  Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 3 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 69.245.84.19 |
Given the history of expansion of Detroit and its suburbs do you not think that the current exurban expansion of the region is just the latest chapter of growth that has been with the city since the 1870's. Historically during the industrial growth era Detroit expanded at an exponental rate. Given what we now view as walkable and better planned neighborhoods were at one time fast spreading uban growth....far less planned out than today. My point is I think that while we dislike the endless expansion of the metro area and appreciate the core cities we forget that they were once spreading out very fast once before. I view this as how can we be surprised with what is happening given the history and the change in lifestyle and technology. I am not defending the wasteful expansion of the urban landscape I am just trying to give another point of view. The biggest difference between the 20's growth and todays is that today we build more homes than there is population to fill them by more than 2 to 1. What do other people think | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1774 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
Continuous geographic expansion + Zero Population Growth = Clusterfuck | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 127 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.75.220.9 |
The population in SE Michigan is growing...just not as fast as other regions in the US. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4988 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.219 |
You're right on the money Wazootyman, Recent data from SEMCOG reported that Southeastern Michigan's current population has been increased to 4,902,390 since Sept. 1st 2006. That number expected to increase further to 5 Million by 2009. Michigan may lose its manufacturing job base, but there's still jobs left to fuel the ecomonic GDP growth for this entire nation. Especially we had foriegn trade from Canada. NOW that's good data thesis. | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 113 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 66.195.132.2 |
Metro Detroit is growing, just not as much as its building. The suburbs and exurbs keep spreading, but as they spread many other areas are abandoned or lose population. Here was the census thing I found. The main difference between today's sprawl and yesterday's sprawl is the architecture. Uglier public buildings, schools, church's, and of coarse apartments and houses. Detroit-Ann Arbor, Mich. 1990 5,187,171 2000 5,456,428 2005 5,656,070 Percent change, 1990 to 2000 5.2% 2000 share of U.S. total population 1.9% | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2793 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.105.86 |
I had some acquaintances that moved out of St. Clair Shores (where I reside) saying that they wanted no part of it becoming the slums... I asked them what will happen when they keep moving and eventually get to the shores of Lake Huron near Port Arthur and Caseville? Will they be like Lemmings jumping into the sea??  | ||
Wilus1mj Member Username: Wilus1mj Post Number: 115 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 216.111.89.3 |
It's simple...people will move and live if they can find jobs. If jobs keep moving farther away, than people will continue to move out farther and farther. You only can drive so far to work. NEW JOBS in Detroit will reduce the sprawl. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1777 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I guess they never heard of a self-fulfilling prophecy. | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 115 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 69.95.237.129 |
I don't understand the culture of Detroit. It seems like people just leave things and move to blander more boring places farther and farther from the city center. There are new jobs and large scale redevelopment projects coming to Downtown Detroit, so why does the population keep dropping? | ||
Motorcitymayor2026 Member Username: Motorcitymayor2026 Post Number: 1309 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 35.11.212.197 |
the downtown population is increasing... most of the middle class and upper class is gone, and now many of the poor neighborhoods are beginning to empty out, hence the lovely urban praries present in detroit. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 140 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 70.229.255.110 |
I know one of the main reasons, TAXES! The corporate jobs dont want to pay so much a year in taxes when no ones even working in their building. Its also the crime and the education issues also. Their are better schools out on the shores a Lake Huron and the lower class isnt going to travel that far to be like everyone else. Its all a snowball effect. No work, no home, new beginning where there's work. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4431 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Milwaukee, why does Milwaukee's population keep dropping, or Cleveland, or any other rustbelters? It has nothing to do with downtown development. You may be able to add 3 to 5 thousand people to a CBD over a decade. That's almost nothing when you consider how many people are moving out of the neighborhoods. Downtown redevelopment is no a cure-all to population loss, as downtown's make up usually less than 1% of the total area of a city, and usually just that much in population. While it's great downtowns are coming back, it's completely irrational to expect a growing downtown in a declined city to mean an overall increase in population when you take into account just how small these areas are. | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 116 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 69.95.237.233 |
I guess I thought about the statement that people live near their jobs for shorter commutes. I would think for the amount of new offices and jobs coming downtown that there would be an equivalent number of people coming in. But, I understand what you mean about how one little part of city doesn't represent how the city is doing on the whole and that it won't necissarily bring back a whole city. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 7 Registered: 09-2006 Posted From: 69.208.246.38 |
Everytime I come back home to Detroit I am often pleased by the new houses built, abandoned buildings torn down, or new businesses popping up. When I see this new development thats lets me know there is a growing demand for city living outside of downtown which is really what is going to bring back the city and hopefully stop or slowdown this exurban develpoment. And Fareastsider is right this region has always built farther and farther away from the center look at new center or highland park but just how far are people and jobs going to spread out before people say that enough is the question that interests me | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1421 Registered: 10-2004 Posted From: 69.242.223.42 |
Just what are the major demographics of the current Downtown/MidTown population, outside of the temporary, transient WSU students? In hard numbers-- not in percentages or guestimates. How many who actually work downtown and how many are "arts and croissants" types? | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4433 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Do you really think there are stats out there like that? | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 267 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 69.136.155.244 |
Prior to WW I, most population growth in the outlying non-urban areas of Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties was driven by emigrants who came to farm and supply the needs of the growing city of Detroit. Each year, these farmers cleared more trees from their land so they could drain and expand their fields to grow crops that would feed themselves and folks in the city. During the fall and winter, they then took their split logs to the markets in Detroit. Eventually, they drained and cleared all of the most fertile sections of the rural tri-county areas. The original settlers had many children, some who also chose to farm when they reached adulthood and the balance who moved elsewhere, usually into nearby villages and cities which had a symbiotic relationship with the local agricultural economy. Hundreds of thousands of descendants of those who came here to farm in areas surrounding Detroit still reside in Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties. Like their ancestors, these folks have never resided in Detroit and they have their own unique view on the subject of Detroit's expansion and sprawl. In the last half of the 19th Century, the rural denizens of Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties worked hard in relative isolation from their urban customers to provide the things that a growing Detroit needed. That isolation was first broken in the late 1890's when the Interurban electric railways for the first time brought Ypsilanti, Farmington, Pontiac and Mt. Clemens all within a 90 minute ride from downtown Detroit. With the explosive growth of the auto industry following the end of the Great War, things began to change even more rapidly. A middle class emerged that included large numbers of industrial workers who could now afford to buy and drive an automobile to work instead of the crowded streetcars. This enabled them to also live in new single family home on the outskirts of the Detroit city limits, away from the noise and pollution of the manufacturing plants in the city. Cheap, cleared farmland was gobbled up by developers to create suburban-type neighborhoods in semi-rural areas. The DSR quickly established bus routes to connect these areas to their streetcar system and once the city of Detroit annexed these areas, the Detroit Water Board would extend their water service to them as well. The tranquility of certain rural areas on the fringes of the tri-county area was further broken when GM, Ford, Packard and Chrysler all quietly bought up large tracts of acreage and built proving grounds. Before long, the dusty rural roads in the countryside were clogged on weekends with "Sunday Drivers" from the city, all heading out to enjoy their favorite picnic groves along the shady banks of the Huron, Clinton and Rouge Rivers. With the eruption of another war in Europe, the Federal Government awarded massive defense contracts to Detroit manufacturers. They needed to ramp up production very quickly, which led them to build greenfield factories outside of the Detroit city limits, which had finally stopped expanding in the 1930's when they reached the Wayne County and other city borders. Before long, developers were buying up and subdividing rural farmland to house the war workers closer to their employment. After the war, the trend accelerated, driving up the price of land and taxes to the point where many rural farmers were forced to sell, which further accelerated the trend. When the semi-rural townships tried to limit the new residential growth, they quickly learned that the state enabling legislation that gave them planning and zoning powers also prevented them from entering into contract zoning or requiring that developers shoulder some of the off-site infrastructure costs caused by their development. They soon found that their only tool for limiting development was to limit the availability of water and sewer service. However, during the 1950's, the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department began a massive expansion of their water and sewer systems into suburban and rural Wayne, Oakland and Macomb counties, and by 1975, townships within the Monroe to Flint to Port Huron perimeter no longer had that tool for limiting growth. "Urbanists", "planners" and pundits in Detroit, Lansing and Washington DC can complain all they want about the sprawl surrounding Detroit, but the responsibility for this condition lies with past and present decision-makers in those cities, not with those in the suburban Detroit Metropolitan area. | ||
Sticks Member Username: Sticks Post Number: 101 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 207.91.250.131 |
Not that there's anything wrong with Caseville. An uncle has been having a spot of trouble getting rid of his lake-front cottage up in that tiny town. Should I forward his brokers number to your neighbors, Gistok? | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 88 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
There goes Lmichigan (yet again) bringing Ohio into a Shitty of Detroit discussion. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4436 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Ohio? I brought in Cleveland, Milwaukee, and could have brought in countless others. Those two just came to mind. No, there you guy go again with your predictable self. | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 117 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 69.95.234.228 |
Livernoisyard, Midtown and Downtown population not including the university. Downtown Population: 6,110 persons Corktown population: 1,678 persons Mid Town population: 9,639 persons Here's a link to the site. If you goto the area where they tell you about race, you can click on map. It has all the census districts. They have roads on the map, so you can outline what you think of as Downtown, Corktown, and Midtown. If you click on a certain district it tells you how many people live there and the percentage of whites or blacks, depending on what map you use. http://factfinder.census.gov/s ervlet/SAFFFacts?_event=&geo_i d=16000US2622000&_geoContext=0 1000US%7C04000US26%7C16000US26 22000&_street=&_county=Detroit &_cityTown=Detroit&_state=0400 0US26&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&A ctiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph &pgsl=160&_submenuId=factsheet _1&ds_name=ACS_2005_SAFF&_ci_n br=null&qr_name=null®=&_key word=&_industry= | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 118 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 69.95.234.228 |
I agree with Lmichigan, Cleveland and Milwaukee are good examples of cities that have much nicer downtowns than they ever had but still have declining populations. He was trying to explain that most any city can have a declining overall population but have a revitalized downtown or business district. | ||
Detroitej72 Member Username: Detroitej72 Post Number: 243 Registered: 05-2006 Posted From: 66.184.3.44 |
This thread separates Detroit's promoters from the haters... As the so called "president" of America says at every chance "If you don't stand with us, your against us"... Using that broad brush, we know who is with the D and who is obviously against us. | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 89 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Lmichigan, I have witnessed on this forum more times than I care to recall about you and your opinions about Ohio cities. Detroit has it worse than perhaps any core-city in America. The social and economic dynamics in Detroit are nearly incomparable to other core-cities. Sad but true. | ||
Hysteria Member Username: Hysteria Post Number: 1343 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
This is true, Firefly ... | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4437 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
What are you talking about concerning Ohio cities? Really, can you give me some examples? I think you're taking me for someone else. Same for you, Hysteria, dig up a substantial amount to show me, since you want to "amen" Firefly. | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 317 Registered: 07-2004 |
Has METRO Detroit really grown though? From stats I have seen before, the METRO pop has basically stagnated and grows and dips by a couple hundred thousand every decade or so. From what I read, Metro Detroit is no larger then it was in the 1970's pop wise. I really don't know why people even in the nice suburbs continue to want to move out. Although like my cousin in Shelby Township says "you just want to be as far away from the City of Detroit limits as you can be". | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4438 Registered: 10-2003 |
It depends on what you mean by the "metro." The inner three counties have fluctuated in population, but the 7 county area as defined by SEMCOG is larger than ever before. It's growing very slowly, though (i.e. 1.4% since 2000). Regardless of how you currently define the area, the metro is still growing very slowly in comparison to many others. | ||
Trainman Member Username: Trainman Post Number: 195 Registered: 04-2006 |
At the top is says that earlier areas are less planned??? Have you ever ever seen the SEMCOG plans for new freeways? new transit? Do you really think our regional leaders are actually planning any better then those before them? (Message edited by Trainman on September 15, 2006) | ||
Janesback Member Username: Janesback Post Number: 94 Registered: 08-2006 |
Firefly said "Lmichigan, I have witnessed on this forum more times than I care to recall about you and your opinions about Ohio cities." I dont know who this Lmichigan is , but I do know she demands to know why I was in this forum? She had replied to a posting and her only comeback to my statement was her curiousity why I was posting in the first place? I've never been rude to her, so whats her problem? | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 91 Registered: 06-2006 |
Janesback, Fortunately, Lmichigan is male. OK? First things first. Lmichigan mentions Cleveland (an Ohio city) and I called him out on it. There was a thread giving props to Columbus, Ohio (a very progressive Ohio city) and Tinkerbell went on and on about Columbus' annexation and sprawl. Alas, as you can see, he has selective amnesia and doesn't get it. That was not the first time he took stabs at Ohio and her cities. Then again, perhaps I should let it go or else end up on the HFD "Just Let It Go Post Du Jour." | ||
Janesback Member Username: Janesback Post Number: 95 Registered: 08-2006 |
Firefly, eeks, sorry for the mistake  . Sorry Lmichigan. | ||
Detroitej72 Member Username: Detroitej72 Post Number: 249 Registered: 05-2006 |
quote: There was a thread giving props to Columbus, Ohio (a very progressive Ohio city) and Tinkerbell went on and on about Columbus' annexation and sprawl. ______________________________ ___________________ Lol, thats some very harsh language there Firefly, but extreamely funny! | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4443 Registered: 10-2003 |
So, because I once derided Columbus (a city you obviously seem to love from the description you just gave it) for its sprawl it means I'm on some Ohio kick? Sounds like you have the problem, not me. Really, you were only to fine one example, and one where I was not the one to bring up the issue in the first place? Sounds like a personal grudge to me. Don't let me take up too much of your hate, because you've got a lot to go around; you really do. Don't waste it on me, Tinkerbell. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 152 Registered: 08-2006 |
LMichigan and Firefly, you have all the problems. Talking about an Ohio city in a DETROIT, MICHIGAN site. If yall want to talk about Columbus, yall need to find a ColumbusYES site. Tinkerbell needs to pop her wand on both of your heads. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 790 Registered: 06-2004 |
Lmichigan, I thought you were a guy! Not that it matters. I wonder why I thought that? The online environment is really funny.... you get a sense of people and their persona through the mere written word. I wonder how off we all are. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4444 Registered: 10-2003 |
I am a guy. Dtown, I was not the one that brought up Ohio, Firefly was, so take that up with him. | ||
Dtown1 Member Username: Dtown1 Post Number: 155 Registered: 08-2006 |
I never said you wasnt a guy, You dindt read me say her or she to you anywhere in that post. Also, if you read correctly, I was getting on you AND firefly (Message edited by Dtown1 on September 15, 2006) | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4445 Registered: 10-2003 |
I was talking to Ray with my first sentence. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 268 Registered: 12-2005 |
Apparently everybody prefers to snipe at each other instead of discussing "Current Sprawl and its relation to the growth of Detroit..." OK, try chewing on these: (a) What are the real root causes behind the current situation whereby residential development growth in Metro Detroit is greater than its population growth? [Hint: It's got less to do with "abandonment" in the CoD and more to do with changes in household and family composition throughout the metropolitan area that are also being seen nation-wide.] (b) Reasonable folks will all agree that growth is desirable - where they tend to disagree is over where is should best take place. Given the current legislative and judicial constraints on limiting the amount and locations of new greenfield development, doesn't it make more sense to try and identify new approaches that will encourage the new development to occur in brownfield and in-fill locations? |
