Duh?: Only way to stop Detroit blight is to ease up on suburban development

[iheartthed]

I understand economic geography pretty well. I also understand people vote with their feet and that you lose more people because those that leave are families looking for safer neighborhoods, better schools, and quality of life.

Is people voting "with their feet" what made Michigan the only state in the country to lose population on the 2010 census? That just happened to coincide with a massive population decline in Detroit.

At some point you have to acknowledge -- because I know you already realize it -- that the population decline has been out of Detroit's control, for the most part. Sure, there are plenty of things that politicians in Detroit could have done not to contribute to the toxic political environment, but at the end of the day the true driver of the population shift [[sprawl) has always been out of their control. I think your proposed fixes are superficial and ignoring of the true problem. Fixing the sprawl is a giant leap towards stabilizing the city [[and inner ring suburbs) that will cost taxpayers nothing.

[Hermod]

Is people voting "with their feet" what made Michigan the only state in the country to lose population on the 2010 census? That just happened to coincide with a massive population decline in Detroit.

At some point you have to acknowledge -- because I know you already realize it -- that the population decline has been out of Detroit's control, for the most part. Sure, there are plenty of things that politicians in Detroit could have done not to contribute to the toxic political environment, but at the end of the day the true driver of the population shift [[sprawl) has always been out of their control. I think your proposed fixes are superficial and ignoring of the true problem. Fixing the sprawl is a giant leap towards stabilizing the city [[and inner ring suburbs) that will cost taxpayers nothing.

The fact that some developer is building a subdivision out north of Romeo doesn't mean you need to leave your beautiful historic bungalow in Detroit with all of its wonderful schools, amenities, and great neighbors.

[GUSHI]

speaking of romeo,mi been trying to talk my wife into moving to romeo, she doesn't want to send our daughter to romeo schools, she prefers utica schools. I couldn't picture sending my daughter to dps. shit I grew up down there and went to catholic school from k-10, and back then the schools were better than now. I guess good schools, good neighbors, grocery stores, safety are all things Detroit is lacking, White flight, black middle class flight, what do you have left. Of the 700000 ,left if half are good folks, that still 350k bad folks, so why would any one wanna move back there. now I do prefer the older built homes, compared to my McMansion , but I like my neighborhood better that say 7 and Conant.

[Detroit500]

Bring the jobs [[back) downtown. Jobs are the first step. If you make downtown a place people will have to be, it will mean development will have to begin. Even bring jobs closer to the area, have more jobs in Dearborn and less jobs in Wixom [[for example). Not that Wixom is an inherently undesirable place to live. In other parts of the country, Wixom is where you would have your summer home or a vacation home, as a respite away from the rigors of city life, but not where you would live permanently.

Will people choose to live downtown? Perhaps, perhaps not, but them working there gives an impetus for them to be there, stores pop up, communities flourish. Related though to this first and foremost is a need to REFORM our schools. If we cannot have our students out there working in jobs they are qualified to do, there will be no incentive for jobs to come to our state. We could PAY companies to employ workers, and if no one is qualified, they won't take the bait.

Jobs and Schools... Fix those two things, the blight goes away in 30 years. And remember, Detroit got into this mess by continuing to annex land. Those who say, why did you choose to build out and not up, remember, the City had been using that tactic for a significant portion of time already.

[313WX]

And remember, Detroit got into this mess by continuing to annex land.

You lost me here.

If that's the case, why aren't Chicago, Los Angeles, Toronto and NYC [[all cities that annexed even more liberally than Detroit) in as bad of a shape as Detroit?

[Wesley Mouch]

Is people voting "with their feet" what made Michigan the only state in the country to lose population on the 2010 census? That just happened to coincide with a massive population decline in Detroit.

At some point you have to acknowledge -- because I know you already realize it -- that the population decline has been out of Detroit's control, for the most part. Sure, there are plenty of things that politicians in Detroit could have done not to contribute to the toxic political environment, but at the end of the day the true driver of the population shift [[sprawl) has always been out of their control. I think your proposed fixes are superficial and ignoring of the true problem. Fixing the sprawl is a giant leap towards stabilizing the city [[and inner ring suburbs) that will cost taxpayers nothing.

What does 'out of their control' mean? Sounds like an excuse to me.

Sure, Michigan population was declining, and so was Detroit's, and all of the Rust Belt. Why? Because other areas did things better than we did.

[shovelhead]

If advocating that government should control sprawl, remember it can backfire. While not the same scenario, Novi got themselves in a losing battle with a developer over not keeping a agreement with a developer over a one half mile section of Novi Road between Twelve Mile and Twelve and a Half Mile Roads that they agreed to reconstruct.

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...for-an-answer#

There's a lot more on this, Google "Sandstone Development Novi"

That cost them about 70 MILLION plus interest. The city negotiated it's way out by ceeding park land to the developer in lieu of cash payment.

As I lived there at that time, the interest was adding up at about 20K per day. Predictions at the time were that it would have cost the homeowner about $200.00 per year as a Special Assessment for close to 20 years by time all payments of principal and interest were made.

[nain rouge]

Why? Because other areas did things better than we did.

I truly believe weather hurts the rust belt quite a bit. Not that I think cities like Detroit made great decisions, but I'm not convinced a lot of successful Southern cities are really doing anything smarter. It's more or less, if you don't have the smarts to make it in the creative economies in cities like NYC or regions like Silicon Valley, you might as well at least live somewhere warm.

[313WX]

I truly believe weather hurts the rust belt quite a bit.

But that doesn't explain cities such as Minneapolis, NYC, Boston and Chicago that have remained relatively healthy.

[GUSHI]

Riots, busing, cay, residence requirment[[the removal destroyed stable neighborhoods),kk,housing bust.

[nain rouge]

But that doesn't explain cities such as Minneapolis, NYC, Boston and Chicago that have remained relatively healthy.

NYC and Boston are easy to explain. The upper east coast was the historic cultural center of the US, and that conferred a lot of advantages to those cities. To succeed in the rust belt, however, you have to constantly bring your A game. Minneapolis/St. Paul would be a bigger deal than Portland or Austin in a better climate.

[ABetterDetroit]

Does it matter?

Your point holds because there were also people predicting the death of the car, circa 2008, because gasoline was going to go past $5 on the way to $10.

Also, in the 1970s, a car got about 50% of the mileage one gets today.

So you could also argue that constant dollar cost per mile has gone down over time.

Then if it doesn't "matter" TAX the GD gasoline! It should increase housing density, if it doesn't you still have more money to build roads that don't destroy a car or public transport, anything at all if it helps to quit sending kids to fight and die halfway around the world to protect the worlds oil supply that's just a bonus then.

[Hermod]

I don't have all the answers to this. And certainly, I've been fine with the idea of picking the most sustainable neighborhoods in the city and re-allocating all resources toward making them successful. Greenbelts have mixed reviews, as per BankruptcyGuy. And I also don't believe that forcing developers to stop expanding won't necessary fix the blight problem in the city.

Think it through. You are a township board in Green Spaces Twp. Farmer Brown had 40 acres that he wants to sell to Schmidlap Developers who want zoning for 80 half-acre home sites. You aren't getting anything from Farmer Brown in property taxes because he is agricultural. You will get a bundle in taxes from the 80 homes in Shmidlaps Golden Acres subdivision. You don;'t worry about schools because the Whatchamalit School District taxes and builds those and you don't worry about roads because your county and the state take care of that. Go Schmidlap and build those homes because we can use us some more taxes.

[Hermod]

I truly believe weather hurts the rust belt quite a bit. Not that I think cities like Detroit made great decisions, but I'm not convinced a lot of successful Southern cities are really doing anything smarter. It's more or less, if you don't have the smarts to make it in the creative economies in cities like NYC or regions like Silicon Valley, you might as well at least live somewhere warm.

The invention of air conditioning worked wonders.

[shovelhead]

Think it through. You are a township board in Green Spaces Twp. Farmer Brown had 40 acres that he wants to sell to Schmidlap Developers who want zoning for 80 half-acre home sites. You aren't getting anything from Farmer Brown in property taxes because he is agricultural. You will get a bundle in taxes from the 80 homes in Shmidlaps Golden Acres subdivision. You don;'t worry about schools because the Whatchamalit School District taxes and builds those and you don't worry about roads because your county and the state take care of that. Go Schmidlap and build those homes because we can use us some more taxes.

And to add on that scenario, it pays a municipality to have real estate ownership turnover. Because each time a property sells, it is reassessed at the time of sale on the price as a basis for future taxation.

Conspiracy theory here, at least with one suburban municipality. That is why they are non responsive to residents concerns and complaionts but fall all over themselves when a developer expresses any interest in coming to town.

[nain rouge]

The invention of air conditioning worked wonders.

Yes! I've heard people from Phoenix tell others that if you find the daytime heat unbearable in the summer, you can just go from one air-conditioned building to the next until nightfall. Once the sun sets, it hits the 80s-90 range, perfect for a swim or a walk before bed. It's extreme, but you have some light at the end of the tunnel.

In Detroit, it's cold and day and night in the winter, and you can't ignore snow. You have to shovel it and you have to drive in it. Find me a person that prefers 25 to 95 and I'll show you a damn liar.

[313WX]

NYC and Boston are easy to explain. The upper east coast was the historic cultural center of the US, and that conferred a lot of advantages to those cities. To succeed in the rust belt, however, you have to constantly bring your A game. Minneapolis/St. Paul would be a bigger deal than Portland or Austin in a better climate.
[/COLOR]

I just think weather is an excuse for our poor decision making. After all, we're the safest city in the country from Natural Disasters.

Detroit had all of the resources to become a powerhouse of a city. But we floundered it over relatively petty shit in the grand scheme of things.

[aj3647]

You lost me here.

If that's the case, why aren't Chicago, Los Angeles, Toronto and NYC [[all cities that annexed even more liberally than Detroit) in as bad of a shape as Detroit?

Apples and oranges. Those cities aren't anything like Detroit and their unique circumstances and characteristics make comparisons pointless. Different demographics, different locations, different economies, different histories, different everything.

For starters, every one of those cities has a mass transit system. Detroit doesn't.

[313WX]

Apples and oranges. Those cities aren't anything like Detroit and their unique circumstances and characteristics make comparisons pointless. Different demographics, different locations, different economies, different histories, different everything.

For starters, every one of those cities has a mass transit system. Detroit doesn't.

Agreed. See above post.

[DetroitPlanner]

Bring the jobs [[back) downtown. Jobs are the first step. If you make downtown a place people will have to be, it will mean development will have to begin. Even bring jobs closer to the area, have more jobs in Dearborn and less jobs in Wixom [[for example). Not that Wixom is an inherently undesirable place to live. In other parts of the country, Wixom is where you would have your summer home or a vacation home, as a respite away from the rigors of city life, but not where you would live permanently.

Will people choose to live downtown? Perhaps, perhaps not, but them working there gives an impetus for them to be there, stores pop up, communities flourish. Related though to this first and foremost is a need to REFORM our schools. If we cannot have our students out there working in jobs they are qualified to do, there will be no incentive for jobs to come to our state. We could PAY companies to employ workers, and if no one is qualified, they won't take the bait.

Jobs and Schools... Fix those two things, the blight goes away in 30 years. And remember, Detroit got into this mess by continuing to annex land. Those who say, why did you choose to build out and not up, remember, the City had been using that tactic for a significant portion of time already.

There are more housing units closer to Dearborn, Southfield, and Warren job centers in Detroit than there are close to Downtown. It would probably be better to bring jobs back to those cities too.

[mwilbert]

But that doesn't explain cities such as Minneapolis, NYC, Boston and Chicago that have remained relatively healthy.

None of those cities has really grown since the widespread use of air conditioning, unlike a vast number of warm-weather cities. There are a lot of people who prefer Houston's climate to Detroit's. I don't agree with them, but you have to recognize the phenomenon.

[mwilbert]

There are more housing units closer to Dearborn, Southfield, and Warren job centers in Detroit than there are close to Downtown. It would probably be better to bring jobs back to those cities too.

Better for what? Not better for reviving the city. I have never heard job travel time isn't a major reason people don't live in the city. I agree that job travel time is a problem for many people living in the city, but that is a different issue.

[Pickford-Bentler]

Then if it doesn't "matter" TAX the GD gasoline! It should increase housing density, if it doesn't you still have more money to build roads that don't destroy a car or public transport, anything at all if it helps to quit sending kids to fight and die halfway around the world to protect the worlds oil supply that's just a bonus then.

I support a gasoline tax instead of a CAFE. A CAFE forces automobile manufacturers to develop fuel saving technologies {at added cost to the vehicle} that the market does not want because gas is cheap.

A tax makes gas expensive, while, as you pointed out, providing funs for better roads; and create a demand or cars with fuel saving technology.

IMO, we pay one way or another.

Like the FRAM add says: "you can pay me now or pay me later"

We chose later and have crappy roads.

[FbO Vorcha]

What does 'out of their control' mean? Sounds like an excuse to me.

Sure, Michigan population was declining, and so was Detroit's, and all of the Rust Belt. Why? Because other areas did things better than we did.

No, they got support from a government that hated labor and would rather support the welfare states of the old confederacy.

[FbO Vorcha]

Yes! I've heard people from Phoenix tell others that if you find the daytime heat unbearable in the summer, you can just go from one air-conditioned building to the next until nightfall. Once the sun sets, it hits the 80s-90 range, perfect for a swim or a walk before bed. It's extreme, but you have some light at the end of the tunnel.

In Detroit, it's cold and day and night in the winter, and you can't ignore snow. You have to shovel it and you have to drive in it. Find me a person that prefers 25 to 95 and I'll show you a damn liar.

I can live with 25 much, much easier than I can live with 95, but then again I was brought up to believe that AC is a luxury and heat is a necessity.

Take away the government subsidized water system [[dams and such) and you have a desert with a bunch of dried out old bones and nothing but dirt and scrub as far as the eye can see. You also have no hydroelectric to provide the electricity to power those air conditioners.

The only really cold period in Detroit is January and February, before and after that temperatures pretty much stay above freezing. If you find the nighttime cold unbearable in the winter, you can just go from one heated building to the next until sunrise. You can probably even spend a large chunk of that time sleeping [[it being night and all), cool nights are a great time to sleep.

Also, people moved to Phoenix to get away from the pollens and such that were causing breathing problems, then they just brought all the green with them because they missed having grass and trees and flowers - bring the pollen back along with the additional problem of depleting the aquifer to support their mid-west lifestyle out in the desert.