Detroit's Population [[now and the future)

[Ben]

I've been wondering what people think is going to happen to the City of Detroit's population. I've tried to look this up but it doesn't seem like anyone has made any estimates. I also wonder what the population is right now. I've seen estimates from 650,000 to [[an unrealistic) 925,000. I think it is probably around 690,000. I also think that the city will drop to 575,000 in the next 10 years and will stabilize around then. What do all of you think will happen to the population?

[Crumbled_pavement]

If the steady stream of abandoned, stripped, gutted, burnt out houses and uhaul trucks headed in one direction is evidence of anything then I think Detroit's population will drop way below 575K. I don't see what changes to stop or even slow down the bleeding. The crime rate reminds stubbornly high, services are declining, schools are declining, blight is increasing rapidly, suburban real estate is still cheap [[at least in the inner ring suburbs), few jobs are coming to the city, city leadership [[city council & mayor's office) still is substandard. There's a serious mess going on here. I'm depressed just thinking about it. But, you get the picture. Ain't no stabilizing happening no time soon.

[Jason]

Not too long ago the census released some estimates and said that over the last 2 year period Detroit had lost 0.4% of its population. Or something like that, I forget the numbers. But it was a trivial loss.

If their estimate was right, and if the greater downtown area keeps on growing, and if the economy improves and helps stabilize other areas, I think it's likely that Detroit's population will start increasing a tiny bit in the future.

[313WX]

If the steady stream of abandoned, stripped, gutted, burnt out houses and uhaul trucks headed in one direction is evidence of anything then I think Detroit's population will drop way below 575K. I don't see what changes to stop or even slow down the bleeding. The crime rate reminds stubbornly high, services are declining, schools are declining, blight is increasing rapidly, suburban real estate is still cheap [[at least in the inner ring suburbs), few jobs are coming to the city, city leadership [[city council & mayor's office) still is substandard. There's a serious mess going on here. I'm depressed just thinking about it. But, you get the picture. Ain't no stabilizing happening no time soon.

Agreed.

And even when services are improved and all of the blight is cleaned up, there's still going to be a 5 to 10 year lag at least in the positive feedback cycle.

[maverick1]

I really don't know. On one hand I hear 150000 or more people will leave. But then I hear 1/2 the population is illiterate, majority are unskilled, and uneducated. If the latter is true where are these people moving to where their situation is better?

[mwilbert]

I really don't know. On one hand I hear 150000 or more people will leave. But then I hear 1/2 the population is illiterate, majority are unskilled, and uneducated. If the latter is true where are these people moving to where their situation is better?

You don't know because there isn't any way to know. However, we can be pretty sure it hasn't stabilized yet, so I expect it will be less in 2020 than it was in 2010.

[ndavies]

SEMCOG generates population estimates. They tie these estimates back to the original Census numbers. http://www.semcog.org/Data/Apps/comp...ple.cfm?cpid=5 They are about in line with estimates in Bens original post.

[mwilbert]

SEMCOG generates population estimates. They tie these estimates back to the original Census numbers. http://www.semcog.org/Data/Apps/comp...ple.cfm?cpid=5 They are about in line with estimates in Bens original post.

SEMCOG's numbers are not credible. Their employment model is broken, which is why I suspect their population estimates are so improbable. In any case you can't really take them as having any kind of reliability. There are also not reliable models for the repopulation of abandoned areas, as opposed to the buildout of greenfields.

To give you an example of why I don't take their numbers seriously, I just looked at the projections for Detroit population that SEMCOG had on its website in 2008. They projected the population in 2035 as 705,128. Now, five years later, they project the 2035 population as 613,623, a slight rise from their projection for 2030. Frankly, I don't think there is any way to know what the population will be in 2035. Detroit isn't in some kind of near-equilibrium state where there will be slow, predictable changes over time.

[Novine]

There's not enough residential units in downtown or Midtown to replace what's being lost everywhere else in the city.

[mwilbert]

There's not enough residential units in downtown or Midtown to replace what's being lost everywhere else in the city.

If you want to project that population will be lower in Detroit in a year, I'd say that's a good bet. But neither you nor anyone else knows how many residential units there will be downtown and midtown in 2030, nor if there will be other growing areas by then.

[poobert]

I really don't know. On one hand I hear 150000 or more people will leave. But then I hear 1/2 the population is illiterate, majority are unskilled, and uneducated. If the latter is true where are these people moving to where their situation is better?

They're moving to the inner-ring suburbs, and bringing their problems with them. Or they're stuck in the hopelessly poor bantustan that is the city. Abandon all hope, all ye who enter Metro Detroit.

What is the fucking point of SEMCOG, anyway? Can't we just eradicate it, as part of bankruptcy, or something? What a mindless organization. It's like a lobotomy patient, stumbling around aimlessly.

[dtowncitylover]

If SEMCOG was ever right, we would still be the US's fourth or fifth largest city with a booming economy and extensive mass transit. Go look at their studies from the 1970s and early 80s. They completely ignored the writing on the wall. They continued to project steady population growth for the region, but we've continued to remain stagnant. SEMCOG reminds me alot of the UN. The mission and goal of it are sincere and admirable, but the people who run it are tied to their anti-regional beliefs [[in the UN's case, anti-Israeli, or anti-Western, etc blocks)

[compn]

what happened to that plan to cut the city up into smaller pieces?

detroit could focus on downtown and midtown, let the outer border be returned into green spaces or cut into new towns. dearborn could expand some more across 94 if that population is still growing.

or the plan to move people from one person per block into neighborhoods full of people?
DTE and DWSD cant service one person per block, its cost prohibitive for residents and service providers.

[Hermod]

what happened to that plan to cut the city up into smaller pieces?

detroit could focus on downtown and midtown, let the outer border be returned into green spaces or cut into new towns. dearborn could expand some more across 94 if that population is still growing.

There have been a few court cases on this matter. The upshot is that cities cannot willy-nilly de-annex economically unproductive areas [[tax outgo greater than tax income). Cities also cannot bail out of areas with an antagonistic voting bloc, minority population, or criminal enterprise.

[renf]

At present, there appears to be something of a revival of population growth in the nation's largest cities. 24 or the 25 largest cities as enumerated in Census 2010 grew between April, 2010 and July 2012 according to Census Bureau estimates. Detroit was the only one of the 25 largest cities that lost population in that span. Population growth in many cities may be fuel, in part, by increases in employment in the health care sector, in higher education and, in a few cases, by increases in employment in the financial services sector. The delay in age at first marriage and the increasing acceptance of same-sex couples also may be contributing to large city population growth at this time.

[Crumbled_pavement]

what happened to that plan to cut the city up into smaller pieces?

detroit could focus on downtown and midtown, let the outer border be returned into green spaces or cut into new towns. dearborn could expand some more across 94 if that population is still growing.

or the plan to move people from one person per block into neighborhoods full of people?
DTE and DWSD cant service one person per block, its cost prohibitive for residents and service providers.

You assume the suburbs want any parts of Detroit. Be lucky someone from Dearborn didn't just flick a booger on you.

[Hypestyles]

if the blight issue can legitimately be curbed, that would go a long way in helping city planners figure out what kind of developments could be explored in a given area-- but all the haphazardly scattered derelict homes, storefronts and other structures make this an ongoing mess.

[Detroitnerd]

They're moving to the inner-ring suburbs, and bringing their problems with them. Or they're stuck in the hopelessly poor bantustan that is the city. Abandon all hope, all ye who enter Metro Detroit.

What is the fucking point of SEMCOG, anyway? Can't we just eradicate it, as part of bankruptcy, or something? What a mindless organization. It's like a lobotomy patient, stumbling around aimlessly.

SEMCOG is not a serious regional planning organization, in the sense that it tries to intelligently organize the region's resources to produce the best outcomes. It's an agency that helps disburse funds, really, for fringe road-building projects. How do they do that? They stack the board with suburban votes, then disburse money to suburban projects. Sure, some of that money goes to projects in the city, but large-scale road projects, like widening the Davison or widening I-94, are often at odds with the real needs of the city, whose density puts it more in tune with transit projects or complete streets planning.

There's a joke about a guy who wins at darts every time: He throws the darts against the wall and then draws bull's-eyes around where they land. I've often felt this is what SEMCOG does: Local developers throw darts on the wall, and SEMCOG makes them all winners by expanding their infrastructure.

[illwill]

Unfortunately, despite all of the positive news about young professionals and artist flocking to Detroit, I think the city suffers from the same problem that it has been for the last 20 years.

Most of Detroit's cheerleaders live outside the city or out of state. Everyone is "saying" they want to see a Detroit comeback but very few people are willing to move into the city or [[put their money where their mouth is). Detroit needs warm bodies.

[p1acebo]

Unfortunately, despite all of the positive news about young professionals and artist flocking to Detroit, I think the city suffers from the same problem that it has been for the last 20 years.

Most of Detroit's cheerleaders live outside the city or out of state. Everyone is "saying" they want to see a Detroit comeback but very few people are willing to move into the city or [[put their money where their mouth is). Detroit needs warm bodies.

I agree with this to a certain extent, however I have seen significant change since I lived downtown a few years ago. It's a small sample size in years, but to see change before your eyes means more to me than nothing happening at all. Obviously I can't make generalizations about Detroit as a whole, but it is passing my eyeball test.

[Ben]

I agree with this to a certain extent, however I have seen significant change since I lived downtown a few years ago. It's a small sample size in years, but to see change before your eyes means more to me than nothing happening at all. Obviously I can't make generalizations about Detroit as a whole, but it is passing my eyeball test.

I think that although Detroit has great neighborhoods like Boston-Edison, the University District, Indian Village, East English Village, Palmer Woods/Detroit Golf Club, and Sherwood Forest and some up and coming areas like Corktown, Midtown, and Downtown, ultimately there are vast areas of the city that are little more than poverty or abandonment. No matter how many yuppies move into downtown the poverty of places like the East Side will not change. I think that Detroit loosing population would not be a bad thing. Detroit could have a world class ring of parks around it if it was to properly develop these abandoned areas.

[nain rouge]

Not too long ago the census released some estimates and said that over the last 2 year period Detroit had lost 0.4% of its population. Or something like that, I forget the numbers. But it was a trivial loss.

The census estimates are always way off. If I remember correctly, the census was projecting a population of about 850,000 in Detroit right up to when the official 2010 count came in. About all the census estimates can do is give you a reasonable estimation of whether the population is going up or down.

Judging by current trends, I see Detroit's remaining historic neighborhoods being revitalized while almost all post-streetcar neighborhoods in the city are left to rot [[outside of a few outliers). Detroit's outer neighborhoods can't compete with the city's urban core or the newer neighboring suburbs, but are stuck instead in a no man's land.

[Detroitnerd]

I see Detroit's remaining historic neighborhoods being revitalized while almost all post-streetcar neighborhoods in the city are left to rot [[outside of a few outliers).

Astute. I like it.

[compn]

high crime, no good schools, no reason to move to detroit.

i hear new delta city is going to be a nice place.

[Detroitnerd]

high crime, no good schools, no reason to move to detroit.

No diversity, overvalued homes, little density, low walkability, bland architecture, lack of history, provincial attitudes, an endless string of strip malls and tire shops, no reason to move to the suburbs.