neighborhood will be served by a station at 9 Mile Rd [[it will also be fairly close to the Fairgrounds station, which will be the terminus of phase II). However, I don't believe Ferndale will last much longer as the center of the gay community. there has already been a large movement into Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Even today, you'll probably find more gays living in the central city than in all of Ferndale, there just isn't the same level of concentration [[density). Look at the hundreds of lofts that have gone up in the past decade, and then look who resides there. But perhaps most importantly is the quality of the housing stock in Ferndale, which simply does not compare to the central city. In the former you will find small wood-sided bungalows. In neighborhoods such as Woodbridge you find large brick houses with elaborate details. You find plush gardens and yards. The houses are also closer together so you won't find any driveways, that is what alleys are for. Expect Ferndale to slightly grow, but not much.

ROYAL OAK [[GROW)-- This area will continue to grow for some time. If a third-phase of the light-rail is ever constructed, it is likely to terminate in Royal Oak. There has been some pretty intense development in recent years, with mid-rise condo towers going up, and now a megaplex movie theatre. I think the character of the neighborhood has changed. It is becoming more chain dominated. The place is already well-established as a yuppie haven with with a very suburban mindset... not someplace where the creative class will thrive. Sure, there will always be vibrant with expensive shops and restaurants, but I don't think the authenticity and "hipness" will ever return to Royal Oak, or the suburbs in general. But the hipness won't have much impact on how Royal Oak grows. It will grow regardless.

ROCHESTER [[SHRINK)-- I haven't really been to this area, but I can agree with other posters that Oakland University is an incredibly important asset. But not even this fact will have much impact on Rochester's decline. The founders of the university should have had more foresight and placed the university in downtown Pontiac, but the trend at the time was to build suburban campuses [[see GVSU and UM-Dearborn). Neither downtown Rochester or Pontiac are within walking distance to the Oakland campus. Bus service is unbearably infrequent and unreliable, and doesn't serve Rochester Hills [[accept into the University) or Downtown Rochester. In addition, Rochester is not located anywhere near a spoke avenue [[such as Woodward), so it won't be connected any regional rail system, at least not anytime in the foreseeable future [[there are abandoned rail tracks that run through Downtown Rochester that could be connected to the regional system) . I don't see much hope for Rochester, beyond the fact that there is a lot of individual wealth there, but as we should all know by know, that wealth won't stay there long. Young people are rapidly fleeing, like everywhere else in the state. There won't be any population increase in Rochester, and there will most likely be declines.

EASTPOINTE [[SHRINK)-- The suburb that was too embarrassed to be next to Detroit that they had to change their name. Too bad they can't escape the problems of Detroit by a simply name change. Eastpoint, and the Gratiot corridor north of six-mile in the city is ground-zero for foreclosures. Eastpoint's housing stock is similar to Ferndale -- modest wooden working-class houses --- but unlike Ferndale, it doesn't have any Downtown to speak of, and isn't located along a thriving corridor. Gratiot is arguably the worst of all the spoke roads in metro Detroit. I would expect population decline and a "shrinking" situation similar to Detroit city.

DETROIT CITY [[SHRINK AND GROW)-- This is very broad, and I can't make any generalizations about the city as a whole. But it is becoming apparent that the central city is destine to grow tremendously in the coming decades.I'm talking about Downtown, Midtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Beyond that, no one can really say. It depends on how dramatic the redevelopment of the central city turns out. My guess is that there will be clusters of vibrant thriving neighborhoods [[such as the Villages area or Southwest), surrounded by fairly low-density areas of intermixed housing and farms, and connected by transit. I also guess that a similar pattern will emerge metro-wide.

[Hermod]

ROCHESTER [[SHRINK)-- I haven't really been to this area, but I can agree with other posters that Oakland University is an incredibly important asset. But not even this fact will have much impact on Rochester's decline. The founders of the university should have had more foresight and placed the university in downtown Pontiac, but the trend at the time was to build suburban campuses [[see GVSU and UM-Dearborn). Neither downtown Rochester or Pontiac are within walking distance to the Oakland campus. Bus service is unbearably infrequent and unreliable, and doesn't serve Rochester Hills [[accept into the University) or Downtown Rochester. In addition, Rochester is not located anywhere near a spoke avenue [[such as Woodward), so it won't be connected any regional rail system, at least not anytime in the foreseeable future [[there are abandoned rail tracks that run through Downtown Rochester that could be connected to the regional system) . I don't see much hope for Rochester, beyond the fact that there is a lot of individual wealth there, but as we should all know by know, that wealth won't stay there long. Young people are rapidly fleeing, like everywhere else in the state. There won't be any population increase in Rochester, and there will most likely be declines..

I would guess that you really haven't been to the area. City of Rochester is a village that pre-dated the building of railroads in Michigan. As railroads were built two of them passed through Rochester where available water power caused a number of lumber and knitting mills to be located. Rochester had two railroad stations. One was on the north side of town [[MC/NYC) and one was on the south side of town [[MAL/GTW). When the interurbans were built, Rochester was a major location on the Detroit-Royal Oak-Flint line with a powerhouse, car shop, and major junction [[Tienken Junction where the Romeo-Imlay City branch line left the Flint line tracks.). Post war, many of the successful farmers in the area sold their land for housing developments to people attracted by the hilly, upland nature of the country as compared to the filled in swamps of the inner suburbs. Avon Township incorporated as the City of Rochester Hills around Rochester. Rochester is virtually self-contained with a hospital, numerous big box store locations, and a still active downtown serving a population made diverse by Oakland University and several other smaller colleges.

[jbd441]

2015: Ferndale will annex Bradenton Florida and Grosse Pt Shores will annex Naples FL All the area south of Tampa and West of Orlando will be renamed South Michigan. No one under the age of 70 will be able to own property there. Oh and the borough of Brooklyn will annex Miami-Dade County.

[preserve]

Maybe Ferndale will annex Detroit, in 5 years it should be
fully downsized.

[tahleel]

Ferndale 2015
Ferndale 2020
population
33,978
70% White 33% Black 3.1% Hispanic

You do realize that your percent figures adds up to over 100%, right? And the Asian and Native American population currently outnumbers the Hispanics, what happens to them?

-Tahleel

[Detroitnerd]

I would guess that you really haven't been to the area. City of Rochester is a village that pre-dated the building of railroads in Michigan. As railroads were built two of them passed through Rochester where available water power caused a number of lumber and knitting mills to be located. Rochester had two railroad stations. One was on the north side of town [[MC/NYC) and one was on the south side of town [[MAL/GTW). When the interurbans were built, Rochester was a major location on the Detroit-Royal Oak-Flint line with a powerhouse, car shop, and major junction [[Tienken Junction where the Romeo-Imlay City branch line left the Flint line tracks.). Post war, many of the successful farmers in the area sold their land for housing developments to people attracted by the hilly, upland nature of the country as compared to the filled in swamps of the inner suburbs. Avon Township incorporated as the City of Rochester Hills around Rochester. Rochester is virtually self-contained with a hospital, numerous big box store locations, and a still active downtown serving a population made diverse by Oakland University and several other smaller colleges.

I think the poster is thinking of Rochester Hills, and may not know the history of small towns around Detroit. Then again, most of us who drive through the area are more familiar with the exurban parts of Rochester/Rochester Hills, and I do think the exurban parts are going to have some major challenges, although I think the little village part will do OK. Rochester Hills, I believe, has the highest percentage of families with children, and has had for about 10 years now. So, in the next 5-10 years, we're going to see a lot of families aging out of those big homes, gas prices rising again, heating costs and commensurate hikes in association fees. I think those homes aren't going to sell as well by then, given the generational shift in taste.

Anyway, about that steepness! That was a very difficult engineering feat to run that streetcar into Rochester, over the south hill. The Detroit United Railway had to build a 700-foot trestle for its trolley cars, with concrete footings, and the span remained up until the 1930s!

[Hermod]

I think the poster is thinking of Rochester Hills, and may not know the history of small towns around Detroit. Then again, most of us who drive through the area are more familiar with the exurban parts of Rochester/Rochester Hills, and I do think the exurban parts are going to have some major challenges, although I think the little village part will do OK. Rochester Hills, I believe, has the highest percentage of families with children, and has had for about 10 years now. So, in the next 5-10 years, we're going to see a lot of families aging out of those big homes, gas prices rising again, heating costs and commensurate hikes in association fees. I think those homes aren't going to sell as well by then, given the generational shift in taste.

Anyway, about that steepness! That was a very difficult engineering feat to run that streetcar into Rochester, over the south hill. The Detroit United Railway had to build a 700-foot trestle for its trolley cars, with concrete footings, and the span remained up until the 1930s!

As you drive over the Clinton River Bridge at the bottom of south hill, look to the east. You can still see the interurban embankment [[with mature tree growing out of it).

[Detroitnerd]

As you drive over the Clinton River Bridge at the bottom of south hill, look to the east. You can still see the interurban embankment [[with mature tree growing out of it).

I think that's not the trestle. They planned to build another to the east, and mounded the dirt up a century ago, but never finished it. I imagine they just used the one track and timed it right instead. Maybe they imagined Rochester would grow more than it did?

[Hermod]

I think that's not the trestle. They planned to build another to the east, and mounded the dirt up a century ago, but never finished it. I imagine they just used the one track and timed it right instead. Maybe they imagined Rochester would grow more than it did?

Rochester [[and Avon Township/Rochester Hills) did grow post war. Many people [[like my father) wanted to "live in the country" and leap-frogged the inner suburbs. There are a lot of 1950s and early 60s ranch house type subdivisions in Rochester Hills. The housing density in Avon Township was much greater than the density in Troy and Sterling Heights for many years. The Rochester area is also home to a lot of apartment type multi-family dwellings both for the general public and "over-55" restricted. Rochester Hills has quite a mix of big box stores and supermarkets. With the original Rochester village anchoring the area, it is much more "sustainable" than Sterling Heights, Troy, Macomb TWP, etc. Don't focus solely on the McMansions.

[Detroitnerd]

Rochester [[and Avon Township/Rochester Hills) did grow post war. Many people [[like my father) wanted to "live in the country" and leap-frogged the inner suburbs. There are a lot of 1950s and early 60s ranch house type subdivisions in Rochester Hills. The housing density in Avon Township was much greater than the density in Troy and Sterling Heights for many years. The Rochester area is also home to a lot of apartment type multi-family dwellings both for the general public and "over-55" restricted. Rochester Hills has quite a mix of big box stores and supermarkets. With the original Rochester village anchoring the area, it is much more "sustainable" than Sterling Heights, Troy, Macomb TWP, etc. Don't focus solely on the McMansions.

When you say "post war," do you mean post WWI? I was speaking within the time frame of the construction of the trestle and plans for another in the 19th century, not of 20th century growth.

No, I think the area around the village will be OK. Rochester's downtown is an asset: walkable and bikable and historic. The area around it will benefit from it. But where you get past walking distance for easy shopping, it will age a little. Where you get past a bike ride from downtown, it will age a little more. Further places, like where you get out to the end of Dutton road, may be showing serious signs of wear in 10 years.

Again, this is a crystal ball exercise, right?

[Hermod]

When you say "post war," do you mean post WWI? I was speaking within the time frame of the construction of the trestle and plans for another in the 19th century, not of 20th century growth.

No, I think the area around the village will be OK. Rochester's downtown is an asset: walkable and bikable and historic. The area around it will benefit from it. But where you get past walking distance for easy shopping, it will age a little. Where you get past a bike ride from downtown, it will age a little more. Further places, like where you get out to the end of Dutton road, may be showing serious signs of wear in 10 years.

Again, this is a crystal ball exercise, right?

I meant WWII, though by then, the interurban was gone [[killed by a combination of Detroit taking over the city system, state highway departments taking over the right of way, and general unprofitability of electric lines).

I couldn't argue with you about Dutton Road in the extreme NW of Rochester Hills, but to use a DY saying, the Rochester area has "good bones". If the oil shortage becomes severe enough, it will be come profitable to have good bus service north and south on Rochester Road and , as a minimum, east-west service along University [[I still call it 5th St).

[Detroitnerd]

I meant WWII, though by then, the interurban was gone [[killed by a combination of Detroit taking over the city system, state highway departments taking over the right of way, and general unprofitability of electric lines).

... general unprofitability of electric lines" to which I'd add, "because the government poured billions upon billions of dollars into public road-building, depriving traction concerns of profitability on inter- and intra-city travel."

I couldn't argue with you about Dutton Road in the extreme NW of Rochester Hills, but to use a DY saying, the Rochester area has "good bones". If the oil shortage becomes severe enough, it will be come profitable to have good bus service north and south on Rochester Road and , as a minimum, east-west service along University [[I still call it 5th St).

Agreed. Maybe even a rail link.

[Hermod]

... general unprofitability of electric lines" to which I'd add, "because the government poured billions upon billions of dollars into public road-building, depriving traction concerns of profitability on inter- and intra-city travel."

DN, interurban lines were having profitability problems in the early 1920s before large scale road building. A lot of interurban lines never earned a penny of profit for their owners and generated mounting losses until bankruptcy. Yes, cars, trucks, and buses took their toll on the the interurbans, but the voting public wanted improved roads and got them.

[Detroitnerd]

DN, interurban lines were having profitability problems in the early 1920s before large scale road building. A lot of interurban lines never earned a penny of profit for their owners and generated mounting losses until bankruptcy. Yes, cars, trucks, and buses took their toll on the the interurbans, but the voting public wanted improved roads and got them.

The biggest business in the United States in the 1910s was road-building, and for most auto historians, 1915 is the fulcrum in the transition from bad roads and few cars to better roads and many cars. So there's not too much of a timing problem there. Americans kicked off the century crying, aided by vocal BICYCLISTS, for improved roads -- and got them.

And small surprise not all of the rail companies worked. You're talking about private businesses that often had 99-year leases to honor and were essentially traction monopolies so they were heavily regulated. So, you start a company and you take a gamble on development going out a certain way. If it doesn't, maybe you build an amusement park to buy some time. And, yeah, maybe you don't make a profit or go bankrupt, or sell your business. That's what happens with private businesses: Gambles, bad decisions, mismanagement, etc. That's called capitalism.

[Hermod]

And small surprise not all of the rail companies worked. You're talking about private businesses that often had 99-year leases to honor and were essentially traction monopolies so they were heavily regulated. So, you start a company and you take a gamble on development going out a certain way. If it doesn't, maybe you build an amusement park to buy some time. And, yeah, maybe you don't make a profit or go bankrupt, or sell your business. That's what happens with private businesses: Gambles, bad decisions, mismanagement, etc. That's called capitalism.

The electric lines didn't have 99 year leases [[actually franchises, not leases) and in many cases, when the term was up, one on-line town would try to hold a gun to the interurbans head [[despite the interurban's financial problems) and precipitate bankruptcy and abandonment.

The highest total rate of return on investment for ALL of the interurban lines in the US never went over 3%. By the mid-twenties, it was about 1.5%. In 1930, it went negative.

[casscorridor]

I think the poster is thinking of Rochester Hills, and may not know the history of small towns around Detroit. Then again, most of us who drive through the area are more familiar with the exurban parts of Rochester/Rochester Hills, and I do think the exurban parts are going to have some major challenges, although I think the little village part will do OK. Rochester Hills, I believe, has the highest percentage of families with children, and has had for about 10 years now. So, in the next 5-10 years, we're going to see a lot of families aging out of those big homes, gas prices rising again, heating costs and commensurate hikes in association fees. I think those homes aren't going to sell as well by then, given the generational shift in taste.

Yes, I meant Rochester Hills. I just call it all Rochester. I think the village/town of Rochester will do good. I think Rochester and Rochester Hills would benefit by merging and eventually reducing the footprint of development on the land. Concentrate development around that pre-existing town.

Go to suburbs with declining young population and see what is happening. Detroit also as declining youth population but I think examples such as Livonia or Warren are more relevant than the Detroit example, because Detroit has an urban foundation [[at least in the core) and many non-auto institutions such as museums, hospitals and colleges located in the center. Suburban areas are fundamentally auto-oriented and lack many real centers, beyond malls. What little public instutions exist are more often than not scattered about, rather than clustered [[like what we see in Midtown).

It makes sense given changes in tastes and attitudes that "downtowns" are the places that thrive. Every town wants their own "downtown." If they don't have one they might build a new one, like in Novi. Some places they even build entirely new towns on green-fields, like in Canton [[Cherry Hill Village). But I don't think the faux town thing is going to work out, the places in the burbs that will do the best are the ones with pre-existing downtowns, such as Wyondotte, Dearborn, Farmington, Northville, Plymouth, Ferndale, Royal Oak, Birmingham, Rochester, Mt Clemens, etc.

This isn't even just about tastes either. Its about sustainability, and our impact on the earth. Oil is one of the leading causes of climate change. Its about the fact that we need to be able to give diverse options to people for transit, and that the suburban model is all about a single mode of transit -- the auto. I think the suburbs can adapt, but they will have a very hard time doing so. The ones that will fare best are the ones I mentioned, but even within those suburbs there will be differences, like the outer part of Rochester will sharply decline while the area around the downtown will fare much better.

[FerndaleDamon]

The stability of Ferndale, and the sense of "normality" is why I moved here. Good city services, good police department, etc. People walk around all over the place. No need to have a car for local needs. Grocery stores, dollar store, proximity to Woodward for bus, if you want it. I've lived here since '04 & so far, I'm very satisfied.

[douglasm]

I'll admit that I moved out of Ferndale in 1973, but the way FerndaleDamon describes it, he could be describing the city I grew up in.

[Detroitnerd]

The electric lines didn't have 99 year leases [[actually franchises, not leases) and in many cases, when the term was up, one on-line town would try to hold a gun to the interurbans head [[despite the interurban's financial problems) and precipitate bankruptcy and abandonment.

The highest total rate of return on investment for ALL of the interurban lines in the US never went over 3%. By the mid-twenties, it was about 1.5%. In 1930, it went negative.

Fascinating. I believe the companies that were merged to comprise the DUR originally had 99-year agreements with the city, probably dating back to when they were horsecar lines.

I do find it difficult to believe that interurban lines weren't very profitable, because the tenor of debate at the turn of the last century were so anti-rail. [[Frank Norris' "The Octopus," the progressive enthusiasm for the automobile, etc.) The traction trusts were the heartless monopolies charging what the market would bear, which emboldened folks like Pingree and Hines to campaign for public ownership and good roads, which eventually helped precipitate the end of the interurban's golden age.

But I think 3 percent would be a good profit in the old days. Not huge, but I also believe plenty of streetcar line owners dabbled in development along the line, where the profits were likely tremendous. I heard that old George Oakman owned much of the near west side, helped route the Oakman car through, then made a dump truck of money. Like lots of the rich of his era, he them promptly became a "reformer."

Your point is well-taken, though, Hermod: We have to be careful to root out the mythology surrounding all this and look at the actual facts. Thanks for sharing your viewpoints and history.

[Hermod]

Fascinating. I believe the companies that were merged to comprise the DUR originally had 99-year agreements with the city, probably dating back to when they were horsecar lines.

Remember that the DUR needed a separate "charter" for each town through which it ran. In many cases the charter required the DUR [[or predecessor lines) to perform certain chores for the city/town/village/wide spot in the road. These often included street sprinkling [[for dirt streets) or paving the street for a certain distance on each side of the tracks. The charter also specified fares in many instances. It was the city's refusal to allow increases in streetcar fares despite the surge in material and labor costs following WW One that was the "hammer" which allowed the city to purchase the city streetcar lines for about one-third of their value. Shortly after taking over, the city promptly raised the fares.

Cite: "Electric Railways of Michigan" by Central Electric Railfans' Association, 1959

I do find it difficult to believe that interurban lines weren't very profitable, because the tenor of debate at the turn of the last century were so anti-rail. [[Frank Norris' "The Octopus," the progressive enthusiasm for the automobile, etc.) The traction trusts were the heartless monopolies charging what the market would bear, which emboldened folks like Pingree and Hines to campaign for public ownership and good roads, which eventually helped precipitate the end of the interurban's golden age.

The finances of interurbans in the US was pretty heavily covered by Hilton and Due in their scholarly book. In 1924, the industry ROR on investment was 2.2% while the DUR [[interurban only) was only 1.3% in that year. costs per "car-mile" for the interurban industry were 12 cents in 1902 and 35 cents in 1924 [[DUR costs in 1924 were 42 cents per car-mile).

Cite: "The Electric Interurban Railways in America" by Hilton and Due, Stanford University press, 1964

But I think 3 percent would be a good profit in the old days. Not huge, but I also believe plenty of streetcar line owners dabbled in development along the line, where the profits were likely tremendous. I heard that old George Oakman owned much of the near west side, helped route the Oakman car through, then made a dump truck of money. Like lots of the rich of his era, he them promptly became a "reformer."

Lots of shenanigans and money made by "railroad promoters" and "interurban promoters" both through land speculation and dummy construction companies that cheated the original investors out of their railroad.

Your point is well-taken, though, Hermod: We have to be careful to root out the mythology surrounding all this and look at the actual facts. Thanks for sharing your viewpoints and history.

Politicians [[and newpapers) loved to campaign against eeeeevullll monopolies like street cars, interurbans, railroads, electric companies, water companies, etc. Every time the price of gas goes up, the pols want to "nationalize the oil companies".

When Hazen Pingree was governor, his actions against the steam railroads contributed to the state of Michigan having the largest percentage of any state of having its steam railroad net abandoned in the decades 1910-1919, 1920-1929, 1930-1939, and 1940-1949.