Discuss Detroit » Archives - July 2007 » America's fastest growing suburbs are... not in Michigan... « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Frenchman_in_the_d
Member
Username: Frenchman_in_the_d

Post Number: 166
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 8:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Some of the Suburbs listed in the article have grown so fast! This explosion of suburbs in Cali is mind-boggling!

And I thought Detroit Metro had vigorous growth!

Read on:
http://realestate.msn.com/Buyi ng/Article_forbes.aspx?cp-docu mentid=5219929&GT1=10341


Note: one the fastest growing is Plainfield, Ill. a suburb of Chicago. Surprising or not?
http://www.forbes.com/forbeslife/2007/07/16/suburbs-growth-housing-forbeslife-cx_mw_0716realestate_slide_6.html?thisSpeed=15000

(Message edited by frenchman_in_the_d on August 07, 2007)

(Message edited by frenchman_in_the_d on August 07, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Ddaydave
Member
Username: Ddaydave

Post Number: 496
Registered: 04-2005
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 8:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I would rather have it somewhere else as it is you have to drive 100 miles from Detroit to see any country
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 2
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 9:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Frenchman,

One needs to take into consideration where the growth is coming from; it sounds like most of it comes from people abandoning the LA metro area for greener pastures. Who knows, 25 years from now there may be a "LA Yes!" forum too. As for suburbs here, I don't know I would call them "vigorous" just now. The economy here is in the toilet. "The Detroit News reports that the number of homes under foreclosure in Michigan doubled from 2004 to 2006 to a rate that is 2 1/2 times the national average. According to foreclosure.com, Michigan had 8,240 homes in active foreclosure on Monday, 8.6% of that nationwide total of 96,019. Our population is only 3.4% of the national average."

source: http://absolutemichigan.com

Do you think our growth/sprawl is vigorous? Historically speaking, maybe we've allowed unfettered sprawl. Right now I see way too many homes in my neighborhood for sale, but I don't know that they're moving to San Bernardino. The question is, just where are people going? Where are the jobs?
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3515
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 10:19 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Other metros' populations are growing. Ours isn't. No place in Michigan should be on that list.
Top of pageBottom of page

Newport1128
Member
Username: Newport1128

Post Number: 89
Registered: 05-2007
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 10:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I just came back from Austin, TX and things are growing by leaps and bounds down there. Two Austin suburbs, Pflugerville and Round Rock, are on the Top 100 list. Not only are the suburbs growing, but people are moving into the central city. Some of it is gentrification of older seedier areas, but they are also building $200-400K condos downtown. Yes, there are the to-be-expected problems with heavy traffic and infrastructure struggling to keep up with the growth. New homes in the suburbs are very affordable. Ten miles from downtown, you can buy a new 1500 sq ft 3br 2 bath ranch for under $170K. Twenty miles from downtown, a basic 3 br ranch runs $110K and a very nice one is about $145K. One builder I talked to sold 12 homes just last week, and they can't build schools fast enough.
Top of pageBottom of page

Novine
Member
Username: Novine

Post Number: 28
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 11:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Metro Detroit hasn't "grown" for years, we just sprawl. While our overall population growth has been anemic, we continue to spread out and de-populate Detroit and now the inner-ring suburbs. I wonder how many of those places are seeing overall growth and how many are simply spreading out like Detroit?
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 4
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:08 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Novine,

I agree; we sprawl. Just how do we tell the difference between sprawl and growth? Do you mean by growth that an entire metro area is taking on residents, business, etc. vs. people fleeing to suburban hinterland?

Interestingly, what we call sprawl, those who stand to profit call growth. See L. Brooks Patterson's outrageous essay:

http://www.oakgov.com/exec/bro oks/sprawl.html

David Brooks writes a funny satirical piece on Sprinkler Cities- the new suburbs of the South and West. The title "Patio Man and the Sprawl People" says it all:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/Public/Articles/000/00 0/001/531wlvng.asp
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 2975
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

There's definitely a difference between physical growth (i.e. growth of paved area), population growth, and economic growth. Brooks doesn't differentiate, though, because it's only the short-term revenue increases that matter to him--not long-term sustainability.

Likewise, sprawl and growth are not necessarily synonymous. The terms have been perverted together thanks to the preponderance of identical, generic, automobile-dependent zoning regs since WWII.
Top of pageBottom of page

Track75
Member
Username: Track75

Post Number: 2566
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That David Brooks piece is hilarious and spot on. I've read his books Bobos in Paradise and On Paradise Drive. He does a good job mixing social commentary on modern well-to-do living patterns with a humorous writing style.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 1760
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Growth does not mean good.

Here in my Las Vegas suburb of Henderson, developers are blasting the surrounding hills of the McCullough Mountain range and building retainer walls in preparation of home building. They're destroying the beauty of those hills that adjoin Black Mountain. It's sad, to say the least. I blame our local politicians was well for not having the balls to say "no" to these developers on zoning changes. But money talks, I guess.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 3657
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ray, the ancients in your community probably thought the same of you (or whoever first built there in your neighborhood) when you arrived...
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 1761
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Valid point, Ly. I'm sure the Paiutes would shed a tear.
Top of pageBottom of page

Track75
Member
Username: Track75

Post Number: 2567
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 12:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

From the David Brooks piece:
quote:

Of course, from the moment they move in, they begin soiling their own nest. They move in order to get away from crowding, but as they and the tens of thousands like them move in, they bring crowding with them. They move to get away from stratification, snobbery, and inequality, but as the new towns grow they get more stratified. In Henderson, the $200,000 ranch homes are now being supplemented by gated $500,000-a-home golf communities. People move for stability and old fashioned values, but they are unwilling to accept limits to opportunity. They are achievement oriented. They are inherently dynamic.

For a time they do a dance about preserving the places they are changing by their presence. As soon as people move into a Sprinkler City, they start lobbying to control further growth. As Tancredo says, they have absolutely no shame about it. They want more roads built, but fewer houses. They want to freeze the peaceful hominess of the town that was growing when they moved there five minutes before.

Since you live in Henderson, Ray, you might find the David Brooks article (circa 2002) particularly relevent.

Part 1

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/531wlvng.asp


Part 2
http://www.weeklystandard.com/ Content/Public/Articles/000/00 0/001/532gxuur.asp?pg=1

(Message edited by track75 on August 08, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Fareastsider
Member
Username: Fareastsider

Post Number: 516
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 1:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good they are not here now maybe the communities can take a minute and breath to come up with some sort of plan instead of approving to many new developments...
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 2976
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 1:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Sorry. When I said "Brooks" above, I meant "L. Brooks Patterson".
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 1765
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 1:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good article, Track, and I have no quarrel with Mr. Brooks views. He describes Henderson to a "T".

His term "sprinkler city" doesn't quite fit, though...the Henderson City council passed an ordinance four years ago prohibiting grass in new homes. Desert landscaping is required, which I have and love. One thing done right.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3524
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Track75, I've been meaning to read those books. They sound promising.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 5
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ironically, from some of what I've been reading, areas that have sustainable development plans (like Boston) end up contributing to sprawl because people leave these areas for more affordable housing.

Ray, you substantiate this through actual experience.

This article explores an alarming trend. "Today, Americans are abandoning traditional growth centers, placing us in the midst of the greatest population re-distribution since the dust bowls." and pegs the need for affordable housing as the reason people are heading for the burbs (it even quotes my former Prof!):

http://www.forbes.com/realesta te/2007/07/16/suburbs-growth-h ousing-forbeslife-cx_mw_0716mi gration.html
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 1321
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That Forbes article conspicuously leaves NYC out of the discussion...
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 2979
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Ironically, from some of what I've been reading, areas that have sustainable development plans (like Boston) end up contributing to sprawl because people leave these areas for more affordable housing.



I don't buy this line of thinking. Nowhere does it say that affordable housing requires homes on a minimum 1 acre lot, accessible only by automobile, and segregated from other land uses. There are plenty of small, traditional towns in the U.S. that are eminently affordable.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 1766
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:32 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Ray, you substantiate this through actual experience."

Oakmangirl, there's one major factor as applies to me, however. I'm retired, and moved to a "55+ required" community. I wouldn't be caught dead here if I was 25 (and I think there's a pun in there somewhere, but not sure where). Even when I first moved here in '84 at age 57 we moved into a typical middle city home in the Las Vegas valley. But now peace, quiet, and no graffiti is much mor important to me. C'est la vie.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 6
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:50 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dan,

I'm merely summing up theory. I agree with you; however, are you saying that these small, traditional towns offer ample employment opportunities? The trend is for job growth in the suburbs. Ideally, we'd all live in small towns, dense, lively urban centers, or homesteading. We'd be close to work, entertainment, green space, public transit, and farmer's markets (or at least a CSA share), but the reality seems to be that people desire suburban living. I think the best compromise is to revisit and revamp the garden city ideal; Pittsburgh has a few of them designed to be affordable.
Top of pageBottom of page

Novine
Member
Username: Novine

Post Number: 32
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 2:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"I agree; we sprawl. Just how do we tell the difference between sprawl and growth? Do you mean by growth that an entire metro area is taking on residents, business, etc. vs. people fleeing to suburban hinterland? "

At a minimum, you should be adding population if you want to call it growth.

If people haven't noticed, there's an interesting trend happening in the O.C. Growth has been flat and that's been forcing Brooks Patterson to trim back on County Government and encourage cooperation among the locals. Much of it has probably been due to the economy. But there's a limit to how far sprawl can go in the county before people start saying "no" to 2 hour commuters and watching the greenspaces get plowed under. People in the outlying townships of the County are much more savvy to the ways of sprawl and many of them aren't willing to drink BP's kool-aid that is growth is good (except for White Lake).
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 92
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 3:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I completely disagree about sprawl in Oakland County and people in outlying townships not being willing to drink L. Brook's Kool-Aid. I live in Brandon Township, in North Oakland, and there are several new McMansion subdivisions going in where forest once was, despite the economy. And the main drag in Ortonville, M-15, is currently seeing a new strip mall constructed (unfortunately.) The explosion of strip malls and "estate" neighborhoods that transformed Clarkston and Independence Township is continuing to expand into other regions of North Oakland. And areas that have are already poster children of suburban sprawl are only getting worse- Rochester Hills, Oakland Township, Oxford, etc. Part of the reason S.E. Michigan's housing market is in such a depression is because builders were behaving in an unsustainable manner even when times were good. The most unfortunate thing is that they continue to do so, which will likely keep our housing market in the basement for years.
Top of pageBottom of page

Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed

Post Number: 1227
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The problem is that the free market will never stop sprawl in Michigan, because unlike in other places, people will not have to tire of the 2 hour commutes, because the jobs keep following them further out.

Living in Clarkston is a hell of a long drive from Detroit, but if you work in Auburn Hills or Troy, it ain't so bad.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 2988
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

^That's because sprawl is not part of a free market. How else do you explain the geographic growth of Southeast Michigan (and even Northeast Ohio), which has had a static population for 30 years?

Make all factors equal, and watch the new vinyl-sided crap-generating machine come to a halt.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 93
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The vinyl sided crap generating machine. I like that. I firmly believe that the free market is non existent in Michigan's housing market. If supply and demand guided building in this state, we would not be in the pinch we're in. And a lot of the nature in this region-trees, animal habitat-would still be intact. Our urban sprawl, which is in no small part due to suburban paranoia about the city of Detroit, is shameful and embarassing. I like the city, and I don't mind rural areas. I once liked where I live now (Brandon), but I now feel that it is a suburbanized nothing-ville whose natural features are no longer visible, and I have no intention of staying. Areas that once had appeal are now being made identical to every other suburb.
Top of pageBottom of page

3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity

Post Number: 847
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Danindc, real estate guru and urban economist. What in the world could you possibly mean by "sprawl is not part of a free market?" Did some no-nothing on Wikipedia use those terms? What are we doing, forcing people to move farther out at gunpoint?

Did you mean "northwest Ohio?"
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 7
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"I once liked where I live now (Brandon), but I now feel that it is a suburbanized nothing-ville whose natural features are no longer visible, and I have no intention of staying. Areas that once had appeal are now being made identical to every other suburb."

No offense, but I believe this to be a large part of the sprawl problem here. People move just beyond the far suburbs to the "country", then when it gets sucked up by development to become yet another suburb, people seek the next best quasi-rural area. It's like a flesh-eating bacteria.
Top of pageBottom of page

Focusonthed
Member
Username: Focusonthed

Post Number: 1228
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:25 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I was responding to Novine who was saying there'd be a limit to how far we could sprawl because of commute time growth, among other things. But this is a moot point when the jobs keep moving out along with the people.
Top of pageBottom of page

Novine
Member
Username: Novine

Post Number: 34
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I didn't say sprawl was coming to a halt. It's clearly not. But considering the Detroit's lost over a million people in the last 50 years, those million aren't going to make it to Brandon or Fenton or Howell.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 95
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I completely agree Oakmangirl. That's why I'm planning on moving to Detroit in a year or two when attending WSU. I do not want to contribute to the sprawl problem or live even farther from the city, and I certainly don't like the suburbs as they stand. My point is I once had no problem with the northern suburbs but now feel that they are just continuing to snowball in their wastefulness and phoniness. I didn't choose to live here (I'm 17)-my parents did.
Top of pageBottom of page

Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc

Post Number: 2990
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Danindc, real estate guru and urban economist. What in the world could you possibly mean by "sprawl is not part of a free market?" Did some no-nothing on Wikipedia use those terms? What are we doing, forcing people to move farther out at gunpoint?



Tell me how many people would be living in Oakland County without the freeways, sewers, new schools, and other infrastructure, paid for by the taxpayers of Michigan (while Detroit's infrastructure needs go unmet). How many? I seriously doubt it was an Oakland County Homeowners Association that built I-75....

quote:


Did you mean "northwest Ohio?"



No.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 8
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dustin,

Just as we can't choose our family, we certainly can't choose where we grow up. Even though I grew up in Detroit, given a choice, I would have opted for Palmer Park or Sherwood subs.

Good for you in moving to the city.
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 1323
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 4:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Even though I grew up in Detroit, given a choice, I would have opted for Palmer Park or Sherwood subs.

Umm...
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 9
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 5:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ummm...what? You don't know how/where I grew up. Pitching a tent in the Park seemed like Paradise some days. ;-) I meant "Woods". Lighten up.
Top of pageBottom of page

Masterblaster
Member
Username: Masterblaster

Post Number: 70
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 5:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I apologize for the thread-jacking!

To Dustin89, if you do end up attending Wayne State University, and can afford to move to that area, and you end up doing so...THEN ALL THE POWER TO YOU! You'd be sort of practicing what you preach..Unlike a lot of people on this forum who live in the suburbs, and are going to stay in the suburbs.

You may not know that 80% of the people on this forum live in the 'burbs until someone starts a thread on places like White Lake and Harper Woods. Then they ALL come out of the woodworks.

Now I can understand how some of these people, like Meaghansdad, would be justified in giving up on Detroit and leaving, as he was active in his neighborhood and endured a whole lot before the last straw came when he and his young son found some drug paraphenalia on the ground.

But some of these people won't even give the city a try.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 97
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 9:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you Masterblaster & Oakmangirl. I've grown up in the far suburbs and certainly don't mean to disrespect that-I've had an easy life. But I can't stand the widespread suburban attitude of paranoia and fear towards the city-even the city of Pontiac, which is a stable and not even that urban of a city. I like cities and certainly am willing to give the largest, nearest one to me a try. I think the vast majority of suburbanites are simply depriving themselves by refusing to even visit Detroit and its many attractions. Since the day I received a driver's license I've attempted to avoid that school of thinking.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray1936
Member
Username: Ray1936

Post Number: 1769
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 9:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dustin, you write exceptionally well for being 17 years of age. Most refreshing. I tip my hat to you.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 98
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 9:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thanks Ray!
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3531
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 9:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dustin89, I'm getting to know you a bit more with this thread. Your situation sounds all too typical but you're on the right track. I'm a handful of years ahead of you and came from a similar situation-- my parents were both native Detroiters maintaining ties to the city, though, at close range in the inner ring--and I'm working to unfold my moving-to-Detroit plan after school.

So is commuting to Wayne out of the question for you? Out of curiosity, are your parents taking well to the idea of living at Wayne?

Keep up the good posts.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 99
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 10:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My parents are native suburbanites, with my mother from Waterford and father from Rochester Hills. I'm sure I'll be commuting to Wayne for a while, but I'd eventually like to move closer to it. I would be very surprised if anyone else graduating from my high school went to Wayne State; and if so, it would be very few people. I'm obviously of a different mindset than many of my peers regarding the city of Detroit & WSU. I don't know that my parents love the idea of my living in Detroit, but I'm always working to turn their views on the city around. I should also mention that I'm also somewhat involved in the Pontiac community, and serve as a Citizen Adviser to the Oakland Press Editorial Board, and generally have a column in the Oakland Press once a month. I can also see myself perhaps living in Pontiac at some point too; it's a very undervalued city which is looked down upon by most of Oakland County. There are some very dedicated people working to keep Pontiac on a positive track, but I think it receives even less attention and support than Detroit in this area, if that's possible. I hope this answers some of your questions, and thanks for the interest. I've learned a lot from some of your posts on recent threads.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 10
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 10:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dustin,

My first flat was in Pontiac and that was way before its "revival"; I look back on my time there with fondness.

You know by choosing WSU, you might be able to get a scholarship. It certainly beats student debt.

Anyway, you're remarkably self-assured for someone so young, and it's very cool you want to give the city a try. Keep on with the nonconformist outlook!
Top of pageBottom of page

Novine
Member
Username: Novine

Post Number: 36
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 10:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Why pay the gas to commute? You should be able to find something decent and affordable close to WSU and there's a fair amount to do in the area if you're willing to get out and about. The area around the campus is fairly safe and if you use some common sense, you should be fine. For those who cry "Detroit crime", there's plenty of crime that happens around East Lansing and Ann Arbor that most people just don't hear about.

WSU isn't on the radar for most suburban kids mainly because they don't see it as getting far enough away from Mom and Dad. The irony is that most of those parents are more wiling to go to Ann Arbor or East Lansing than they would to Detroit. If you're into having a urban lifestyle, you might as well move down there now.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 100
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 11:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

As far as cost--WSU seems to be pretty affordable. I'm leaning towards a major in journalism, and I'd like to try and get an internship at the Free Press or News while at WSU, or get involved w/ the campus newspaper. In response to Novine, I'm sure I'll get sick of the 50 mile commute each way pretty quickly, and of course commuting limits your on-campus involvement. Living in the town that I do, I've heard enough "Detroit crime" screams to last me a lifetime :-), and they just go in one ear and out the other. I want an education in an urban setting and the atmosphere and opportunities Detroit provides...the largest problem with much of Oakland County is that it is boring with a capital "B."
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3535
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2007 - 9:13 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Novine, what you said about WSU being on kids' radar is partially true; a lot of high-achieving students pass on WSU scholarships to go away and pay big in doing so.

But the WSU student body makeup is still largely suburban.

Anecdotally, when I went there after GP South, only 7 other people from my school went there, with dozens of others glady going to other average schools like WMU. The last couple years, my alma mater has at least tripled the annual amount that goes to WSU. Pretty sure it beat WMU one year. Changing attitudes about Detroit, maybe? It's just sensible, though, because it is able to provide academic rigor and is affordable either from the commuting standpoint or from the standpoint of decent rent there near campus.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw

Post Number: 3536
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2007 - 9:22 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

50 mile commute? That's like me driving from my family's home to UM. That's unfathomable. I can't handle that once a month. You don't want that for yourself, especially since time is of the essence when you're a student, and that will take away at least 2 hours of every day. I commuted to Wayne but it was a 15 minutes w/o an expressway, and could almost be therapeutic after class.

I think there is merit-- if you want a transition year before living on campus-- to commuting, but you might want to get your family to move to Birmingham, Royal Oak, or out of OC to keep your money and your sanity.
Top of pageBottom of page

Dustin89
Member
Username: Dustin89

Post Number: 101
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2007 - 12:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

If and when I can afford rent during college, I'll be moving much closer. In the summer-fall of 2006 I was volunteering for a certain political party (lol) and was driving from my house to the campaign office on Woodward in Ferndale. It gets a little old but it's do-able.
Top of pageBottom of page

Tielerh11
Member
Username: Tielerh11

Post Number: 67
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 09, 2007 - 1:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dustin, if your maturity and writing abilities are any indication of your academic achievements, I would venture to guess that you would be an excellent candidate for merit scholarships from Wayne. Keep in mind that you may receive enough aid to offset the cost of living in the dorms as a freshman. Now, my experience is at U-M and not Wayne, but I will say that living on campus freshman year of college is an unbelievable experience and something you may not want to pass up.

Keep it up! :-)
Top of pageBottom of page

3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity

Post Number: 853
Registered: 01-2005
Posted on Friday, August 10, 2007 - 3:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Danindc: I'm going to respond politely.

You asked ---

"How many people would be living in Oakland County without the freeways, sewers, new schools and other infrastructure paid for by the taxpayers of Michigan (while Detroit's infrastructure needs go unmet)"

Well now, where to start?

None or very little of the infrastructure you refer to was paid for by "the taxpayers of Michigan" as you intend the phrases to be used (as a "gift" from the rest of the state to OC.)

The freeways were primarily if not exclusively paid for with federal taxpayer dollars.

The sewers were paid for by the people who use them, usually at great profit to the City of Detroit.

The schools were paid for by the local residents who use them and have voluntarily taxed themselves to build them.

The freeways are bi-directional, not one-way. People if they wished (and a few do) could use them to move back into the city.

The federal government and the state have spent countless millions in recent years improving or rebuilding the expressway systems INSIDE the city. Only a non-resident would allege that Detroit's infrastructure needs are not being
met. Its bridges have been rebuilt so many times that it's extremely unlikely that there will ever be a Milwaukee-type bridge collapse here as there was there last week. People who drive here every day know that.

Detroit receives far more tax dollars from Lansing and Washington than Detroiters send there.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ray
Member
Username: Ray

Post Number: 976
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 - 12:16 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I hate sprawl and was appalled by Brook's stupid article promoting it.

That said, he has a point: the sprawl reflects the preferences of the buying public. What frustrates me and you is that the buying public is so clueless. But, this is the height of elitism to impose my (our) value system on others.

If an urban way of life is truly superior, than eduction, persuasion and experience will draw more people in Southeast Michigan to it.

Once those preferences changes, the same market forces that built up the sprawl will build back the city at lightspeed (example: the overnight transformation of the desolate wasteland south of the Chigaco loop in to a forest of expensive condos).
Top of pageBottom of page

Novine
Member
Username: Novine

Post Number: 45
Registered: 07-2007
Posted on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 - 11:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"That said, he has a point: the sprawl reflects the preferences of the buying public. What frustrates me and you is that the buying public is so clueless. But, this is the height of elitism to impose my (our) value system on others."

Who's asking to impose value systems? I think most people would be fine with people making those choices IF those choices reflected the true cost of sprawl. They don't so people are making decisions about where to live while burdening others with the cost of that choice.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oakmangirl
Member
Username: Oakmangirl

Post Number: 51
Registered: 08-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - 9:35 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ray, I think you nailed the point of Brooks's article. Just as the suburban dweller has a mindless, slavish devotion to buying a pimped out grill, so he has that same slavish desire for what he "perceives" a better, easier life away from the city.

Novine, what are the true costs of sprawl to the person who chooses that lifestyle over urban living? Higher gas costs? The empty city and its residents pay a much higher cost, but do you really think those leaving care?

As for sprawl, unless there's some sort of cap or penalty, it's bound to happen. Most major urban areas have it; the difference is some places make it a little more palatable for the environment by providing rail service. Look at the Main Line near Philly or Chicago's North Coast burbs; they have serious public transit. This is good in the
sense that they at least consider the environment and the fact that poor/working class city dwellers need transit to jobs in the burbs. I don't support sprawl, I'm just realistic. Ironically, sprawl here COULD be a good thing if we had rail service as it provides a wider job market for those who live in the city. Of course, it could result in the city losing even more people...maybe that would be a wake up call to city govt.??
Top of pageBottom of page

Lmr
Member
Username: Lmr

Post Number: 90
Registered: 03-2007
Posted on Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - 12:16 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Several of those fastest growing suburbs are here in
the Minneapolis-St.Paul area. A lot of the growth in places like Prior Lake, Shakopee, etc. isn't necessarily people moving from within the city outward, although there is some of that, it's people moving from small towns and farms into the twin cities metro. I would suspect that is what a lot of these high growth suburbs are in other places, too. The rural counties in the middle of the country have lost a lot of population in recent years, especially younger people.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 3744
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - 12:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Its bridges have been rebuilt so many times that it's extremely unlikely that there will ever be a Milwaukee-type bridge collapse here as there was there last week.


Was there yet another bridge collapse there in Milwaukee last week? Probably meant Minneapolis...

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.