Hipster Duck
Senior Member
So is Detroit losing population even faster than it was a year or two ago, or is this just hyped up by the media in the wake of all the reporting on the ailing auto industry?
|
|
|
Detroit: For Sale in Bulk
- Thread starter CDL.TO
- Start date
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,463
- Reaction score
- 9,255
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
I bet it is. Notice that many of the houses there were abandoned quite recently.
Also note this is at Woodward and 7 Mile, only a mile from Oakland County and housing stock not as old as that in what used to be the most hard-hit areas on the south east side and mid west side. This is 1920s/1930s stock.
Also note this is at Woodward and 7 Mile, only a mile from Oakland County and housing stock not as old as that in what used to be the most hard-hit areas on the south east side and mid west side. This is 1920s/1930s stock.
L
livdb
Guest
It still find it unreal that some major american cities that were thriving 3 years ago are literally turning into ghost towns. Detroit has been in trouble much longer than that but all this talk of $1 houses is incredible. 6 months ago a friend told me he almost bought a brand new house in Vegas through auction for under $50,000... for a new 3bedroom house!
You cant get a 600sf condo in downtown toronto for under $200K.
You cant get a 600sf condo in downtown toronto for under $200K.
lordmandeep
Banned
Cars are cheap as well in the States.
You can get a massive Suv for under 20k.
You can get a massive Suv for under 20k.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Do these $1 deals come with a sneaky "must pay 37 years of back property taxes" clause?
I guess they've moved from LA to Vegas to Boise or wherever...only a matter of time before a society based on the consumption of suburban housing moseys on back to Detroit's urban prairie (I think metropolitan Atlanta will reach south Michigan by then). The only question is whether or not any houses will be left standing. Is the land any good for farming?
I guess they've moved from LA to Vegas to Boise or wherever...only a matter of time before a society based on the consumption of suburban housing moseys on back to Detroit's urban prairie (I think metropolitan Atlanta will reach south Michigan by then). The only question is whether or not any houses will be left standing. Is the land any good for farming?
adma
Superstar
http://americancity.org/daily/entry/1569/
Columnists
Contemplating Another Path for Detroit’s Historic Assets
Francis Grunow | Tue, Apr 28th, 2009
It’s been said there are more demolition companies per capita in Detroit than anywhere else in America. That may be true, but some Detroiters would no doubt prefer if the percentage were even greater, especially if it meant not having to look at the latest fire-ravaged wreck next door or across the street.
Although building demolition occurs at a much faster clip than construction, it’s impossible to keep pace with the flotsam and jetsam of a city that loses one thousand people every month. The shells of burnt-out bungalows can plague neighborhoods for years, while the city’s toxic mix of economic paralysis and bureaucratic apathy mires good-faith efforts at neighborhood stabilization and the desire to distinguish between structures that should and can’t be saved. Indeed, there is a growing consensus that Detroit’s scattershot approach to redevelopment is beyond broken and in dire need of a major overhaul, particularly when considering the core city’s historic resources.
In recent weeks, this disconnect surfaced again as officials grappled with the fates of two vacant landmark structures near the city center. Neither the Lafayette Building, a 14-story office building from the 1920s, nor the iconic Michigan Central Station, designed by the same firm that built Grand Central in New York, bears any resemblance to a devastated foursquare, vacant or otherwise. The thing is, significant historic structures like the Lafayette building and Michigan Central Station are often dumped in the same bucket as any other vacant buildings and do not benefit from a comprehensive redevelopment strategy to get them back online. The result is the continued erosion of downtown Detroit’s world-class stock of pre-World War II urban fabric, despite the fact that there have been more successful rehab projects in the central business district during the last five years than in the last five decades.
The most frustrating thing for urbanists is that there is so little rhyme or reason to how the city disposes of these buildings. With no plan for replacement, the creeping creation of vacant lots in the name of “much needed†parking or blight removal is insidious. Since 1998, the city has spent at least $50 million to demolish well over two million square feet of Detroit heritage.
To the surprise of many, Detroit’s interim mayor Kenneth Cockrel put “on hold†the imminent demolition of the Lafayette Building after receiving numerous calls and letters. He committed to “reconsider†the building and work with the preservation community to see if redevelopment or a strategy of mothballing is feasible. Meanwhile, Detroit’s embattled city council voted earlier this month (with the mayor’s blessing) to use economic stimulus money to demolish Michigan Central and stick the gratuitously negligent billionaire owner, Matty Moroun, with the bill.
In this most important of local election years, where Detroiters will vote for mayor twice as well as for a new council, there is so much at stake. In the handling of the Lafayette and Michigan Central there is huge opportunity for defining another, more progressive way to creatively and sensitively recast the role of Detroit’s historic landmarks. Where better to begin than through the repositioning of the city’s core assets, its undervalued anchors, as the urban basis for revival and long-term regeneration of dear old Detroit?
Francis Grunow is a fallen city planner, former head of Preservation Wayne, Detroit’s local historic preservation organization, and currently making his way through law school.
Columnists
Contemplating Another Path for Detroit’s Historic Assets
Francis Grunow | Tue, Apr 28th, 2009
It’s been said there are more demolition companies per capita in Detroit than anywhere else in America. That may be true, but some Detroiters would no doubt prefer if the percentage were even greater, especially if it meant not having to look at the latest fire-ravaged wreck next door or across the street.
Although building demolition occurs at a much faster clip than construction, it’s impossible to keep pace with the flotsam and jetsam of a city that loses one thousand people every month. The shells of burnt-out bungalows can plague neighborhoods for years, while the city’s toxic mix of economic paralysis and bureaucratic apathy mires good-faith efforts at neighborhood stabilization and the desire to distinguish between structures that should and can’t be saved. Indeed, there is a growing consensus that Detroit’s scattershot approach to redevelopment is beyond broken and in dire need of a major overhaul, particularly when considering the core city’s historic resources.
In recent weeks, this disconnect surfaced again as officials grappled with the fates of two vacant landmark structures near the city center. Neither the Lafayette Building, a 14-story office building from the 1920s, nor the iconic Michigan Central Station, designed by the same firm that built Grand Central in New York, bears any resemblance to a devastated foursquare, vacant or otherwise. The thing is, significant historic structures like the Lafayette building and Michigan Central Station are often dumped in the same bucket as any other vacant buildings and do not benefit from a comprehensive redevelopment strategy to get them back online. The result is the continued erosion of downtown Detroit’s world-class stock of pre-World War II urban fabric, despite the fact that there have been more successful rehab projects in the central business district during the last five years than in the last five decades.
The most frustrating thing for urbanists is that there is so little rhyme or reason to how the city disposes of these buildings. With no plan for replacement, the creeping creation of vacant lots in the name of “much needed†parking or blight removal is insidious. Since 1998, the city has spent at least $50 million to demolish well over two million square feet of Detroit heritage.
To the surprise of many, Detroit’s interim mayor Kenneth Cockrel put “on hold†the imminent demolition of the Lafayette Building after receiving numerous calls and letters. He committed to “reconsider†the building and work with the preservation community to see if redevelopment or a strategy of mothballing is feasible. Meanwhile, Detroit’s embattled city council voted earlier this month (with the mayor’s blessing) to use economic stimulus money to demolish Michigan Central and stick the gratuitously negligent billionaire owner, Matty Moroun, with the bill.
In this most important of local election years, where Detroiters will vote for mayor twice as well as for a new council, there is so much at stake. In the handling of the Lafayette and Michigan Central there is huge opportunity for defining another, more progressive way to creatively and sensitively recast the role of Detroit’s historic landmarks. Where better to begin than through the repositioning of the city’s core assets, its undervalued anchors, as the urban basis for revival and long-term regeneration of dear old Detroit?
Francis Grunow is a fallen city planner, former head of Preservation Wayne, Detroit’s local historic preservation organization, and currently making his way through law school.
syn
Senior Member
Detroit never ceases to amaze me. I'm sure most of the homeless people in Toronto (that don't have a mental disease) collect enough in a week to buy a house or two in Detroit.
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,463
- Reaction score
- 9,255
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
So demolition of MCS is a go? What a damned shame. Glad I got to see it.
I remember earlier plans for it to be police headquarters, a Homeland Security office, a hotel. Damn it.
I remember earlier plans for it to be police headquarters, a Homeland Security office, a hotel. Damn it.
detroitbootybass
Active Member
Not really. They took those steps in hopes of forcing Mr. Maroun (who was my old boss back in the early 90s) to do something with the building. Demolition is only a last resort if no plans are made to restore the train station.
Uncle Teddy
Senior Member
It would be a shame if it wasn't restored.
adma
Superstar
Well, there's some compromise-solution suggestion-mongering that they restore the station proper, but get rid of the tower (not the greatest of its ilk, and who'd want to be a tenant here?).
Personally, I like the tower. It's as no-nonsense as the MC5.
Personally, I like the tower. It's as no-nonsense as the MC5.
detroitbootybass
Active Member
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Yup, Detroit.
Were those photos taken just south of 8 Mile? Kinda looks like it and you say northern boundary of Detroit.
When I was there in 2007, we stayed in Ferndale, just north of 8 Mile in a house that two 18 year olds bought for 10K. I couldn't believe a house could sell for 10K. Up the street from there, new houses were going for 110K at the time.
The people we stayed with couldn't believe the average house price in Toronto.
Detroit's a very sad place. The most poverty I had experienced up to that point in time was either Cuban peasants or our own, Torontonian poverty at its worst. I wasn't ready for Detroit.
Edit: I don't know how I missed it but Woodward and 7 Mile it is. We were just west of Woodward and no more than 100m north of 8 Mile. South of 8 Mile was bleak and actually looked like a post-apocalyptic urbanscape where nature was slowly taking over again.
Were those photos taken just south of 8 Mile? Kinda looks like it and you say northern boundary of Detroit.
When I was there in 2007, we stayed in Ferndale, just north of 8 Mile in a house that two 18 year olds bought for 10K. I couldn't believe a house could sell for 10K. Up the street from there, new houses were going for 110K at the time.
The people we stayed with couldn't believe the average house price in Toronto.
Detroit's a very sad place. The most poverty I had experienced up to that point in time was either Cuban peasants or our own, Torontonian poverty at its worst. I wasn't ready for Detroit.
Edit: I don't know how I missed it but Woodward and 7 Mile it is. We were just west of Woodward and no more than 100m north of 8 Mile. South of 8 Mile was bleak and actually looked like a post-apocalyptic urbanscape where nature was slowly taking over again.
Last edited:
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
There are many reasons why American decay tends to end in residential abandonment (less true in other countries, including Canada) but one of the more interesting and ignored reasons is American municipal tax structure.
In many cities in the US, particularly in the sunbelt, the burden of municipal tax revenues comes from sales taxes localized within the community and not from property taxes. You might have seen this, indirectly, if you read in the news about transit projects being financed in a county somewhere in the US through a 0.5% sales tax hike. Some cities, like Mesa AZ, have no property tax whatsoever. As a result, there is no impetus for landlords to keep up their property or, in extreme cases like Mesa, to even keep them occupied. Instead, the city lavishes subsidies on new retail construction, leading to a surplus inventory of commercial (retail) real estate. For this reason, American cities are dotted not only with abandoned housing but also abandoned storefronts, since the city cares more about collecting tax revenues from sales rather than from the value of the property itself.
It's a screwed-up system, to be sure, and in the rust belt it has basically legitimized sprawl without growth.