The Changing Face of Detroit

[iheartthed]

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.

Haven't the suburbs always been pretty full of former Detroiters though? What makes cooperation now anymore likely than in the past?

[chitaku]

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.

[corktownyuppie]

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..

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.

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.

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.

[corktownyuppie]

Haven't the suburbs always been pretty full of former Detroiters though? What makes cooperation now anymore likely than in the past?

Suburbs have been full of former Detroiters. When in history has Detroit been attracting former suburbanites? I think that's the difference maker.

[iheartthed]

Suburbs have been full of former Detroiters. When in history has Detroit been attracting former suburbanites? I think that's the difference maker.

But how does this make regional cooperation more likely?

[Detroitej72]

But how does this make regional cooperation more likely?

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.

[DetroitPole]

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.

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.

[iheartthed]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[mwilbert]

it is pure fantasy to believe that suburbanites will move to Detroit in large masses.

Suburbanites, probably not.

Children of suburbanites, something I see a fair bit of.

[iheartthed]

Suburbanites, probably not.

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.

[313WX]

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 shape

But think of Detroit as a person in a coma.

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.

[corktownyuppie]

Detroit will be saved by out-of-region migration, period. There is no other workable way to re-populate the city.

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.

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.

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."

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.

[corktownyuppie]

But think of Detroit as a person in a coma.

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 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.

[Det_ard]

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.