The Death of the Fringe Suburb

[313WX]

I hear that on the predictions, I was sort of curious as to what the reasoning was. I hope Troy doesn't decline over the next 20-30 years, and agree that an increased density in Detroit is probably good for it. As for the auto industry, ugh. Feast or [[mostly, lately) famine. Another major industry needs to settle in here.

Other major industries need to settle in here.

Fixed that for you.

[begingri]

As nation abandons exurbs, are Detroit's inner-ring suburbs our best opportunity for density, urbanity?

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/in...xurbs_are.html

[Novine]

According to the 2010 Census, Troy, West Bloomfield and Farmington Hills all had flat population growth. Livonia, Southfield and Bloomfield Township all lost population. Does anyone expect those communities to turn around those numbers over the next 10 years?

[Det_ard]

According to the 2010 Census, Troy, West Bloomfield and Farmington Hills all had flat population growth. Livonia, Southfield and Bloomfield Township all lost population. Does anyone expect those communities to turn around those numbers over the next 10 years?

Who knows, but there are a few things that influence population statistics in built-out communities that make population stagnation or slight loss a poor indicator of a community's health. As average household size decreases so does the population even if the number of households stays the same. In addition the foreclosure process left some number of houses vacant in 2010. As foreclosures decrease, these homes will be re-occupied.

[CLAUDE G]

I think the whole issue is that nobody wants to live in the inner city if they don't have to, and due to that one reason the suburbs survive.

Eventually Detroit is going to hit rock bottom [[Which is already happening) and your going to have areas where literally everyone has moved out.

From those very areas, development will then start to grow and as a ring will continue to grow into the suburbs.

[Novine]

"Who knows, but there are a few things that influence population statistics in built-out communities that make population stagnation or slight loss a poor indicator of a community's health."

True but in SE Michigan, the pattern of growth, plateau and decline has been repeated over and over again for the past 50 years. Why are those communities going to be different?

[ghettopalmetto]

I think the whole issue is that nobody wants to live in the inner city if they don't have to, and due to that one reason the suburbs survive.

When you write "the inner city", are you speaking specifically to inner city Detroit? Or inner cities in general?

[MikeM]

"Inner city" is a term my 90-year-old parents use. Is this a generational term?

[Mikeg]

"Who knows, but there are a few things that influence population statistics in built-out communities that make population stagnation or slight loss a poor indicator of a community's health."

True but in SE Michigan, the pattern of growth, plateau and decline has been repeated over and over again for the past 50 years. Why are those communities going to be different?

I think that the best leading indicators of a community's ability to stay "healthy" are their millage rates and code enforcement, especially if they have a small or non-existent industrial tax base.

Now that the bubble has burst, the value of the low-density residential dwellings which predominate in this region are very dependent on the relative differences in local property tax rates and creeping blight. The communities that are most likely to break out of that cycle will be those whose leaders realize that their future "health" is dependent on the maintenance of their housing stock.

To avoid following the cycle, those communities will need to have active code enforcement, keep their municipal budget costs under control and maintain a tight control on the amount of zoning for local commercial land use so that it is in sync with the amounts of disposable income within the typical one mile service radius. Too much local commercial can lead to blight on the perimeters of neighborhoods, which can set off residential blight.

[ghettopalmetto]

To avoid following the cycle, those communities will need to have active code enforcement, keep their municipal budget costs under control and maintain a tight control on the amount of zoning for local commercial land use so that it is in sync with the amounts of disposable income within the typical one mile service radius. Too much local commercial can lead to blight on the perimeters of neighborhoods, which can set off residential blight.

The above is clearly an academic thought. The practicality of it is something quite different. Code enforcement requires tax dollars--and compliance with code enforcement is dependent upon an ownership population that can afford to maintain its property. Further, building codes address safety and occupancy. They do not address dirt, toys strewn about the yard, or other cosmetic issues that can certainly affect property values [[and contribute to a vicious cycle).

"Keeping costs under control" is difficult when you have services with fixed or increasing costs that must be provided--road maintenance, etc--and tax revenues simutaneously fall [[see above). Theoretically, you can eliminate all quality-of-life services, but then you risk going to a Point of No Return. No one is going to want to live in a municipality without parks, transportation, and other basic services.

Zoning exists on a piece of paper. Changing the zoning from commercial to residential does not make an abandoned strip mall into an apartment complex. You're still stuck with building inventory that must be dealt with. And in a declining area, developers looking for The Next Coolest Thing are going to be hesitant to redevelop a 40-year-old strip mall.

[Bham1982]

According to the 2010 Census, Troy, West Bloomfield and Farmington Hills all had flat population growth. Livonia, Southfield and Bloomfield Township all lost population. Does anyone expect those communities to turn around those numbers over the next 10 years?

To me, this directly contradicts the article claims.

These are all inner suburbs. The article claims the outer suburbs are dying.

In Metro Detroit, virtually 100% of inner suburbs are losing population, and virtually 100% are gaining population. The article claims the outer sprawlburbs are dying, and the inner suburbs are benefitting.

[Novine]

I don't consider Troy, Bloomfield Township, West Bloomfield or Farmington Hills as inner-ring suburbs. They are all at least second tier suburbs. As for exurbs, some of those locations are losing population too. Unlike past Census numbers, the pattern of growth and decline in Metro Detroit wasn't along a wave moving outward. Look at the loss of population in the townships along the St. Clair/Macomb County border. In Livingston County, Brighton and Hamburg Townships used to be fast-growing. Now they're not.

http://library.semcog.org/InmagicGen...2010Census.pdf

[Bham1982]

I don't consider Troy, Bloomfield Township, West Bloomfield or Farmington Hills as inner-ring suburbs. They are all at least second tier suburbs. As for exurbs, some of those locations are losing population too. Unlike past Census numbers, the pattern of growth and decline in Metro Detroit wasn't along a wave moving outward. Look at the loss of population in the townships along the St. Clair/Macomb County border. In Livingston County, Brighton and Hamburg Townships used to be fast-growing. Now they're not.

http://library.semcog.org/InmagicGen...2010Census.pdf

We have totally different conceptions of inner and outer suburbs.

To me, an inner suburb is a postwar, mostly or fully built out suburb, like Farmington Hills, Livonia, Southfield, Warern, Sterling Heights and the like.

An outer suburb is basically every township in Livingston, Northern Oakland, Western Oakland, and Northern Macomb.

Using this definition [[which I think most folks would agree with), almost every inner suburb is losing population, and almost every outer suburb is gaining population.

[antongast]

We have totally different conceptions of inner and outer suburbs.

To me, an inner suburb is a postwar, mostly or fully built out suburb, like Farmington Hills, Livonia, Southfield, Warern, Sterling Heights and the like.

An outer suburb is basically every township in Livingston, Northern Oakland, Western Oakland, and Northern Macomb.

Using this definition [[which I think most folks would agree with), almost every inner suburb is losing population, and almost every outer suburb is gaining population.

It's a pretty subjective definition, I guess, but I'd say an "inner suburb" is anything south of 14 Mile and east of Inkster. Suburbs outside that line have a tangibly different character from those inside, and IMO need a different term to describe them [[middle-ring or second-tier or some such). Then there's another line where they start to look and feel different again, maybe 26 Mile to the north and Napier to the west, and anything past that is an exurb.

[ghettopalmetto]

We have totally different conceptions of inner and outer suburbs.

To me, an inner suburb is a postwar, mostly or fully built out suburb, like Farmington Hills, Livonia, Southfield, Warern, Sterling Heights and the like.

An outer suburb is basically every township in Livingston, Northern Oakland, Western Oakland, and Northern Macomb.

Using this definition [[which I think most folks would agree with), almost every inner suburb is losing population, and almost every outer suburb is gaining population.

I don't know if you realize this or not, but given the lack of precision in your definition, and the proclivity of Michigan to feed the sprawl machine, then the localities you consider "inner" and "outer" suburbs will constantly change over time, moving ever outward.

And for that matter, what the hell is Grosse Pointe?

[Bham1982]

It's a pretty subjective definition, I guess, but I'd say an "inner suburb" is anything south of 14 Mile and east of Inkster. Suburbs outside that line have a tangibly different character from those inside, and IMO need a different term to describe them [[middle-ring or second-tier or some such). Then there's another line where they start to look and feel different again, maybe 26 Mile to the north and Napier to the west, and anything past that is an exurb.

Ok, but using your definition and introducing a "middle-ring" tier, the same point stands, IMO.

Almost all inner and "middle ring" suburbs are losing population, and almost all outer suburbs are gaining population.

[Bham1982]

I don't know if you realize this or not, but given the lack of precision in your definition, and the proclivity of Michigan to feed the sprawl machine, then the localities you consider "inner" and "outer" suburbs will constantly change over time, moving ever outward.

I agree, and that's basically my point.

The article claims the "sprawl machine" is dying or dead. I think it's pretty much same as ever [[though obviously affected by economic cycles).

[Detroitnerd]

I agree, and that's basically my point.

The article claims the "sprawl machine" is dying or dead. I think it's pretty much same as ever [[though obviously affected by economic cycles).

The "growth machine" as Macomb and Oakland counties have known it, is over.

We can continue to pick over the growth from 2000 to 2008 and ignore what's happened since, thereby claiming that nothing has changed. [[All while praying for the growth machine to be switched back on -- not happening.)

Or we can take an intelligent look at the emerging trends that will pose great troubles for communities built in the last 50 years that rely on cheap fuel, low materials costs and increasingly out-of-date tastes and make changes.

[Bham1982]

The "growth machine" as Macomb and Oakland counties have known it, is over.

Again, based on what?

Are you defining growth as population change?

If so, how can you make this claim, when all the growth is on the fringe, and all the decline is in the core?

[ghettopalmetto]

Again, based on what?

Are you defining growth as population change?

If so, how can you make this claim, when all the growth is on the fringe, and all the decline is in the core?

How about "based on new housing starts"???

And let's not get too caught up in the word "growth". Physical displacement is not the same as growth. Southeast Michigan, as a whole, has been stagnant for 40 years. So the fact that a place like Oxford Township was "growing" [[until recently) does not validate it in any way.

[Detroitnerd]

Again, based on what?

The lack of growth since the housing crash. The increasing toll of commercial foreclosures. The rising costs of heating fuel and gasoline squeezing homebuyers. How heavily the population is leveraged. The lack of real future opportunities. The increasingly beleaguered housing associations. The unfinished and increasingly vacant developments on the periphery.

Are you defining growth as population change?

Even if I were to, the boom of the early 00s is over. Sure, from 2000 to 2010 the exurbs did well, but you have to look carefully at the last two years of data. Macomb Township, for instance, grew more than 50 percent during that period. Except they had expected to crack 80,000, which they didn't. That is significant. The planned growth did not happen.

If so, how can you make this claim, when all the growth is on the fringe, and all the decline is in the core?

The decline is in the core? Are you aware of the amount of buildings undergoing renovation in Detroit? The amount of housing starts and investment in downtown and midtown? This is the very core, you realize: the center of the city. We're seeing nothing short of gentrification down here.

As for that growth on the fringes:


This is the growth on the fringes. No growth. Fields of gas and power hookups. And the association never fully funded has to beg for plowing services from the county.


I asked one of the guys living out here how he liked it. He tried to make the best of it. Said he did move to the burbs to get away from it all -- although he hadn't envisioned living across the street from this.


A look at the mailboxes on the front of this development gives you an idea of just how vacant these "booming exurbs" are.


Another "booming" exurban development stalled. They usually have one or two work crews working on a custom building, but the larger development company usually sells to another group.


Sometimes they park fake cars in front of the vacant houses to help give the impression the place is occupied, thereby drumming up a sale or two.

[SteveJ]

Drive through M-59 in Macomb at any time of the day and its packed. Every restaurant is packed every weekend. You have to wait in line to eat out. I wouldn't call that dying. Now Detroit is dying or may be dead by tomorrow.

[antongast]

Now Detroit is dying or may be dead by tomorrow.

Want to bet? Five million bucks says Detroit will still exist on Friday, December 2nd, 2011.

[Detroitnerd]

Yes. And let's get in an imaginary time machine and go to the year 1951. Go to downtown Detroit. Every restaurant is packed every weekend. You have to wait in line to eat out. Nobody would say Detroit was dying. Now zoom out to the beet fields of Oakland County. Nothing there.

When we are talking about long-term macro-economic trends, snapshots of the moment don't really counter the other evidence. You're just taking one plotting point on a line and saying everything's fine. There are many other signs pointing to a coming crisis for the exurbs, including an oversupply of the kind of housing out there, a shrinking population for the state, bleak signs for manufacturing, rising fuel costs, rising home heating costs, the durability of the housing construction, overleveraged residents, etc. You can't just say that because the restaurants are crowded, everything will always be fine. Think of that resident of Detroit in 1951.

[skyl4rk]

People are living in the exurbs now, and the usual means of transportation is the SUV. So if gas prices double in the future, all the exurbians need to do is switch to cars with twice the mpg that they are getting now in an SUV. They will also save on the purchase price, insurance and registration. That should give the exurbs another 10 to 20 years.

If the real estate market starts picking up again, those failed developments are going to be developed.