L Brooks Reduced to Whining

[mwilbert]

I'll grant it's much less true than when Ellis Island was a thing, but Bham has a point here. I'll speak to one example I know something about: Hamtramck has quite a few immigrants whose first stop was in Queens, even if far more of them migrate from Queens to New Jersey. People go where they want to go, but for their first stop they often choose somewhere with a strong community who also recently arrived from where they used to call home.

I'm not claiming it doesn't happen, but it seems much more common for people to immediately go to where that community is--both communication and travel are much easier and cheaper than they were in prior generations.

Also, in the specific case we were looking at, in that period California had more net out-migration than there was total immigration to the US, so it really isn't much of an explanation.

[Bham1982]

I'm not claiming it doesn't happen, but it seems much more common for people to immediately go to where that community is--both communication and travel are much easier and cheaper than they were in prior generations.

Also, in the specific case we were looking at, in that period California had more net out-migration than there was total immigration to the US, so it really isn't much of an explanation.

Immigrants don't leave gateway cities the same calendar year they arrive. Obviously it's a gradual process, occurring over decades. But there's a reason practically every affordable small town within 150 miles of NYC has a growing Dominican community. It's gradual outmigration from NYC.

If you look locally, at the Bangladeshi and Albanian communities, you'll note a large % are here from the NYC area.

[Bham1982]

No, the developers and new homeowners don't even come close to covering the costs. See here.

If that were true, then why would sprawly communities desperately want new housing?

And if that were true, and we wanted to eliminate the problem, then obviously we would have to shut down most of Detroit based on extreme cost/benefit imbalance.

[mwilbert]

If that were true, then why would sprawly communities desperately want new housing?

And if that were true, and we wanted to eliminate the problem, then obviously we would have to shut down most of Detroit based on extreme cost/benefit imbalance.

Because under Michigan's system of municipal taxation, the only way most communities can increase their income is to allow more building. The costs of maintaining the infrastructure come later, and aren't all paid by the community itself.

It is entirely possible that parts of Detroit should be mothballed, but the problem is that those parts are neither contiguous nor empty. You probably recall that this was something that was proposed under Mayor Bing, but it isn't nearly as easy to close down areas that already have people and infrastructure [[that may serve people in other areas) as it is not to build things that shouldn't be built in the first place.

I wouldn't suggest we should shut down existing sprawl, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to stop making more, particularly in an area with little overall growth.

[masterblaster]

Pontiac was an important town. It's basically irrelevant now.


And the housing stock, excepting a small area off Telegraph, is very basic/spartan, so the long-term odds for gentrification are pretty slim. It's simple housing thrown up for mid-century laborers, like you see in Warrendale or Taylor.

The housing stock in Royal Oak, Ferndale, Berkley, Rochester, and Wyandotte are about identical to Pontiac's, yet those communities are gentrifying.

Even though you minimize Pontiac, its decline just goes to show that Oakland County is ABSOLUTELY NO BETTER than Wayne County in dealing with older, industrial communities that eventually succumbed to white flight, spread of blight, and out-of-control crime. Due to Pontiac's much smaller size than Detroit, it's decline could be largely ignored.

Pontiac has a few more areas of excellent housing stock outside of that area you mentioned [[Indian Village and Seminole Hills).

There is Franklin Boulevard Historic District, just outside of downtown, which was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1983

Here is another street just outside downtown with some sweet turn-of-the-century houses

[Meddle]

One of the reasons that Amazon didn't even look twice at Detroit for HQ2 was because of the total lack of mass transit in SE Michigan.

See? Good things happen without transit. Another Jeffinfestation was avoided.

[Bham1982]

The housing stock in Royal Oak, Ferndale, Berkley, Rochester, and Wyandotte are about identical to Pontiac's, yet those communities are gentrifying.

First, none of these communities have housing stock as terrible as Pontiac. None were built in like 5 years to house auto workers from Appalachia.

Second, these cities are all different. Wyandotte is working class and not gentrifying. Rochester is rich with bigfoot homes everywhere and top-notch schools. Berkley and Royal Oak have beautiful old neighborhoods and are upper middle class with very good schools. Ferndale has so-so homes but is hip with great restaurants.

[bust]

If that were true, then why would sprawly communities desperately want new housing?

Because the sprawly community is the only one who benefits from it, at the expense of everyone else. When a family moves from Redford to Milford they take the local taxes they pay with them. Meanwhile Redford's infrastructure still needs support. The temporary fees you talk about only pay for part of the new infrastucture, and it serves only them. They do nothing to sustain the infrastructure their taxes previously paid for they've left behind, nor all the strains of having bigger and bigger systems to prop up.

It's explained quite clearly and in detail, using examples, in my previous post. Did you read it? If you have a disagreement about anything specific in that post, I welcome you to address it here.

Look at the big picture, it's easy to understand: infrastructure is expensive and sprawl requires it is built. Meanwhile what already existed ages and must be maintained. Metro Detroit's sprawl has grown enormously the past 70 years, while population growth has not come anywhere close to keeping pace. From a macro perspective, overall costs for the region increase dramatically without corresponding increases in revenue to pay for it. From a more micro perspective the people who remain in the closer-in communities and did not participate in the sprawl are the ones left holding the bag.

[softailrider]

First, none of these communities have housing stock as terrible as Pontiac. None were built in like 5 years to house auto workers from Appalachia.

Second, these cities are all different. Wyandotte is working class and not gentrifying. Rochester is rich with bigfoot homes everywhere and top-notch schools. Berkley and Royal Oak have beautiful old neighborhoods and are upper middle class with very good schools. Ferndale has so-so homes but is hip with great restaurants.

Restaurants aren’t that great since China Ruby closed.

[mikefmich]

Thread title seems......"reduced to"? I always considered the whine his MO for decades.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

Thread title seems......"reduced to"? I always considered the whine his MO for decades.

I concur, he's been whining for decades. Think's everyone is out to screw him and Oakland County.