Does this bear a striking resemblance to the situation in Cleveland? Detroit lost 25% of their population between 2000 and 2010. Going from a city of 900,000 to 713,000. Cleveland only lost 17% of their population in the last 10 years. However both are historic. Detroit had the auto industry, while Cleveland had the steel industry. Both industries had good paying jobs that required minimal education.
Both face issues of abandonment and vacancies. Neither have the tax base or the resources to combat this issue. So what do you think, can either city be brought back?
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_18/b4226096954910.htm
I found this a little while back and had been waiting for an appropriate time to share it, but the first map shows the Detroit metro area's population gains and losses by census tract, which is basically a neighborhood sized unit. What's really interesting is that right downtown, there was actually pretty strong population growth, despite all the bad new coming out of Detroit even before the meltdown.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fastcodesign.com/1663580/are-new-suburbs-vampirizing-urban-centers-not-quite-according-to-these-maps
I think a lot of the talk about restoring Detroit is foolish, the goal should be to stabilize it, or probably even better, to manage its decline. As that map points out, the metro area isn't entirely weak and could probably stabilize somewhere near its current population.
Detroit proper no longer has the clout or the money to act as a proper central city though, and rethinking that relationship is where the challenge lies. If crime could be gotten under control, there are areas of Detroit that could be really promising sites of reverse-sprawl development. Due to the high vacancy, they are essentially greenfields, but with the added benefit of existing infrastructure and central location. I see that as largely relocation within the metro area over the next 30 years though, rather than new growth in the short or long term.
I'm mostly just here to support Adam's comment. I really like what he said, Detroit just needs to reconsider and adjust to what it is now and not take all the blame for what it once was and what it has degraded to.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the maps on that link had great imagery. It's nice to be able to see changes in order to better understand them.
I"m glad to see that the new mayor has a realistic view of Detroit and seems to have some good idea on how to move forward. I also agree fully with the above comments.
ReplyDeleteThis article reminded me a lot of what we talked about in class on Tuesday, and trying to figure out which neighborhoods funding should go towards. It's important to put the money in places where you see a higher return, but the most troubled areas shouldn't be ignored either.
I agree and have to say "Imported from Detroit"
ReplyDeleteInteresting article. I agree with the comments above, and think they have covered everything pretty well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Liz on the positive feelings towards the mayor and his realistic views. I am also glad to a see mayor with such Detroit roots. (Everyone in Detroit loves the Piston!) I think its great he is dealing with the size problem in Detroit. The city just does not have the population to support the space anymore and leaving building vacant is the worst possible thing for the image of Detroit. Also, the articles makes a strong comment about the auto industry providing jobs for people with little education, this is what brought people to the city. Now the city left with those same out of work people of our changing economy. We are all waiting for a come back, and it nice to see problems addressed in a realistic matter.
ReplyDeleteDon't even bother. It's not going to work. People need to help themselves. No matter how good the Mayor, it's all about the people. They need to wake up and start making changes in the community. I like what the Mayor is going to do, but then again, we can't force people...
ReplyDelete