I saw this report online today:
http://247wallst.com/special-report/...-each-state/6/
I thought Oakland county was but maybe this report's methods were different than before.
I saw this report online today:
http://247wallst.com/special-report/...-each-state/6/
I thought Oakland county was but maybe this report's methods were different than before.
Livingston is still mostly rural and has way less people than Oakland so it wouldn't be that hard for a small affluent area to skew the median income past Oakland's.
By per capita, Oakland County is still more affluent.
Last edited by animatedmartian; February-18-15 at 10:20 PM.
Median vs. mean.
You mean 'Mich-ississippi's' Livingston County. Not only the richest county in the state, but the most Klan covered county in the state.
That's the rumor I've heard.
My wife has a lot of family there. It's alright, but if you need anything at all you're driving lots of miles.
Speaking of Livingston County, all indicators are pointing to its boom days being over, and that's really good for the rest of the region. The fastest growing county in the state in the 90's [[37%), growth slowed way down in the 00's [[15.3%), and population estimates show it crawling in the 10's [[1.9% for the first three years of the decade) relative to the 90's.
Apart from its nasty little cultural history, the problem with it is that the growth was basically entirely sprawl. There is not a single incorporated city or village in the entire county that tops 10,000 residents. It's the worst of exurbia.
That's because no one's wages have gone up. Can't buy houses if people aren't making money. Don't worry, once [[or if ever) the economy kicks up again, the sprawl machine will get going.Speaking of Livingston County, all indicators are pointing to its boom days being over, and that's really good for the rest of the region. The fastest growing county in the state in the 90's [[37%), growth slowed way down in the 00's [[15.3%), and population estimates show it crawling in the 10's [[1.9% for the first three years of the decade) relative to the 90's.
Apart from its nasty little cultural history, the problem with it is that the growth was basically entirely sprawl. There is not a single incorporated city or village in the entire county that tops 10,000 residents. It's the worst of exurbia.
The sprawl machine is going crazy right now; probably stronger than at any time since the 1990's.
Go west on 96 till about Beck or Wixom Road exit, then drive around western Novi and eastern Lyon Twp. Thousands of 500-600k homes going up everywhere.
And that's base price. Actual move-in costs [[with lot fees, required landscaping and the like) are probably well north of 600k for most of these homes. For Michigan standards, that isn't cheap.
Only so many people want to trade 1-2 hours of their free time daily commuting in a car sitting in traffic daily for the Livingston county lifestyle. I96 Rush hour has to be the absolute worst in the metro. Its nice out there but no chance I would give up that much time out of my life for it.Speaking of Livingston County, all indicators are pointing to its boom days being over, and that's really good for the rest of the region. The fastest growing county in the state in the 90's [[37%), growth slowed way down in the 00's [[15.3%), and population estimates show it crawling in the 10's [[1.9% for the first three years of the decade) relative to the 90's.
Apart from its nasty little cultural history, the problem with it is that the growth was basically entirely sprawl. There is not a single incorporated city or village in the entire county that tops 10,000 residents. It's the worst of exurbia.
Last edited by ABetterDetroit; February-19-15 at 11:03 AM.
It's not even that, because Oakland has already grown more in population than it did over the entire previous decade, and Macomb is growing at about the same rate. Even Wayne's loss has slowed down, considerably. That's the thing; it looks like people's choices have actually changed in just over a decade. People are sticking around and moving toward the urban core counties of the metropolitan area. The more rural exurban counties are either slow growing of shrinking.
There has been no such change.
The fastest growing parts of the state are all exurban townships. I believe Lyon Township is the fastest growing community in the state, both in terms of population and building permits.
And Wayne County is the fastest shrinking county in the entire U.S.
You misunderstood. I said the growth has pulled back into the urban core counties. Where in these counties the growth is happening is a different subject, but Livingston, Lapeer, St. Clair, etc...have have all slowed down or are shrinking, while Oakland, Macomb, and Washtenaw has picked back up while Wayne's loss is slowing.There has been no such change.
The fastest growing parts of the state are all exurban townships. I believe Lyon Township is the fastest growing community in the state, both in terms of population and building permits.
And Wayne County is the fastest shrinking county in the entire U.S.
As for that last part, that's not true on its face. While it may be the slowest among the nation's most urban counties, there are counties with greater percentage population losses.
But the growth is all on the fringe. The fastest growing parts of the metro area are the same as always, on the fringe. the fastest declining parts of the metro area are the same as always, in the core. How is there a change?You misunderstood. I said the growth has pulled back into the urban core counties. Where in these counties the growth is happening is a different subject, but Livingston, Lapeer, St. Clair, etc...have have all slowed down or are shrinking, while Oakland, Macomb, and Washtenaw has picked back up while Wayne's loss is slowing.
Could you point me to one of these counties? I don't think there's one urban county nationally with worse population loss [[by number or %).
Seriously? Look at the numbers I gave for Livingston's growth. This is not debatable. I wasn't arguing that sprawl had ended, just that it's slowed way-the-hell down in the fringe counties. I'd point you to the housing permit numbers and bi-annual population figures estimates at SEMCOG. Look at where the change is. Fewer than a handful of out-county tri-county municipalities are growing at double-digit rates. Some of the fastest growing communities are in the urban parts of the tri-county, now. This was not even the case ten years ago. Growth is very clearly different than it was a decade ago. I'm not arguing from some emotional standpoint. Look at the numbers. You're the one who popped up like I showed a bat signal the moment I even so much as suggested that sprawl may be slowing down or recentering in the more urban counties. This is something you are wont to do, I've noticed.
So, now you're trying to qualify it with "urban county" after I'd done that? You can't keep moving the goal posts for your emotional arguments. You didn't qualify county with anything in your original response.
Please, don't try to pretend that you don't have a hardline agenda, here. Just own it, and quit misrepresenting other people's responses. You guys are going to have to offer more than anecdotal stories. Some things are hard to measure; housing permits are pretty unassailable points of data. Livingston County is not anywhere near returning to its previous ridiculous growth rates, nor are the out-county in Oakland and Wayne where things are picking back up, but where there is also now competing urban growth where there wasn't in the previous decade.
Last edited by Dexlin; February-19-15 at 11:15 AM.
That's not what I'm seeing out here in Western Oakland County. I'm in Milford, but travel to Livingston County often [[Mostly the area around Howell, Brighton, Fowlerville). New residential construction out this way has been insane for the last 1-2 years! I'm not sure what the driving force is, but I'd have to agree with bham1982 that it's nothing short of crazy.It's not even that, because Oakland has already grown more in population than it did over the entire previous decade, and Macomb is growing at about the same rate. Even Wayne's loss has slowed down, considerably. That's the thing; it looks like people's choices have actually changed in just over a decade. People are sticking around and moving toward the urban core counties of the metropolitan area. The more rural exurban counties are either slow growing of shrinking.
In Milford they just announced plans for the restart of a 700+ acre mixed use residential/retail development that was idled in the late 1990's. There's also work starting on a 175 acre development just a mile further up the road. Just to put that into perspective the entire Packard plant covers under 50 acres. Like it or not, people are still moving out this way for some reason.
Last edited by Johnnny5; February-19-15 at 11:13 AM.
Here's a summary of the latest Census results.
http://archive.freep.com/article/201...sus-population
A WSJ article from 2014:
http://www.wsj.com/video/americans-r...1-7C7C6FC49CC5
From Governing Magazine:
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/ce...ates-data.html
You can zoom in on Detroit.
I think there is substantial argument over what "growth" means--is it absolute growth, growth as a percentage of the current population, or change in that growth rate?
If you were able to segregate the growth in just the downtown-midtown areas from the remainder of Detroit, I'd guess you'd see:
a decent amount of absolute growth;
a large amount of growth as a percentage of the pre-existing population; and
an astronomical change in the growth rate.
Does the absolute growth there exceed other cities or counties? I don't know.
Is the change in the growth rate newsworthy and exciting? You betcha.
Last time I was in Brighton was 1961 on my way to my cousin's wedding in Lansing. The only thing i remember vividly was a little diner called the "Squat and Gobble".
You didn't have to tell us you "usually agree with Bham1982" we already know.You really think Detroit has stabilized? Wow. Do you watch the news? Bankruptcy, murder, corruption, illiteracy, failing schools and infrastructure. Stability is - best case - 20 years away. <1,000 young transients that give up on the city after a year or two isn't stability.
|
Bookmarks