  Atperry Member Username: Atperry Post Number: 251 Registered: 12-2004 |
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20061208/UPDAT E/612080464 | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 328 Registered: 03-2006 |
hip hip hooray | ||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 535 Registered: 02-2006 |
Didn't ya hear?, everyone is moving to Georgetown, Kentucky. First Livonia, now Troy.  | ||
The_nerd Member Username: The_nerd Post Number: 345 Registered: 12-2003 |
Perhaps, they should try downtown Detroit? | ||
Bibs Member Username: Bibs Post Number: 616 Registered: 10-2003 |
It's all due to Hooters opening up on Big Beaver which is the official gateway to Troy. Ha! | ||
The_nerd Member Username: The_nerd Post Number: 346 Registered: 12-2003 |
^ Hooters on Big Beaver? My God, location and a good marketing strategy in one. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1198 Registered: 12-2004 |
I thought it was a good looking building design, though bad location (i.e. not Detroit). | ||
Adamjab19 Member Username: Adamjab19 Post Number: 734 Registered: 11-2003 |
So the Hooters finally opened up? I thought they were still in battle with Troy city council. | ||
Wordonthestreet Member Username: Wordonthestreet Post Number: 135 Registered: 11-2003 |
I guess those people should have bought at the Book Cadillac. I think there are a few units left for them. | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 186 Registered: 11-2005 |
Isn't it funny that this project had 165 units, and they couldnt sell enough, but the BC sold 40 units in a day, while there is just an announced expansion of the BC Condos to be above the garage now. I think developers will soon finally realize that the only place for high-rise residential and office is in Detroit. | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 657 Registered: 10-2003 |
I too think that is very VERY strange. Here Troy is trying to be "downtown Southeast Michigan" centered on the Big Beaver corridor, and they can't even build a couple high rise condo towers? Troy has a gigantic office worker population, Somerset Mall, an affluent population, and proximity to other major employment centers. It would seem selling these condos would be easy, even in a poor economy. To be honest, I don't think this is good news for the emerging, new construction, downtown condo market. I'm willing to guess that the same type of person who would choose to live in a project like this in Troy would also be looking at new construction high rise condos downtown too. | ||
Wilus1mj Member Username: Wilus1mj Post Number: 164 Registered: 05-2005 |
The taxes in Troy for the developers and the buyers of the condos are very different than the Book Cadillac. All the tax incentives for the Book doesn't allow good comparisons between the two projects. It's never good to see developers back out of projects anywhere in Michigan. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4858 Registered: 10-2003 |
All development is not good development, and the market decides that, as well as the will of a developer. Developing for development's sake is rarely a good idea, so I'm not quite sure I understand that sentiment that everything ever proposed should be built for its own sake. And, in this particular case, this may very well turn out to have been one of those examples. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 1932 Registered: 07-2004 |
So much for regionalism. On this forum anyway.which does not surprise me, despite all the supposed advocating for it here.The definition of regionalism on the forum is .."Detroit good everything else bad".. A bldg not being built in Troy is not good for Detroit.Because if things are tight in Troy how can they possibly be in Detroit? Btw here in Ann Arbor a whole has been dug at Huron/ Ashley just a half block from the homeless shelter.It (the whole) was to be a new high rise condo thing but........it is just a whole and has been for quite some time now.Personally I am glad as we don't need all this crap being proposed for A2. But I certainly don't take glee in it and see it as a victory for Detroit with such scorn as some of you do. Something will get built here; just as it will in Troy. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 359 Registered: 01-2005 |
Frequently, the best deals are the ones you don't do. The developer, and/or its lenders, had the good sense to back off on this one. I remember when I was involved in condo development in FL in the late 70's, early '80's, there were 60,000 unsold condos in Dade County ALONE. Developers (and lenders) have learned some things since then. I sincerely hope the B-C deals get closed, but there are always a significant number of walk-aways in these kinds of markets, and the fact the Troy deal got shelved is a bad omen for not only the suburbs but Detroit as well. But, the market always rebounds sooner or later. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 380 Registered: 06-2006 |
"A bldg not being built in Troy is not good for Detroit." I know I can't believe that some of these morons are actually cheering this...they represent the core of reason Detroit is in such bad shape today...these idiots need to be marginalized so the rest of us can continue to move the region forward.... | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11008 Registered: 10-2003 |
By locating the Hooters on Big Beaver it relays a sign of the aging franchise. They should have located the Hooters a few blocks above Big Beaver to relay a message that the franchise was still young and perky.  As for the failed development, I have to just sit back and smile. Finally people seem to be coming to their senses and realize they don't want the crap thrown at them like Novi and Troy. If they want urban, they will move to an urban area. This is the reason momentum has been building in Detroit and developments aren't being cancelled. Troy and others are becoming victim of their own poor urban planning. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 381 Registered: 06-2006 |
There goes another idiot... The building in Troy did NOT fail because people would rather live in downtown Detroit...it failed because the MI economy is in a down cycle...what's more, you people seem to favor a poor MI economy so long as you're able to read stories like the one posted above because you love to hate the suburbs so much.... You are worthless and we don't need you in order to move Michigan and metro-Detroit forward...you're a burden on revitialization of our region so just do us all a favor and step aside (Message edited by thejesus on December 09, 2006) | ||
Wordonthestreet Member Username: Wordonthestreet Post Number: 136 Registered: 11-2003 |
I don’t think people here are necessarily cheering the demise of a residential development in the suburbs, but rather cheering the demise of a project that tried to replicate an urban-type development in the suburbs. Visiting the sales center at The Monarch, the sales people touted the amenities of the city (Comerica Park/Ford Field, the Fox, DIA, Orchestra Hall, ect…) in their sales pitch. A buyer for a condo/high-rise is not the same as your traditional suburban buyer. The Monarch had one bedroom, 1,000 sq foot units priced at $400,000. Someone looking to live in Troy would want a lot more space for the money. Also the appeal of a high-rise are often associated with views (i.e. river, other buildings), Troy does not offer that. I’ve talked to several people that work for the developer, many of them thought this project was a joke to begin with and predicted its demise. | ||
Quinn Member Username: Quinn Post Number: 1070 Registered: 01-2005 |
While a condo development in Troy is not something that I would champion...I really can't revel in this news. It's bad for everyone here...even us Detroiters...that's for sure. Now if the story read, "Developers Bigbucks, Richman and Toomachmuney are now considering luxury towers along Detroit's riverfront where the condo business is booming," then I'd be giddy as a schoolgirl. | ||
Stuckincincy Member Username: Stuckincincy Post Number: 1 Registered: 12-2006 |
What's wrong with encouraging urban development in the suburbs? The last thing Big Beaver needs is another bland, mid-rise development. True, it works best in downtown Detroit, but dense projects anywhere can help combat sprawl. Does anyone know how Bloomfield Park is doing? It seems like that would have similar problems to the Monarch. | ||
Wordonthestreet Member Username: Wordonthestreet Post Number: 137 Registered: 11-2003 |
Mixed-use development and combating sprawl are good things. Thinking you can charge ultra premium ($400/sq ft) and think people are going to pay that to live in Troy is another. The Bloomfield Park project is moving forward. The retail portion of the project has secured some great tenants. The condo portion has been significantly scaled back for some of the same reasons as The Monarch. I think the first phase of condominiums will be about 30 units, down from 200 – 300 units. | ||
Wordonthestreet Member Username: Wordonthestreet Post Number: 138 Registered: 11-2003 |
Chicago Living, in the Heart of Troy - The Monarch Private Residences Troy, MI -- (ArriveNet - Mar 11, 2006) -- Chicago is one of the hottest residential areas in America because homeowners absolutely love the ambience of living downtown and the convenience of walking to work or to a restaurant or show. Now that same popular Chicago Lifestyle is available right here in Southeast Michigan. http://press.arrivenet.com/bus iness/article.php/764567.html | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 409 Registered: 12-2003 |
The day I see pedestrians on Big Beaver is the day Detroit is dead. | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 81 Registered: 04-2006 |
I bet the problem was insufficient parking. If they really wanted to move the area forward, they should have built some landscaped surface parking lots along Big Beaver. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 382 Registered: 06-2006 |
Wordonthestreet: If what you say is accurate, then that's just as bad, because what these people are really saying is that they'd rather have not have this building built at all than have it be built in Troy... This project didn't get moved to Detroit...it got canceled, period! And they are applauding this! These people don't really want to see Detroit revitalized...they really just want to close the gap between Detroit and the suburbs, even it that means both end up worse off than they are now Disgusting if you ask me... | ||
Dbc Member Username: Dbc Post Number: 14 Registered: 09-2006 |
"[H]omeowners absolutely love the ambience of living downtown and the convenience of walking to work or to a restaurant or show." "Coming to the heart of Troy’s business district and the Somerset Corridor, The Monarch Private Residences will provide a retreat from the city[.]" Anyone else find these two ideas diametrical opposites? Uh, you want to live "downtown" while retreating from the city. OK. Also, having lived in Chicago, it is a just a tad disingenuous to compare Troy and the Windy City. I guess they are technically correct in that perhaps you couldn’t tell the difference INSIDE the building with the windows closed. Or, maybe they meant to compare it to lively “downtown” Schaumburg. Last, I think people are happy about the development’s cancellation because the ridiculous comparisons to downtown Chicago can be considered a slap in Detroit’s face. Not only are the claims utterly false, but SE Michigan already has an urban downtown. Detroit seems to be on roll with the loft and condo developments - and the nationwide trend reflects a renewed interest in city leaving - so developers and Troy come up with the absurd idea that compares Big Beaver to downtown Chicago. Go ahead and put a building in Troy, but don’t lie to people and act like they’re recreating The Loop. I know it’s marketing – and it appears people weren’t swayed by it – but it seems like another underhanded attempt by the suburbs to take away some of Detroit’s thunder. | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11010 Registered: 10-2003 |
Seriously man, building a pair of 18 and 10 story buildings in Troy? That's the stupidest fuckin' thing I've ever heard. Why bother trying to create a densely populated area now, which is exactly what tower living does. They create an atmosphere where NOBODY in Troy walks anyplace. Everything is set back off of Big Beaver with it's own ginormous parking lot. Building a high density residential development goes against the strip mall/unwalkable community they have built. Why do I cheer it's failure? Because I find it laughable that when the economy in this state is in one of it's worst conditions every, Detroit appears to still be moving ahead. Most suburbs on the contrary, who's very creation are what drove Detroit into a state that is/was considered a 3rd world country by some are experiencing the pain themselves. Hey, I'd lose very little slip if every suburb in this region failed while Detroit was revitalized. The creation of the suburbs was the reason for Detroit fall, dating back over 50 years. Why shouldn't I revel in the suburbs falling upon hard times, especially when the region has always been so anti-Detroit to begin with. No, the project didn't move to Detroit, but most all planned Detroit projects are moving ahead as planned. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 361 Registered: 01-2005 |
The project was not a "failure." Had it been built and not sold, w/ a resulting loss of money, it would have been a failure. It was just another deal that did not get done at this time. (One of many, by the way.) May be built in the future. (I'd never live in it and I think the comparison to Chicago is ridiculous. For the record.) Troy and downtown Detroit are totally different markets. Don't compare apples and oranges. | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 82 Registered: 04-2006 |
I don't want the suburbs to fail, I just think they'd be nicer places to live without all the damn buildings. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 383 Registered: 06-2006 |
I would prefer that any high rise being built in Detroit over a place like Troy... But here, the question isn't whether to build this in Detroit or Troy, it whether to build it in Troy or not build it at all...if faced with that choice, I pick the former The fact that this project didn't move forward is not a sign of the suburbs of southeast Michigan are hurting or failing (as you'd like to see, sadly)...it is a sign Michigan's crappy economy, and nothing more... | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 629 Registered: 11-2004 |
The economy played a role, but it's not the only factor. Look at their website whose downtown do they use in their flash intro?. If Troy is so great why not use theirs? Check out the views this building offered, would you pay those prices for it? Wordonthestreet comments only confirm that they were trying sell this as if it were in the city. It's also sign that if you're gonna tout a place as offering urban living, build it somewhere urban. | ||
Goose Member Username: Goose Post Number: 24 Registered: 02-2005 |
anyone know of any news regarding the status of the proposed waterfront condo projects in st. clair shores......???? | ||
Hysteria Member Username: Hysteria Post Number: 1812 Registered: 02-2006 |
Wrong. Detroit attractions aren't worth featuring when selling suburban real estate? Only x miles from ... I guess those that considered this development in Troy could not possibly be interested in what downtown Detroit has to offer. Pathetic. (Message edited by HYSTERIA on December 09, 2006) | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 630 Registered: 11-2004 |
They are worth featuring. But they went beyond that, the marketing was a not so subtle way of saying living at the Monarch was like living in downtown Detroit or Chicago.
Does that sound like Troy to you?
I think they'd be very interested so much that they'd rather have the real thing. (Message edited by eric on December 09, 2006) (Message edited by eric on December 09, 2006) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3221 Registered: 08-2004 |
Goose, I was thinking the same thing about the 2 St. Clair Shores developments... I live there, and haven't heard a peep in nearly 9 months. I kinda think that the economy is putting a squeeze on that one too. But eventually I do think that some high rises will show up in SCS. They have the one thing that most all other "buildable" suburbs lack (Grosse Pte. is not buildable for high rises)... spectacular waterfront views (from up high in this case). I think that in the future Grosse Pointe empty nesters will be a major drive for marketing these 2 projects (27 story Jefferson Beach Marina, and 19 story Emerald City Marine). But right now everyone's hurting. | ||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 28 Registered: 11-2006 |
"No, the project didn't move to Detroit, but most all planned Detroit projects are moving ahead as planned." Supersport Interesting thought. Are there really two housing markets that don't necessarily move in tandem? A 'burbs market and a downtown market? Downtowns and waterfronts are unique and have unique value to many that typical 'burbs don't. (see post above about SCS). Folks might be inclined to jump at waterfront views but in no hurry to buy the latest 'burb housing (which probably isn't unique, anyways). | ||
Wordonthestreet Member Username: Wordonthestreet Post Number: 140 Registered: 11-2003 |
Could Big Beaver be the next downtown? http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060123/B IZ/601230356 This attitude is probably why many here are cheering the demise of The Monarch. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 363 Registered: 01-2005 |
That detnews article above is loaded w/ BS. First, anyone who believes that Troy's office occupancy rate is 85% should have a credibility check. I'll bet it's in the 75% range at best, and was about that in January when the article was published. Troy's real estate taxes are way above what they should be. I'd say the average Bloomfield Hills/Bloomfield Twp residential taxes are at least a third less than Troy's, and those municipalities have far better schools and services than Troy, and except for Te4legraph Road in Bl Twp, far less congestion and business activity. I can't imagine why anyone would live in Troy if they could afford to live in, say, Bloomfield Twp, and most people who would be locating to Troy today could afford something fat better. Troy as the "next downtown?" Ridiculous. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 3021 Registered: 10-2003 |
3rd world ... I dunno ... congested ... vacant offices ... higher taxes ... relatively poorer services ... sounds to me like they've got the basics down for a new downtown Detroit ... lol! | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 3022 Registered: 10-2003 |
Say nice things about Troy! | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 83 Registered: 04-2006 |
It's probably too late, but I think the James Savage guy interviewed in the article had it right. Troy will never be a downtown. What it offered to potential residents in the past was open space: large, wooded lots along quiet two-lane roads. Their planners evidently still haven't figured this out, and are pushing a pointless, wasteful "growth at any cost" strategy that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. It increases tax revenue in the short term, but in the long term it makes Troy much less attractive to the kinds of people who would actually consider moving there, since those who want high density will move to existing urban centers like Detroit, Birmingham, or Royal Oak. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3222 Registered: 08-2004 |
Sounds like Troy's City Manager has "illusions of grandeur" in that almost year old story. Looks like reality has set in since. And can someone please tell me what "entertainment" he was referring to? Does Troy have any major theatres or sports venues that I'm not aware of? I take it he's still thinking about that 3000-5000 seat theatre that has been on the drawing board for about a dozen years but that city residents don't want and won't pay for. An entertainment district on paper is what they have. To compare Troy to Chicago's Magnificent Mile is absurd! Maybe at rush hour the roadway looks like Chicago, but that's about it. Besides the Top of Troy Building, just how many tall skyscrapers does Troy have again (over 20 stories)? ZERO Maybe Troy is a Schaumburg Illinois wannabe, but they're no Chicago. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3223 Registered: 08-2004 |
And also, it's a little late to do too much to make the Big Beaver stretch "pedestrian friendly". With a "sea of parking" in front of most establishments, and with all the buildings set way back... it will take a miracle for them be become even remotely "pedestrian friendly". Just trying to cross Big Beaver to the other side with all that traffic is a major feat. It's not at all like lower Woodward where the other side of the road is 80 feet away. On Big Beaver it's a couple hundred feet to get to the other side with all that roadway, turning lanes and traffic island. Hardly pedestrian friendly. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 364 Registered: 01-2005 |
You younger folks probably don't recall, but 20+ years ago the Troy leadership was talking the same story; the new downtown Detroit, center of the universe practically. Then they announced the construction of the Top of Troy "skyscraper" which really kicked off the hype. However, the economy turned south and the Top of Troy, when completed, was a total economic disaster. Millions lost. Eventually, the prime lender, the New York State Teacher's Union Pension Fund took the building over, where it languished for years until the economy turned again and Teacher's was able to dump it. Same old, same old. Say something nice about Troy? OK, it's not Livonia. (JUST KIDDING.) | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 262 Registered: 02-2006 |
I know it may be more expensive for the developer to by the land, but they would almost certainly sold out if they bought some land along the east Jefferson Ave. cooridor. Hell, even if they bought land on the west Detroit River bank they would have sold out. I'm even willing to bet that if they bought the parking lot west of the Fisher Building, and build a 18 story tower, offering amazing views of Detroit and "Troy" they would have sold out! 313 | ||
Cman710 Member Username: Cman710 Post Number: 64 Registered: 07-2006 |
Note that a trend towards use of former office space as residential space is strong in some other cities as well. In downtown New York City, many former office buildings have been and are being converted into luxury residential buildings. While the number of these conversions remains minor compared to the total number of office buildings, it is nonetheless significant. This trend has also occurred in one small way in Newark, NJ, where a developer has rehabbed a long-vacant skyscraper and made it a luxury building. http://www.eleven80rentals.com / In that building, a "flexible" one bedroom (1 bedroom plus a nearly bedroom sized office and living room) goes for about $2100/month. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 365 Registered: 01-2005 |
Detroit313: I'd be interested to know why you think someone who may have developed the land west of the Fisher Bldg and built a 18 story residential building would have sold out. You may be correct (I doubt it even w/o addressing the hang time to sell-out.) One has to consider that that there are several highly experienced hi-rise residential developers around Detroit and the rest of the country, all of whom one assumes are aware of the location and marketability of just about every prime development opportunity. Just because no one did it isn't dispositive, but it's very indicative that the site isn't a good development candidate. | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 263 Registered: 02-2006 |
3rdworldcity Just an example. My point is, Downtown and Midtown have a lot more to offer then Troy. Especially the view/urban. Ever been to the top of the Fisher Bldg? Ever been to the top of Troy? And yes I am aware of the developers in Metro Detroit, and as you can see, they would prefer to develope in the suburbs than in the city. But if they don't get on board now, they are going to miss out on some very good land development opportunities.313 | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 384 Registered: 06-2006 |
"The creation of the suburbs was the reason for Detroit fall, dating back over 50 years. Why shouldn't I revel in the suburbs falling upon hard times, especially when the region has always been so anti-Detroit to begin with." You're mixing up cause and effect. The suburbs were created because of Detroit's failure. The suburbs exist in large part because of the morons that rioted and set the city on fire. Can you blame people for wanting to move away from that, espcially when the land is available and our regions use of the automobile made it so easy? But now that a lot of that kind of nonsense is under control, suburbanites are starting to live and spend money downtown again. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1982 Registered: 10-2003 |
Simply not true. Go back and read your history. Better yet, read Sugrue's book, and you'll learn that Detroit's demise was rooted at least 25 years prior to the 1967 riots. The suburban expansion that occurred after WWII directly led to disinvestment in the core city. There are many other functional cities in the U.S. that have extensive suburbs. Certainly, not EVERY American city became equally dysfunctional at the same point in history. The people "cheering" the cancellation of the Troy condo project know this. They also know that continual overbuilding of the suburbs will only undermine efforts to revitalize Detroit. Troy doesn't exist without a Detroit to flee and abandon. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 331 Registered: 03-2006 |
and jesus, you oversimplify extremely complicated issues regarding the demise of Detroit that are not self-explanatory to anyone really...there's more to it than "morons" who rioted and destroyed the city. | ||
Mikem Member Username: Mikem Post Number: 2924 Registered: 10-2003 |
Right, until the late 1960's, there were just a few hundred hicks living in places like Livonia, Ecorse, Roseville, and Farmington. Of course the suburbs which formed around other American cities were created by an entirely different motive.
Especially once they get their CCW permit. | ||
Wpitonya Member Username: Wpitonya Post Number: 36 Registered: 08-2005 |
The '67 riots were not necessarily the cause of the city's decline, they were arguably the result. There was decades of horrible housing conditions before the riots and people were fed up by '67. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 385 Registered: 06-2006 |
Yes, I realize it's an oversimplification of the issue, but I find it interesting that you're all calling me out on my statement yet leaving Supersport's statement about the suburbs causing Detroit's decline alone...very indicative of your bias... The sprawl in SE Michigan was mostly made POSSIBLE by the prevalence of the automobile in our region, but the '67 riots (and the subsequent annual display of pyrotechnics in residential neighborhoods) are a HUGE part of what made sprawl DESIREABLE...the riots greatly accelerated the rate at which suburban communities were built, and with good reason.. (Message edited by thejesus on December 10, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 386 Registered: 06-2006 |
"Especially once they get their CCW permit." Amen to that | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1983 Registered: 10-2003 |
There is only a bias because Supersport is correct in his assessment. Investment in new suburbs diverted resources away from the existing city into the newly developed areas. The infrastructure in the City of Detroit was left to crumble. This pattern continues today.
With the exception of the 1984 World Series, there hasn't been major rioting in Detroit for nearly 30 years. Why, then, did the pace of suburban development accelerate during the 1980s and 1990s? History doesn't seem to support your conclusion. Again, you cite Detroit-specific reasons for what is a national phenomenon. How do you reconcile this? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 387 Registered: 06-2006 |
Danindc: I agree with your point about investment in new suburbs and communities, except that I am suggesting there was a cause for such investment, which I noted above...you have yet to suggest a cause... And Dan, two MAJOR riots a decade and a half are enough to send away people with the means to move away for a very long time... and if that wasn't enough, the annual tradition known as Devil's Night (there were 800 fires in 1984 btw, 400 in 1994) should make any potential home buyer weary...not even dirt cheap real estate prices were enough for people to risk losing everything...where do you think those 12,000 abandoned homes came from? And a national phenomenon? I don't know if you have lived here, but I assure you that our region has a greater contrast between the quality and cleanliness of it's downtown when compared with it's suburbs than most places do... (Message edited by thejesus on December 10, 2006) | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 388 Registered: 06-2006 |
btw, I want to note that I come to this site because I want to see less investment in the 'burbs and more in downtown Detroit.. I'm not an advocate of suburbanism, but much of what people post here about the suburbs is horse shit which flows directly from their bias and hatred of these areas | ||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 29 Registered: 11-2006 |
What I think is happening in many urban areas is the central city exodus to the inner suburbs which got full and eventually old and then a move further out to the exurbs until eventually folks realized they are too far from the employment centers (for those cities which have strong employment in the CBD) and probably pro sports and the like. At that point a certain segment of the population, usually younger and without children, start to move back to downtowns which are 'hip' and have plenty of entertainment. Families with children usually look to 'burbs with better schools. What I think the key is employment. I wouldn't expect a single 28 year old to live in downtown and work in Troy, but I would expect that some 28 year olds working at Compuware to live downtown rather then automatically look for a 'burb like Troy. | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1747 Registered: 06-2004 |
That's because one statement is true and the other isn't, not because of bias. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 1941 Registered: 07-2004 |
Jesus Danindc god love sport and his heart is sincere about Detroit but you are putting your own credibility on the line when you say he is correct- he is ignorant. I started a silly thread about Susie Walker.It was a bit of a riddle but it was also to illustrate the downright silliness and ignorance displayed on the forum. Susie Walker of course was the fictional little girl in miracle on 34th street that did not believe in Santa Claus. Her secret desire was to have a house......in the suburbs........in 1947. The suburbs were not created out of negativity.They were created and perhaps more importantly sustained because people wanted them.That is about as simple as it is. what caused cities and Detroit more than any other to decline we can debate. But suburbs are there because people wanted a bigger yard more sq footage and that kind of thing..........and a swing in the back yard just like Susan Walker. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1984 Registered: 10-2003 |
The causes for suburban investment were systematic and determined by new postwar policies at the federal and state levels that encouraged mass suburbanization. VA loans were a major cause, as they could only be used to purchase a brand new home (presumably in the suburbs), and not an existing home (in the city). Interstate Highway Act of 1956 made the suburban automobile commute possible (90% paid for by the federal government). Official FHA, real estate, and bank policies of redlining inner-city neighborhoods. Sugrue goes through a lot of these in great detail. When these policies were enacted, NO ONE IMAGINED the central cities would empty out in the manner they did. The suburban-heavy policies are outdated. Some of them have since been revised or eliminated, like real estate redlining. Others require adjustment to re-establish a true free market (highway funding).
Many other cities had riots in 1967 and 1968. A lot of those cities have seen significant reinvestment since then.
If I'm not mistaken, the "traditional" arsons on Devil's Night were enacted upon vacant homes.
Detroit was impacted harded than most other cities, due to relocation of auto plants to the suburbs and out-of-state, the massive investment in the highway network, J.L. Hudson's pioneering of the first suburban shopping mall, etc. Cultural biases and animosities brought to Detroit by Southern migrants (both white and black) didn't help matters much, either. These biases have noticeably passed to current generations and persist through the region. | ||
Hysteria Member Username: Hysteria Post Number: 1844 Registered: 02-2006 |
Good stuff, Dan. | ||
Stuckincincy Member Username: Stuckincincy Post Number: 2 Registered: 12-2006 |
Actually, I grew up in Troy, and can say that the reason many people moved to Troy as opposed to Bloomfield Twp. are the services and schools. Both are excellent, and for Troy residents outweigh the benefits of living in a more private area. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 389 Registered: 06-2006 |
You're still avoiding the issue of causation Dan...VA loans and the building of highways were not limited to just Detroit...so the question remains as to what distinguishes what Detroit has experienced over the last 50 years with just about every other major city three major factors that led to Detroit's sprawl, the decentralization of the city and the poor condition of the city that followed are the automobile, the availability of undeveloped land and, yes, the rioting and destruction of the city by its inhabitants... if you want to throw another theory out there, I'm all ears.... | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1986 Registered: 10-2003 |
Mass suburbanization in Detroit was *well* underway by 1967. Based on my observations, and what I've read, the following are what I think are the reasons Detroit declined much further than other cities in the Age of Suburbanization: 1. Massive and incredibly efficient freeway system made automobile commuting possible 2. Complete dismantling and abandonment of rail transit system 3. Persistence of racist and discriminatory attitudes, which were instrumental in supporting Detroit's large network of neighborhood "improvement" associations, physical segregation, and employment discrimination, creating a self-perpetuating cycle of failure for minorities. 4. Blue collar, largely uneducated populace during the Postwar Era made homeowners more susceptible to the blockbusting tactics of real estate agents. 5. Overcrowded housing stock during WWII, as workers arrived to take jobs in the factories 6. Heavy reliance on automotive manufacturing industry, which started to go downhill in the early 1970s, and hasn't ever fully recovered. 7. Relocation of automobile plants from the inner city to outlying suburban areas. 8. Wanton destruction of urban fabric for automobile infrastructure created a moonscape and made the city an infinitely less desirable place to live. Can anyone think of other causes? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 391 Registered: 06-2006 |
You're still avoiding the issue... None of the things you posted are unique to Detroit with the exception of Automobile plants relocating to the suburbs, and then we have to ask, of course, WHY they relocated to the suburbs...there are a multitude of reasons, many of which are in line with the causes I posted earlier... | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1988 Registered: 10-2003 |
None of those things is 100% uniquely Detroit, but the extent to which they were put into practice, and the combination of all of them, created the devastating results we see today. Unlike other large manufacturing towns--Boston and New York come to mind--Detroit never reinvented its economy, either. I think that in order to appreciate why Detroit produced a different result, you need to compare and contrast with how these same forces played out (or did not play out) in other cities. For the most part, there was a much more extreme practice of the factors of suburbanization in Detroit. | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 3023 Registered: 10-2003 |
Dan, "Can anyone think of other causes?" Yes her are three more: (1) Detroit had tremendous bottom up wealth in the post war era. (Metro Detroit (Detroit included) still does, btw.) Detroit's working and lower middle classes had relatively a lot more $$ to spend than in many other cities. This added to the momentum to leave for greener pastures and that momentum kept prices low. (Why live in a 900 sf flat in NW Goldberg when for LESS than 2x your annual salary you could get a tidy brick 1300 sf house of your own in Crary/StMary. Why live in 1300 sf in Crary St. Mary when again for 2x your annual salary 2000 sf awaits in some place called Livonia. (BTW Dan those factors of LESS than 2x an annual salary still holds to this day in Metro Detroit, can you imagine that?) In other cities, particularly older east coast cities, housing was a much more significant cost issue and THAT kept things relatively more stable. (2) Detroit's inability to expand to annex its sprawl. LA, which boomed about the same time as Detroit and experienced similar levels of post war divestment from it's inner core at about the same time, was able to keep much of it's white flight within its vast borders and didn't lose this population and tax base even though much of its older parts hit the skids hard much like detroit's central residential neighborhoods. (3) Detroit's stagnant economy by the mid 60s and afterward (still well paying and all that but not growing anymore) failed to attract immigrants in significant numbers. Consider Chicago which has been kept a living breathing city recently less by an influx of the upper midwest's best and brightest, but probably MORE by large numbers of immigrants stabilizing it's sprawling bungalow neighborhoods to the west and SW faaar from the playground neighborhoods of the north. | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 264 Registered: 02-2006 |
You forgot the water supply!313 | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 520 Registered: 04-2006 |
Sprawl is not an anti-Detroit move to the suburbs phemoena. Not many people move from Detroit to say a newer suburb like Novi. Most move to places like Warren, Southfield, Farmington, or Dearborn. Of the folks building in places like South Lyon or Brighton (the fringe), most have NEVER lived in the City (Detroit); they know no one who lives in the City, this is just keeping up with the Jones' to them. Its what is done and expected. Many of the folks from my High School that lived in Detroit are now living in places like Southfield, Livonia, Westland or Dearborn. These are hardly part of the sprawl problem. In fact all of those communities are going to be hurt by sprawl, just like Detroit has. Just look at places like Livonia Mall or Wonderland! | ||
Cman710 Member Username: Cman710 Post Number: 66 Registered: 07-2006 |
I have to say that Dan has made some great points. While many of the factors that he cites are not unique to Detroit, many were present to a much greater extent than in other cities. I think the point about Detroit failing to reinvent itself like some other cities is a great one, and I think that is the main reason why the city's depopulation has not been stemmed, whereas other cities have seen rebirth. While too large to ever have been a "company town," like Gary, IN, Detroit had many characteristics of a company town, except that its fortunes were tied to an entire industry rather than simply one company within an industry. When that industry and the heavy manufacturing industry more generally faltered, the city and state's economy was heavily damaged, and it really has never quite recovered. Detroit was left with a base of workers without skills easily convertible to services industries, unemployment rose, and the city and state's economy stagnated. It remains safe to say that heavy manufacturing will never thrive again in Michigan as it did earlier in the 20th century, so it will be imperative for the state and the city of Detroit to develop new industries to attract jobs for the next century. That will be quite difficult, but I refuse to believe that it is impossible. | ||
Detroitrulez Member Username: Detroitrulez Post Number: 49 Registered: 12-2006 |
jeezus.....I know how some people spent this past Sunday..... | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 411 Registered: 06-2006 |
and btw, why does the anti-Suburb crowd rag on Troy so hard and almost never mention Southfield, which steals just as much, if not more, of the wealth, workers and businesses away from the city of Detroit.... |
