Cities that belong in other states

[benp]

Originally Posted by edale

I appreciate your post, and will admit to a bit of hyperbole with my commercial corridor comment. I know of the (mostly) Mexican corridor along Vernor, but that slipped my mind. I applaud Detroit for its revitalization efforts, and would love to see continued progress in the areas you highlighted and beyond.

Still, for such a large city, there's a a pretty small amount of surviving urban commercial nodes. And, tbh, some of the examples you shared don't exactly appear to be very occupied or urban. If these are all that's left out of a city that can fit SF, Boston, and Manhattan in it...well, that kinda proves my point.

But again, I appreciate the information you shared, and I hope to see more in the way of a Detroit resurgence for many years ahead

I agree with your observations. As I do not know all of Detroit very well, I really expected that there would be more "hidden" neighborhood commercial districts that I wasn't aware of, so it was very sobering and disappointing to look through the above list of neighborhoods and realize that that's all there are, and not much at that for many of them.

At least the commercial districts of inner suburbs (Dearborn, Highland Park, Hamtramck) can stand in for some of what's missing in adjacent central Detroit neighborhoods, though technically not part of "Detroit" itself.

[Wigs]

Steely, weren't you the forumer that pointed out that Black flight was starting to really affect the Rust Belt cities in the past couple of decades, yet somehow Buffalo didn't suffer the same fate?

[FromSD]

Originally Posted by edale

Obviously continued sprawl without regional population growth is a problem. I've never argued that sprawl isn't one of the issues that has contributed to Detroit's condition. What I have repeatedly tried to argue, and what appears to not be getting through, is that sprawl alone cannot explain Detroit. If it did, we'd have Detroits all over this country, and it wouldn't be such an outlier in terms of urban devastation. Sprawl alone cannot explain why Detroit has virtually no intact commercial corridors, or why there are huge expanses of urban prairie across the entire city, or why essentially all wealth fled the city years ago, or why the population continues to be in free fall to this day.

Sprawl is the symptom. If everything was great, or at least tolerable, in Detroit, why would just about everyone who had the means to move out do so? There are push factors in play that fuel the sprawl machine. Is it racism? Crime? Poor schools? Lack of urban amenities? A weak core? Environmental issues? The answer is probably yes to all of these and more.

I've had this question for a while: is the "useful life" of neighborhoods in metros with moderate housing costs and no geographical limits to sprawl shorter than it is in high cost metros that do have those constraints? And by "useful life" I mean the period during which a neighborhood is stable and considered desirable ("a nice place to live"). For instance in a place like Dallas-Ft. Worth, where development is marching relentlessly to the Oklahoma border, do older suburbs find themselves passed over by people looking for housing with the latest bells and whistles in newer suburbs further out? Do the older suburbs more quickly get relegated to the status of second and third best--their best days behind them?

The preference for newer housing is true everywhere, but in metros that can't sprawl like they used to, it seems like older neighborhoods hold their own longer. Since there is less greenfield acreage to convert to subdivisions, there is more incentive to invest in older areas, either by developers or by individual property owners.

[benp]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Steely, weren't you the forumer that pointed out that Black flight was starting to really affect the Rust Belt cities in the past couple of decades, yet somehow Buffalo didn't suffer the same fate?

Buffalo (city) Black population did peak in 2000 at 108.9k, dropped to 100.8k in 2010, but then increased to 102.6k in 2020. The increase may be due to newly arriving immigrants from Africa and Caribbean countries.

Suburban towns of Cheektowaga and Amherst saw an increase in Black population of several thousand between 2010 and 2020, so that may be indicative of some Black flight. Many former super-majority Black neighborhoods in Buffalo have become more integrated with the arrival of South Asians, some are now Asian majority.

[Velvet_Highground]

Originally Posted by edale

I appreciate your post, and will admit to a bit of hyperbole with my commercial corridor comment. I know of the (mostly) Mexican corridor along Vernor, but that slipped my mind. I applaud Detroit for its revitalization efforts, and would love to see continued progress in the areas you highlighted and beyond.

Still, for such a large city, there's a a pretty small amount of surviving urban commercial nodes. And, tbh, some of the examples you shared don't exactly appear to be very occupied or urban. If these are all that's left out of a city that can fit SF, Boston, and Manhattan in it...well, that kinda proves my point.

But again, I appreciate the information you shared, and I hope to see more in the way of a Detroit resurgence for many years ahead

No worries, I’ve been known to occasionally throw around some hyperbole myself. Plus you were making a legitimate argument. Detroit retail has definitely been hit the hardest during the years of decline. The really grand commercial districts were in the “middle city” built between 1904 & 1933. 12th Street, Grand River & Livernois, Oakman along Harper & Kercheval are all only have remnants left.

My grandfather’s family when they left the dumpster fire that was being Jewish in the dying days of Tsarism in Ukraine (one of the Alexander’s invited westerners to modernize the economy my family took the offer. Too bad for history he was killed opening the parliament by radicals who wanted to stoke a reactionary response bringing revolution) opened up a shoe store at Grand River and Livernois.

Grand River and Oakman

https://twitter.com/DetroitStreetVu/...43573054140416

Grand River and W. Warren

https://www.motorcities.org/story-of...d-river-avenue

The it’s mostly in the “new city” mostly built from the 30’s to the 60’s is where you’ll find the city’s retail districts, outside central of the urban core. When I was pointing out those stretches of retail I made a conscious effort to pick neighborhoods that kept to the original character as much as possible. Ie having more street side retail though it’s impossible to not have parking lots, drive thru’s and auto-repair shops in Detroit.

The far westside, that rectangle sticking out to the west is the quadrant of the that for the most part has high occupancy rates and low levels of blight. It’s also an urban-suburban hybrid. Most of the commercial thoroughfares are occupied and mostly intact in terms of low levels of vacant lots. However while back in the street car days they were designed for walkability with low to occasional mid-rise street front retail that changed.

Changes in demographics & wealth saw a trend where older buildings were converted into businesses catering to lower incomes. The city wanted to refresh its retail meeting modern suburban standards not an unfamiliar story at all as we all know and not a good one. Generally the wealthy and upper-middle class areas kept more of the traditional street front retail where as more average middle class neighborhoods saw more conversions to suburban style. Not that you won’t see plenty of original retail in avarage neighborhoods but it’s more likely to have been modernized in some way either minimally or totally re-cladded in cinderblocks.

Most of the major westside thoroughfares have a healthy amount of retail and the areas I pointed out are some of the larger stretches of preserved retail. Beyond where I mentioned the whole stretch of McNichols from Grand River to Livernois is a lively stretch of retail with few vacant buildings or gaps, a lot of it is boring inexpensive and car centric retail. 7 mile from Grand River to the Lodge is another major retail center with the 7 and Evergreen shopping mall, apartment tower & townhomes being built in the 70’s to revitalize the surrounding traditional retail.

Grand River and Greenfield is one of the last great pre-war shopping areas & malls it now bookends a smaller retail node at Lasher the former downtown of Redford Twp now called Old Redford. Both are struggling but have points in their favors. Old Redford recently had its corner store renovated into mixed use and it has a beautiful theater that plays cult classics for the artist community that’s been there for a while. There’s also a number of small businesses including a great sweet potato place a coffee house & a bakery along with a mom n pop pharmacy. Grand River - Greenfield has a Forman Mills occupying one of the two main buildings though the street front retail has taken a hit during Covid losing its Nike store & others with it. The Mammoth Department store across Grand River is at put up a plan now or the city will demolish, I hope it can be saved but the owners have failed so far.


https://www.motorcities.org/story-of...d-river-avenue

Grand River and Greenfield

https://www.detroityes.com/mb/showth...reenfield-area

Grand River and Longacre

https://www.detroityes.com/mb/showth...reenfield-area


https://www.detroityes.com/mb/showth...reenfield-area


A cool old school Detroit retail location in terms of getting a mental picture of what things used to be like is Jefferson Ave. Jefferson -Chalmers is an old section of retail next to Grosse Pointe that’s being renovated and has already had several projects completed while much is underway now. Jefferson Ave in general has a lot of retail but it’s not as dense as it used to be. Check out E Jefferson at McDougall there’s a great stretch there.

Rounding things Joy and Plymouth both have long stretches on the westside of relatively dense retail although the block east of Southfield is kind of run down. But Greenfield also has a lot of retail though unlike many of the other mile roads on the west side im not seeing much new investment into building renovation or new stores, perhaps it’s due to the big strip mall / grocery store at the corner of Joy. East of Greenfield and south of 96 there’s a big industrial corridor. While Joy picks back up in a very nice neighborhood (Aviation Subdivision) the commercial buildings are scarcer and generally mothballed though a new close to street retail development looks to be opening. I’m not very familiar with this area.

Grand River and Joy 1970’s

https://twitter.com/DetroitStreetVu/...66555518976000

Schoolcraft and Fenkell are mainly residential with the exception of Fenkell in Brightmoor which was a neighborhood built quick and cheaper than most in the city while in a beautiful location, hilly with large parks and oak forest & by rivers. It became very blighted and most of the blight was cleared along with the majority of the homes. It’s a dozen home per block kind of neighborhood now but there are some loyal holdouts and new comers who like the space and natural beauty “downtown Brightmoor is mostly mothballed properly but it has some good Fish and Chips. The neighborhood is a focus of 2024 to get revitalization going as it borders Rosedale Park & Old Redford.

8 mile is seeing some big news in Detroit retail construction is progressing on the redevelopment of former Northland Mall. The Historic Hudsons department store has been saved and is being renovated into lofts and apartments while surrounded by a larger series of multi unit apartment developments.

[Velvet_Highground]

Tower Center Mall in its pre-Covid “glory days” 2018, Forman Mills is the last tenant. The old department store connected by skywalk (unseen) may soon be demolished. This is one of if not the last great Detroit shopping centers it’s located on the edge of the Rosedale Park area one of the city’s most desirable neighborhoods.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/20...it/1642555002/

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I'm talking about point to point distance. Chicago's urban area sprawls more evenly away from the loop than Detroit's urban area from downtown Detroit.

Oh, gotcha. And yeah, that far NW metro Detroit sprawl pushing out into Livingston County does get pretty "way the fuck out there".


I guess I was thrown off by your "in terms of physical area" preface, because in terms of total physical area of sprawl, Chicagoland is easily the midwest sprawl king, which is no surprise given how much more populous it is than any of the others. But metro Detroit has to be a solid #2.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by FromSD

I've had this question for a while: is the "useful life" of neighborhoods in metros with moderate housing costs and no geographical limits to sprawl shorter than it is in high cost metros that do have those constraints? And by "useful life" I mean the period during which a neighborhood is stable and considered desirable ("a nice place to live"). For instance in a place like Dallas-Ft. Worth, where development is marching relentlessly to the Oklahoma border, do older suburbs find themselves passed over by people looking for housing with the latest bells and whistles in newer suburbs further out? Do the older suburbs more quickly get relegated to the status of second and third best--their best days behind them?

The preference for newer housing is true everywhere, but in metros that can't sprawl like they used to, it seems like older neighborhoods hold their own longer. Since there is less greenfield acreage to convert to subdivisions, there is more incentive to invest in older areas, either by developers or by individual property owners.

This is what I've been trying to get across regarding Detroit. Before 1950 Detroit captured just about all of the population growth in the metro. Since 1950, it has captured none of it. Detroit's real estate development industry is fueled by greenfield development. There is literally no force that pushes development back into the core, which many other older cities have at their disposal. Forces that can push development back into the core include:

• natural geographical constraints
• artificial, government imposed boundaries
• access to water
• static, rail-based transit network

Chicago has a rail-based system that is centered on legacy hubs inside the city of Chicago. New York has a rail system, natural constraints, and government imposed boundaries. Most of the other northeast corridor cities have at least one or two of those. Los Angeles has natural geographical constraints and probably controls water. San Francisco has land constraints, rail transit, and probably also controls water. Detroit has not a single one of those factors working in its favor. The last ace it did have was control of the water system, but it lost control of that after a series of strategic mistakes, mismanagement, and ultimately the bankruptcy a decade ago.

Some background on the perpetual water wars in Metro Detroit:

Detroit Metro Times: Water wars
Nov 13, 2002 at 12:00 am

Water under the bridge

Detroit established its water department in 1836 and has provided service within and beyond its boundaries since then. As the region expanded, the city used its ability to sell bonds, with inherent risks, to finance expanding the system — facilitating suburban growth.

Perhaps inevitably, tension began to arise; the initial concern, however, was not suburban control of the water system but rather Detroit officials balking at the idea of subsidizing growth that would eventually drain away residents and erode Detroit’s tax base. The issue came to a head in 1955 when Detroit water chief Laurence Lenhardt said Detroit would no longer add new suburbs to its system, capping service at the 42 cities then buying Detroit water.

For the previous three summers drought had virtually dried up spigots in western Wayne County. Some areas had banned new housing, and industry would not locate in the area due to the shortages. Trucks were delivering water to residents. Lenhardt hung tough. He told them to build their own systems. Detroit, he said, was not going to sell them water that would facilitate the suburban exodus.

A firestorm ensued. Business, civic and suburban leaders as well as the three Detroit dailies began a several years long review of how to best serve the water needs of the region. A six-county committee of political leaders, aided by the National Sanitation Foundation and the Detroit Metropolitan Regional Planning Commission (later SEMCOG) concluded that the City of Detroit should build the water system. Summarizing the prevailing view at the time, the Detroit Times editorialized that “the reason for unification of the water supply in Detroit’s department is because the Detroit system has the economic base — its present facilities and paying customers — to finance expansion. No other apparent combination of communities has such resources.”

Under pressure from the combined force of these interests, Mayor Albert Cobo eased Lenhardt out and installed a manager who would build a regional system.

In the 1960s similar pressures came from Oakland and Macomb counties as they expanded. They faced development bans from the state due to limited sewer systems, so Detroit provided them sewerage services. Detroit also financed a new water treatment plant off Lake Huron to supply the growing northern suburbs of both counties, as well as the greater Flint area.

Shortly after these facilities were in operation, Oakland County Drain Commissioner George Kuhn began a 20-year campaign to take them from Detroit. In the 1990s alone, at least six regionalization bills were introduced in Lansing at Kuhn’s urging. Yet Oakland County communities, evaluating their own interests, ignored Kuhn, deciding that it was easier, safer and cheaper to buy Detroit water than to build their own systems. Now, the payback for Detroit providing this option to the suburbs is an attempt to take it from the city without compensation.

Read more here

Detroit's water system, which supplies almost all of the water to Metro Detroit, is technically still owned by the city of Detroit, but it is now managed by a regional authority after the suburbs stepped in during the bankruptcy to keep it from being privatized. Without any carrots left at the city's disposal to curb sprawl, and no real geographic constraints, it's really left up to either the state to step in, or regional leaders to build consensus on the issue of sprawl as a problem.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Chicago has a rail-based system that is centered on legacy hubs inside the city of Chicago.

I don't doubt that Chicago's rail systems played an important role in the different outcomes between Detroit and the windy city, but surely there's got to be more to it than just that, right?

[Crawford]

Historically, yes, but in 2024, new sprawl isn't a big factor for Detroit's most immediate problems. Ma and Pa Whitebread aren't moving from Milford to Detroit if there were a growth boundary.

I'm not even sure if the region is sprawling all that much anymore. It isn't like 20-30 years ago anymore, when McMansions were going up everywhere to the north and west. There's still some sprawl, but not crazy amounts. Lyon Twp. has really developed, and I guess Macomb Twp. is filling in the last farmland, but I can't think of much else.

[ColDayMan]

Originally Posted by edale

I agree with you Colday, but have to point out that Pittsburgh has received VERY little immigration-- far less than Detroit. So if that's the key differentiator for Chicago vs Detroit, what do you think explains Pittsburgh's stable core in spite of the sprawl + stagnant regional population situation there?

Pittsburgh is unique in which it's much smaller land-area-wise than Chicago or Detroit and yet, due to topography, the core had to maintain in order to keep white-collar workers employed. There aren't that many secondary office nodes outside of Pittsburgh city (I can really only think of Cranberry, Southpointe, and Greentree) like there are in Detroit so downtown Pittsburgh is basically forced to beef-up due to lack of available flat land. I'd venture if Pittsburgh was in a flatter area, the very thing that emptied Detroit (sprawl + lack-of-immigration) would've emptied Pittsburgh as well.

Plus, let's be honest, Pittsburgh doesn't have the historic black population that Detroit, Cleveland, or Chicago had so that whole "redlining/racism" thing that drove white folks out to Livonia wasn't as prominent there, even though The Hill, West End, etc were still devastated. Pittsburgh got to keep majority-white neighborhoods intact until, well, still today.

[Wigs]

ColDayMan, what was done to the Hill District in Pittsburgh is terrible. At one time probably one of the most thriving inner city Black communities in the United States...then got destroyed in part to build the Penguins former "igloo" arena, and "urban renewal" that still hasn't filled in.

Just using Google Earth one area is over 27 acres of prime real estate that was intact neighborhoods now languishing as parking lots for the newer arena.

I don't know much about the West End but watched a mini doc about The Hill district during Covid.

[ColDayMan]

Yeah, The Hill's destruction is nuts.


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...ld-back-better

[Wigs]

That before and after gif is something else! Ugh

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Steely, weren't you the forumer that pointed out that Black flight was starting to really affect the Rust Belt cities in the past couple of decades, yet somehow Buffalo didn't suffer the same fate?

Yes, Buffalo was certainly quite the trend-bucking outlier in this group last decade

select legacy cities by % loss of NH-blacks from 2010 - 2020:

st. louis: -17.5%
detroit: -15.9%
cleveland: -15.1%
baltimore: -14.6%
pittsburgh: -13.4%
chicago: -9.7%
milwaukee: -6.5%
DC: -6.3%
cincinnati: -5.7%
philly: -4.7%
new york: -4.5%
rochester: -3.5%
buffalo: +1.5%


But maybe benp's hunch is correct and black African immigrants are offsetting African American losses to the the burbs in Buffalo?




In any event, going back to Detroit and Chicago, here are some numbers from last decade showing how Chicago was able to outgrow its population loss due to black flight, while the math is just not there yet for Detroit.


city of chicago 2010 - 2020:

NH black: -84,735
NH white: +8,905
NH asian: +44,926
NH other: +41,038
hispanic: +40,656

net: +50,790

(if you take away the black flight number, the others add up to a +135,525)




city of detroit 2010 - 2020:

NH black: -93,361
NH white: +5,166
NH asian: +2,678
NH other: +8,261
hispanic: +2,590

net: -74,666

(if you take away the black flight number, the others add up to a +21,790)


I have to believe that there's more to it than simply "trains".

[Wigs]

I trust benp as he's the one SSP forumer that has vastly more knowledge and history of the city of Buffalo than even my nerd brain possesses.

Any losses in the city of Buffalo have been offset by South Asians particularly Bengladeshis (many moving from NYC) buying and fixing up a lot of the derelict houses in Buffalo's former Polonia section within say a 1-1.5 mile radius of the large Broadway market. Converting old Catholic churches into Mosques and establishing new businesses, including opening small grocery stores in previous "food deserts", in a part of the city most wrote off years ago as "left for dead".


https://maps.app.goo.gl/DEZUPNFReVhd3PDU9

Another grocery just opened 2 weeks ago in a defunct Dollar Tree location of 14,000 sq ft.
Grocery stores replacing dollar stores is a net win for the local area.
2 min clip that won't link directly on SSP
https://youtu.be/QITHQiax0R0?si=hw7WP8uXIZcneZVb

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

In any event, going back to Detroit and Chicago, here are some numbers from last decade showing how Chicago was able to outgrow its population loss due to black flight, while the math is just not there yet for Detroit.


city of chicago 2010 - 2020:

NH black: -84,735
NH white: +8,905
NH asian: +44,926
NH other: +41,038
hispanic: +40,656

net: +50,790

(if you take away the black flight number, the others add up to a +135,525)




city of detroit 2010 - 2020:

NH black: -93,361
NH white: +5,166
NH asian: +2,678
NH other: +8,261
hispanic: +2,590

net: -74,666

(if you take away the black flight number, the others add up to a +21,790)


I have to believe that there's more to it than simply "trains".

What do you think is attracting the non-Black ethnic groups to Chicago?

[Wigs]

Chicago truly seems to be the best value for money in America. Biggest city where one can lead a good, metropolitan "big city" life for a fraction of the cost of NY, LA, SF, many other Metros.

I wonder how much of Chicago's loss is Black Boomers and youngest of Silent Generation dying off in large numbers and not being replaced due to much smaller households than previous generations, and how much is flight to suburbs, or leaving Chicagoland altogether for the South/SW.

[SIGSEGV]

Pittsburgh also has several major research unversities within city limits, which Detroit doesn't really have.

[Crawford]

Even Cleveland has Case, which, while under the radar, is a fairly prestigious major research institution.

Granted, I don't think that's a primary issue with Detroit, but it doesn't help.