Great article in Crain's "Living and Investing in the D" issue. This is going to be a big decade for Detroit, methinks.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...FREE/110819901
Printable View
Great article in Crain's "Living and Investing in the D" issue. This is going to be a big decade for Detroit, methinks.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...FREE/110819901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zozo
I hope you are right, but I was told the 70's would be the big decade for Detroit, then it was the 80's, then the 90's....you get the idea....and yet, the same problems exist.
Color me doubtful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zozo
Seriously? Gateway is still being floated? While you're at it Crain's, why not reprint all those breathless reports about Caddilac Centre.Quote:
2 Gateway Park: A 370,000-square-foot shopping center anchored by a Meijer Inc. store is proposed for the old Michigan State Fairgrounds at Eight Mile and Woodward. The proposed RobotTown robotics research consortium is also eyeing the fairgrounds as a possible location.
and this one...
...so the company in question....that hasn't pulled the trigger on the long rumored Gateway project.... has not announced participation in this venture either....but you're reporting it as if it'll happen?Quote:
4 Meijer: A deal still in the works would include constructing a 200,000-square-foot retail building with smaller retail buildings surrounding it on the 25 acres at Grand River and McNichols, on the site of Redford High School, which closed in 2007. Grand Rapids-based Meijer Inc. has not announced it will occupy the site, but government and real estate sources say the tenant will be Meijer. The project is being developed by Southfield-based Redico LLC and backed by a handful of longtime Detroiters including developer Bernie Schrott.
Crain's needs to have another section in that article called "Proposals" with a sub heading of "not meant to be a factual statement". you can put cohesive, functioning, regional mass transit there too.
I'm getting a little tired of hearing/reading about the Shops at Gateway.
Reports in late June had Meijer looking over the lease and prepared to sign it by mid July.
It seems like there are 2-3 news stories a year for the last 5 years that this is going to actually happen.
No kidding. The only time I read Crain's is when it's posted on this site, but I really question their crediblity.Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
More times than not they seem to be more cheerleader than fact finders.
There was an interesting debate over whether it should be a typical park-in-front development [[developers like doing what they've done before) or whether it would have an urban orientation with parking and loading in rear. I'd rather they take their time and hammer it out right. Would be awful to be left with something like Model T Plaza if things went sour.
I wonder what the hell Gilbert has planned for that parking garage. Or he's probably holding on to it until a big company needs a new building.
I think the difference is this:Quote:
Originally Posted by ferntruth
70s- businesses fled Detroit
80s- businesses fled Detroit
90s- businesses fled Detroit
00s- business loss bottomed out
10s- businesses are relocating to and flourishing in Detroit
If anyone wants to see how much new development has occurred in Detroit since 12/15/2010, please see this thread: http://www.city-data.com/forum/detro...elopments.html
By the end of the thread, you can see how fast things are accelerating. The ball is indeed rolling.
You mean "new" Detroit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zozo
This will probably be "Detroit's" [[areas outside that I-75/River/M-10/Grand Blvd.) worst decade.
If you could trade wishful thinking, then Detroit would be Wall Street
I call skipper's rule on this stuff. This decade is giong to be slow growth for the entire USA economically speaking so money won't be moving in too quickly.
The biggest issue facing Detroit is it's crime [[shocking!) and then it's horrible school system. Until these things are rectified somewhat nothing will change.
People with money are not going to move to Detroit enmasse if they don't feel safe and families won't move until the education system can give the kids an actual education.
No amount of hipsters, singles or wishing will change this unless Detroiters take back their city and demand action on the horrendous crime rates and nepotism and bullshit educational politics that have destroyed the system.
Fuck, I feel like a broken record.
Crime is not rampant in the entire city, so people will move to the safe areas first. If there is enough demand, the growth could spread to other parts of the city. As far as the horrible schools, very soon the governor will get his way and all school districts in the state will be forced to become schools of choice. Then Detroit Public Schools will become irrelevant and anybody who buys in Detroit will have the option to send their kids to Oakland County Schools or wherever they choose. For these reasons, this time Detroit may have a chance at rebirth.
The ball is, indeed, rolling in Midtown, downtown and Corktown...to a certain extent. But I'd like to see some stats on the rest of the city of businesses moving in vs. businesses moving out. Same thing with people moving in vs. people moving out. I'm admittedly taking a wild guess here, but I don't think the picture is so bright in ROD -- the rest of Detroit.
Obviously it isn't. I've only lived here 4.25 years and entire neighborhoods that used to be a little weathered but intact, are completely devastated now. BTW is there any momentum in the clark park/hubbard richard area? Or is it stable but stagnant?
It seems stable and mostly stagnant [[some new stuff), but I've pegged those neighborhoods as potential boom areas. They have great assets and are still intact. Mexicantown seems to be becoming somewhat of an attractive area for artists and hipsters, [[perhaps overflowing from the lack of availability in Corktown?). If you shop at Honeybee, you know what I'm talking about. Hubbard-Richard/Clark Park are looking good for the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by ismoakrack
I did not know that Honeybee was still open...? Where are they now?Quote:
Originally Posted by BrushStart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitej72
For one, outsiders aren't going to pick through the few neighbourhoods where crime isn't an almost every day occurance. They will instead look at the suburbs and realize these are thriving neighbourhoods with better schools and live there.
When the governor "gets his way" do you think people are going to want to move to the city just to send there kids to a school on a bus with longer commutes or do you think they will live closer to schools in a good neighbourhood like most people?
If the majority of Detroiters start going to school in Oakland County or Warren Consolidated, I wouldn't be surprised that parents there move their kids further away. Because a principal I know now has his hands full with the few Detroiters at this school now. With the daily class interruptions, fighting, and lower level of education [[they are having a hard time with the curriculum) this is going to cause some serious problems.
I stand by my original post....again.
I hear you. I am concerned about rather or not crime has really topped off in certain areas. Federal funding of programs such as food stamps and the coming cuts in welfare in October will have an impact... though I AM NOT suggesting that to be an excuse for crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by ferntruth
Everyone seems to wish for and talk about regional cooperation, arguing that if the wealthy and the poor were forced to share resources and cooperate, it would actually force a better result for all parties. I still agree with this. If the people north of 8 mile never have to listen to the constituency south of 8 mile -- and if the people south of 8 mile never have to listen to the constituency north of 8 mile -- then, progress will be impossible. Walls go up. Alliances form. Simple problems like the Cobo Hall become multi-year Gordian knots which steal precious time and resources from other big-issue problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Mass transit becomes an elusive oasis for 3 decades because infighting and dysfunction.
The City of Detroit encompasses a citizenry which bears the weight of social problems disproportionate to most other municipalities in SE Michigan. Unemployment, single parenthood, homelessness. Crime. The political boundaries will never require L. Brooks Patterson to deal with Detroit's uneducated and unemployed. The political boundaries will never allow Bloomfield Hills voters to vote for the Detroit City Council. And God forbid raising the issue of raising taxes on Oakland County residents to help with the social problems of Detroit.
But it looks like regional cooperation will start to happen, not because of a political concession to do so. It's happening because Detroit is starting to shed its residents who are leaving for the suburbs while simultaneously attracting an affluent, educated citizenry into its core.
Southfield Mayor Brenda Lawrence is probably one of the more liberal mayors Oakland County has ever had. Detroit Mayor Dave Bing is arguably one of the most business-friendly mayors Detroit has ever had.
I would argue that for specific individuals, this transition is likely to feel like "things are getting worse". I'm sure it feels that way for some of the inner-ring suburbs who are having to take on some of Detroit's social problems. It probably feels that way for Detroiters for whom "things have gotten so bad", that they've been forced to move.
But for the region as a whole, this transition -- painful as it may be -- will result in a political landscape that serves the greater good in a much compelling way:
[[1) Brooks Patterson and the Oakland County crew will be forced to share their affluence to deal with the poor. Not because they're "sending money into Detroit". But because the working poor and lower-middle class is starting to become their problem.
[[2) This new affluent educated is bringing entrepreneurship and business sense into the city, resulting in a migration away from unskilled job toward a knowledge economy that will make the core of Michigan's new economy. This new citizenry also has a lot less patience for "Onward Christian Soldiers" being sung at a City Council Meeting and is pushing for real solutions. Plus, they pay lots of taxes and require fewer services.
Socialism makes a good argument for the redistribution of wealth. It's not one I subscribe to, though I think the intent has some merits. Well, we don't live in a socialist system. But instead of redistributing wealth, the changing face of Detroit is resulting in a re-distribution of Detroit's social problems.
In the long run, we all benefit, especially if you are on board with the idea that the City of Detroit is the "face" of SE Michigan to the rest of the world. And the better state of the city will eventually result in the better state of the region.
In rebuilding you HAVE to move from the core outward. That is what every successful urban revival has done. Yes, other pockets [[like corktown) will spring up, but for the revival to be sustained, the core has to be strong, just like getting your body back in shapeQuote:
Originally Posted by 313WX
When you see the reports that lofts downtown have waiting lists, companies following Dan Gilbert to the Central Business District, and witness new business coming to town, you can't help but to feel optimistic. Sure, some people will sit back and downplay it, and only time will tell if they are correct.
When you see the trends like downtown being filled by many former suburbanites and many former Detroit residents moving to the suburbs, the chances of regional cooperation become more likely.
i wish you could tell me where the "safe" areas are, because I would move there. Or if you mean "safe" as in relative to, say, Somalia, okay then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitej72
I'm sick of hearing about this "rebuilding the core" too. This "core" is a few square miles in a city of ~138 square miles. What we HAVE to do is provide a decent quality of life to all sustainable areas of the city.
Hell, Coleman was "rebuilding the core" decades ago, throwing up monorails and putting awnings on abandoned hotels, monkey bars on Washington Boulevard. Well, the renaissance still hasn't come. In fact, things have gotten unspeakably worse virtually everywhere else.
There is nothing wrong with Midtown and downtown. In fact, I think they're sustainable on their own merits. Yet every incentive still goes to them. They are truly the welfare queens of Detroit.
Rebuilding the core and the revival "moving outward" sounds more like the human centipede to me, with the vast majority of the population being at the back of it.
I desperately wish we could. We can't. We've tried. There's just not enough money. And the pot is getting smaller not larger. It's time to start performing triage and save what we can, otherwise the whole ship goes down.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPole
Midtown and Downtown are not sustainable...yet. You still have vacant building after building after building that will need the up-front capital investment to redevelop. People [[including me) talk about how downtown buildings are 98% full. That's true when you only include the ones that are built out. There's still a decades worth of work to do in the core of the city before anyone will call it "fully sustainable". Until you can walk from New Center to the Coleman Young Building without going through giant islands of blight and danger...it's not fully sustainable.
And maybe you're right and that other areas and other neighborhoods deserve the incentives and redevelopment money more. Let's assume that. That's like putting money into a block with 18 abandoned houses instead of trying to rescue the block with only 3.
These aren't fun times for residents on either of those blocks. But if you dilute your efforts, both blocks die. If you focus all your effort on one block...then at least you'll have one sustainable neighborhood at the end of the day.
Detroit might be attracting an affluent, educated citizenry into its core [[a very small area by the way), but it's also been shedding its black middle class and that's been happening for a long time..Quote:
Originally Posted by corktownyuppie
Hardly a scientific survey, but I don't know any poor or lower middle class former Detroiters who have moved to the suburbs. The number of college educated, middle class or higher residents who have left the city that I know are many.
I get the feeling you're placing too much importance on the people who are moving into the midtown area and not enough on the people who have left the neighborhoods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Yeah, but SOMEONE has to bring a bit of reality to this party.
Cheers
Haven't the suburbs always been pretty full of former Detroiters though? What makes cooperation now anymore likely than in the past?Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitej72
seems like every 5 years we appoint a new hero [[Gilbert) to lead us out of the storm......Same stuff over and over since 1960.
This is a very good point, and one which I admittedly am ignorant. I think most of us are all ignorant. I posted a new thread inquiring about where are revenue sources come from and what our biggest cost sources are.Quote:
Originally Posted by rjk
Recognizing that migration because of a lowering standard of living is painful for many, the question is this: does the trade-off in migration patterns turn a net positive for the city? Or a net negative? I truly don't know and I wish we had some objective 3rd party who would share the analysis. It's fair to say that I'm biased toward downtown because, well, frankly, it's the part of Detroit I see most often. And I think we all are like this...speaking about the city through the filter of our daily experience -- which is different at 7 & Livernois, Washington and Michigan Ave, Greenfield and McNichols, or Alter and Mack.
When 3 middle class families of 4 with family income of $85,000 leaves and is replaced by a single resident with an income of $150,000...is that net positive or net negative? Factor in not just the taxes paid, but also the money spent into the economy, the services needed, etc. Figure this, the single living at the Book Cadillac probably requires a different level of policing than the 3 living at Alter and Mack. Is it more? Less?
No one knows and that's part of the problem.
That said, I see your point and think it warrants consideration.
Suburbs have been full of former Detroiters. When in history has Detroit been attracting former suburbanites? I think that's the difference maker.Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
But how does this make regional cooperation more likely?Quote:
Originally Posted by corktownyuppie
Well, for starters, I don't think there will be a lot of black former Detroiters playing the fear card to their neighbors the way politicians like Brooks and his ilk have in the past. And if former suburbanites move to the city in large masses, I doubt they will have distrust towards the suburbs like Detroiters of yesterday have.Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
The divide was essentially almost always purely racial, cloaked in the guise of "city" vs. "suburb." Now the divide is just going to be more openly about race. It's not like race relations have really improved in this region. And isn't going to go away just because whites and blacks live in the same municipal boundaries. In fact, just look forward to blacks moving where whites used to live, and whites moving further out to Holly, Washington Township, and beyond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitej72
Oh, okay. I guess this is the discrepancy. I just simply don't agree that race relations were root the cause of Detroit's decline.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitej72
I like to play the Detroit optimist as much as anyone, but it is pure fantasy to believe that suburbanites will move to Detroit in large masses. It is foolish to believe that this is how Detroit will be saved, or even how it should be saved. The economics of it just don't make sense. Detroit will be saved by out-of-region migration, period. There is no other workable way to re-populate the city.Quote:
And if former suburbanites move to the city in large masses, I doubt they will have distrust towards the suburbs like Detroiters of yesterday have.
Suburbanites, probably not.Quote:
it is pure fantasy to believe that suburbanites will move to Detroit in large masses.
Children of suburbanites, something I see a fair bit of.
Sure, more than in the past, but I have a hard time envisioning even young adults, who grew up in the suburbs, moving to the city at a rate that would replace the population losses in Detroit. I really don't see how to do it without becoming an attractive destination for out-of-region migration.Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilbert
But think of Detroit as a person in a coma.Quote:
Originally Posted by rb336
While downtown [[the brain) has been incapacitated for over 40 years, the other parts of the body have slowly rotted away [[the neighborhoods). Now that the brain is just not recovering from its coma [[downtown Detroit) the other aras of the body [[neighborhoods) are to the point where they're useless because they've been stagnant for so long without a functional central nervous system.
Bottom line is there will essentially be no Detroit except for a few areas outside the I-75/River/M-10/Grand Blvd. loop [[especially when all the planned demolitions come to fruition thanks to the mortgage crisis). It just needs to be said as it is. Instead of saying "this will be Detroit's best decade" or "Detroit's coming back", please say "downtown Detroit's coming back", because that's eesentially what one means when they say that, seemingly forgetting there's another 130-odd square miles in the city that's still rapidly declining.
I think you're partially right. I think out-of-region migration will need to be a big component, which is why I don't object to the focus on downtown/midtown. Someone moving here from Atlanta, DC, Chicago won't be thinking..."hey, can anyone recommend a place in the old neighborhoods by City Airport?" But I don't think it'll be the only source of population growth. Migration from the suburbs -- I think, through the lens my downtown living -- is no longer an isolated incident, but rather, a trend.Quote:
Detroit will be saved by out-of-region migration, period. There is no other workable way to re-populate the city.
I agree with you about the destination problem. Right now the CBD is probably at less than 60% or more occupancy when factoring in the undeveloped abandoned buildings. For us Detroiters, things might look like they're turning around...and they are. But bring in anyone from outside Michigan...the comments are "wow, this is actually nicer than I thought it'd be...but wow, there's still a lot of work to do. a lot of work."Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
You also have to ask the question: are we trying to re-populate the city? or are we trying to make the city financially solvent? Because, assuming that we're trying for the latter....losing 4 retired couples in single family homes on the northwest side but gaining those same retired couples into Millender Center takes a drain off the city operational budget. Much easier to police a building with one entry point vs. 4 homes that may be vacant at any given moment...etc etc.
As for the suburbanites vs. children of the suburbanites...the good news is that time is on our side. Attitudes of this generation are a lot different than the baby boomer crew.
I agree with you, in general. The only thing I'd add is that the "other 130-odd square miles", which includes areas that I grew up in and hold near and dear...are areas which mostly go unseen to outsiders, other than the crime reports on the news. Like it or not, the CBD is the "face" of Detroit to anyone who lives outside the city. And it's still not developed enough to "feel walkable" and "feel safe" yet. If you expand your perspective to include out-of-staters, the CBD is pretty much the only thing they know or care about.Quote:
Originally Posted by 313WX
The loss vs. gain is so lopsided that it seems silly to even consider if there's a balanced trade-off.
In the last ten years the city lost 237,000 people, net. 185K black, 41K white. For the sake of argument, and a lack of real numbers, let's say 13,000 affluent folks moved into the "heart" of the city. Then that means 250,000 people moved out.
Based on the demographic changes in certain suburbs, it appears many former Detroit blacks moved to cities like Farmington Hills, West Bloomfield, Southfield, Oak Park, Harper Woods and Redford. These are upper- to lower-middle class areas.
The upshot of this is that what Detroit lost are largely middle class people, leaving a population more weighted toward the lower class. Even if the number of young affluents moving in is three or four times my example [[4 x 13,000 = 52,000), that still isn't even close to balancing out the quarter-million middle class folks who left.
I expect to see a continued decline in most neighborhoods, with a gradual improvement in the downtown, midtown, corktown, woodbridge type neighborhoods.