Penske Corporate HQ - Why Bloomfield if Penske's such a Detroit booster?

[bailey]

Well, true, but most of us think of a brisk walk or bike ride through a lively neighborhood to get to work in five minutes, not traveling like this:

If by "most of us" you mean posters on this board...sure. However as to the 5 million metro area, those who think a brisk walk through a lively neighborhood to get to work is preferable to their current situation, or even a priority to them is a tiny and pretty much irrelevant minority. And they probably already do live that way in the rare areas where it's possible.

[Detroitnerd]

If by "most of us" you mean posters on this board...sure. However as to the 5 million metro area, those who think a brisk walk through a lively neighborhood to get to work is preferable to their current situation, or even a priority to them is a tiny and pretty much irrelevant minority. And they probably already do live that way in the rare areas where it's possible.

Well, thanks for pointing out some language that should have been more specific.

Nationally, when we discuss a trend of people wanting to live near where they work, we aren't talking about them living two exits away on the wonderful freeway. We really aren't. Most of the time, that national conversation about living near where we work goes hand in hand with walkability, bikability and density.

Truly, only in yahoo Michigan would we consider living near where we work to being "five minutes [by car] away" ...

And that "tiny and pretty much irrelevant minority" is tiny because it's well educated, up-to-date and ... moving to real cities that aren't stuck with the hopeless job of building the world of 1961 over and over again.

[bailey]

And that "tiny and pretty much irrelevant minority" is tiny because it's well educated, up-to-date and ... moving to real cities that aren't stuck with the hopeless job of building the world of 1961 over and over again.

Sure, except if we look at the Metros that added the most people in the country, they are some of the most sprawled out places in the country. Drop a quarter million new jobs in Detroit and lets see what happens to that out migration trend.

Also, to bham's point...

Another trend that persisted: nearly all of the fastest-growing metro areas from 2010 to 2011 [[46 of 50) were located either entirely or partially in the South or West.

-Census Bureau

[nain rouge]

Detroit was also once one of the fastest-growing, sprawling metro areas. Houston, Phoenix, etc. are the next Detroit. Hardly enviable long-term, but undeniably great fun while it lasts. One day they'll wonder how they could've built all those winding, identical suburbs in the middle of a giant desert. Couldn't those idiots see how unsustainable it was? Then will come the inevitable answer: "We didn't know any better. Everyone was doing it. How were we supposed to know? The politicians - everyone - promised us it was OK."

[Detroitnerd]

Sure, except if we look at the Metros that added the most people in the country, they are some of the most sprawled out places in the country. Drop a quarter million new jobs in Detroit and lets see what happens to that out migration trend.

Kind of hard to argue with that last point when the whole region is hostile to investing in cities and would rather keep tearing up greenfield like gas was still 95 cents a gallon.

Also, to bham's point... -Census Bureau

So correlation equals causation?

Go ahead. Be my guest, kick and scream and resist the future until metro Detroit is a forgotten backwater. I really don't care anymore.

[bailey]

Kind of hard to argue with that last point when the whole region is hostile to investing in cities and would rather keep tearing up greenfield like gas was still 95 cents a gallon.

Well, that may be, but those who are "well educated, up-to-date and ... moving to real cities" in fact arent. Some of them are moving to NYC, but the vast majority are moving to Dallas, Houston, Phoneix, and Arlington..etc.

So correlation equals causation?

Um. no. but in this instance, you rejected Bham's posit that Detroit's weather has something to do with people's desire not to want to walk everywhere. I simply pointed out that per the census. the vast majority of the growth in metro areas in this country are in more temperate climates in the south and west.

Go ahead. Be my guest, kick and scream and resist the future until metro Detroit is a forgotten backwater. I really don't care anymore

.
I don't think you quite understand my point. I'm not anti transit or pro sprawl. We should have comprehensive, multi modal transit. however, I'm just saying that is a minority position here and if migration trends are to be believed .. a minority position nationally when it comes to where people choose to live. If walkability and mass transit were real priority for most people, then Dallas/Ft Worth would be a very different place. Chicago wouldn't be losing population, Miami would be shrinking, LA would be empty, and so would Phoenix.

People go where the jobs are and all else is secondary.

[Detroitnerd]

Well, that may be, but those who are "well educated, up-to-date and ... moving to real cities" in fact arent. Some of them are moving to NYC, but the vast majority are moving to Dallas, Houston, Phoneix, and Arlington..etc.

You overstate things. Some are moving to those places, the vast majority? It looks like a pretty wide spectrum, sun and rain, cold and heat. But what you can draw from this map is that people are leaving Detroit and going to ... mostly other cities. In fact, the one place they seem to be moving to Detroit from is Virginia Beach, hardly a major city with bad weather and oppressive transit.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/06/04/mig...nties-map.html

What don't we offer here that they do in New York and San Francisco? In Boston and Washington, D.C.? In Portland and Seattle? In Chicago and Philadelphia? Just a thought. As you were, Bailey.

Um. no. but in this instance, you rejected Bham's posit that Detroit's weather has something to do with people's desire not to want to walk everywhere. I simply pointed out that per the census. the vast majority of the growth in metro areas in this country are in more temperate climates in the south and west.

I rejected it because people don't freak out about walking several blocks to a subway in New York. Because, frankly, New Yorkers aren't provincial. And it's correct to reject correlative information as causative. Furthermore, do these theories seem to be borne out by the Forbes map?

I don't think you quite understand my point. I'm not anti transit or pro sprawl. We should have comprehensive, multi modal transit. however, I'm just saying that is a minority position here and if migration trends are to be believed .. a minority position nationally when it comes to where people choose to live. ... People go where the jobs are and all else is secondary.

People go where the jobs are is partly true. There are plenty of jobs in Alaska. And yet women overwhelmingly choose not to go there. And young men will go, but only half the year.

There are jobs in California. But also a high cost of living that keeps people limited in the kind of home they can buy.

There are jobs in New York City. But to pay to educate your family in private school is a significant cost that will not attract a lot of people who have children unless they're top earners.

Studies show that the better educated, better qualified and more creative young people are, the more likely they are to pick the kind of environment they want and then either find opportunities there or make their own once they get there.

Therefore, we should be attracting people who like all four seasons, are not intimidated by a few months of snow, gladly trade it for the sunshine and nearby recreational opportunities and vibrant urban life, with choices ranging from upscale Birmingham to accessible Ferndale to the Midtown bubble and grittier locales in between.

The point is, when you're a region, you try to play it smart. If having a dense part of town that is served by transit slows the outflow of educated young people and draws people looking to get in on the ground floor, that's a strength. How well are we doing by offering exclusively suburban environments? How is that going to pay off for us? We already have probably 10 years' worth of bigfoot homes to sell and a generation graduating from college with meager savings and heavy debt waiting for a recovery that seems to recede into the future. Who is going to pay for these homes at $300K a pop and pump $6 a gallon gas into their cars to drive to jobs?

As smart businesspeople know, you want to be slightly ahead of that curve. If businesspeople only invested in stuff that everybody else was doing, what progress would there be? You've got to get with the times.

Think of Carl's Chop House. That place was in business forever, right? Why did it close? The model was so successful, right? Three martini business lunches, corporate accounts, and everybody loves red meat, right?

Well, times changed, and Carl's didn't. Corporate accounts dwindled, business lunches were more likely to be monitored by bean-counters, drinking on the job became prohibited by a lot of employee manuals and, frankly, people started lunching lighter, not wanting to get all logy from eating a steak for lunch.

The way I see it, metro Detroit is like Carl's. If Carl's wants to survive, it should change. Maybe not drastically, but maybe Carl's should expand a bit, offer a sunlit cafe in the rear, offer some vegetarian and vegan choices on the menu, consider a thriftier menu out on the patio.

To point to the status quo in defense of business as usual is circuitous reasoning ... and we do so at our peril.

[Hypestyles]

curious. I had no idea where the Penske Group HQ was at. Well, there's certainly more than enough room to relocate to a downtown building.

If Compuware ends up being bought out and gutted/dissolved, there will be some needed space/ownership in the Compuware building.

Beyond that, maybe Dan Gilbert and/or Mr. Ilitch can convince Roger P to send some non-core staff downtown as an "experiment".

[Wesley Mouch]

Bloomfield Hills is in Detroit. Detroit is an idea. I care not about municipal boundaries. Ich bin a Detroiter, baby.

[Bham1982]

Bloomfield Hills is in Detroit. Detroit is an idea. I care not about municipal boundaries. Ich bin a Detroiter, baby.

Yes, I agree, and the folks saying otherwise aren't being completely truthful. When they say "Detroit" they don't mean the city of Detroit either. They mean Downtown and Midtown. The rest of the city can burn down, as long as a taxpayer subsidized Applebees opens on Woodward.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

There are what, approximately 5 million people in Metro Detroit? I would like them all to be Detroit boosters. But we wouldn't have room for all of them to live and work here even if they wanted to. I was a bona fide Detroit booster when I lived in New York. And Detroit would be much worse off if our suburbs were devoid of sucessful big businesses. If Mr. Penske thinks his business is better situated where it currently is, I am a few billion short of being able to question his judgment. He's a hell of a guy, good for Detroit, and I think is a suburbanite who pushes other suburbanites to give Detroit a shot.

[townonenorth]

Go ahead. Be my guest, kick and scream and resist the future until metro Detroit is a forgotten backwater. I really don't care anymore.

What do you mean, until?

[gameguy56]

Sure, except if we look at the Metros that added the most people in the country, they are some of the most sprawled out places in the country. Drop a quarter million new jobs in Detroit and lets see what happens to that out migration trend.

Also, to bham's point... -Census Bureau

And all these new areas are building light rail and densifying their core city neighborhoods. Houston's downtown and midtown areas are growing like gangbusters, and the city has a long term plan for light rail across the entire city. Meanwhile, Detroit still lives in 1961, as Detroitnerd said.

[Bham1982]

And all these new areas are building light rail and densifying their core city neighborhoods. Houston's downtown and midtown areas are growing like gangbusters, and the city has a long term plan for light rail across the entire city. Meanwhile, Detroit still lives in 1961, as Detroitnerd said.

Downtown Houston is in the same sad shape as Detroit, maybe worse. Main Street is empty, moreso than Woodward, and the last remaining retail [[the Macys) is closing.

And Houston is incredibly sprawly. It's even sprawlier than Metro Detroit, and they're building subdivisions like gangbusters. Haven't seen much urban growth there, and I'm down there a few times a year.

[bailey]

And all these new areas are building light rail and densifying their core city neighborhoods. Houston's downtown and midtown areas are growing like gangbusters, and the city has a long term plan for light rail across the entire city. Meanwhile, Detroit still lives in 1961, as Detroitnerd said.

That may or may not be true for the same reason, however, you've made my point for me. None if it EXISTS NOW. Houston has had their one rail line running one route since the 80s. so, for the person making the choice, they're choosing the same sprawl. Except one is in a nicer climate and likely has a job there.