  Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 651 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 68.61.194.237 |
Why is it necessary to develope housing on a nice, and utilized golf course. I think there are plenty of options available for developing without destroying this one. http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2006606140403 | ||
Toolbox Member Username: Toolbox Post Number: 927 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.184.29.148 |
Wondered when this was going to pop up. The nirghbors in The Woods will be pissed. | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6120 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
But the City managers should be thrilled. 120 acres are now going to be taxable. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1886 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
Who cares if they are pissed, if they want to save the golf course outbid the developer. Cities should not own golf courses. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1508 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.51 |
Golf courses all over the Metro area are being developed into housing. It seems that they've been over-built in SE Michigan and, combined with the bad economy, that leads to a natural lack of demand. What's wrong with a city owning a golf course? Lots of municipalities all over the country own golf courses. If anything, it's a good opportunity for city kids to learn a sport that is a fantastic business networking tool. Anyone who's anyone in the business world golfs and uses golf to network. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1887 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
And most municipalities are losing money. i don't want my tax dollars going towards golf courses. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 868 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 209.104.146.146 |
This plan is myopic. It may be a good deal in terms of cash today, but the city loses a recreation facility forever. Should the city own golf courses? Perhaps. Public recreation is something the people of a community need to consider, particularly in developed areas with limited greenspace. If a city chooses to own a golf course, there's nothing wrong with that at all. We get mad when they close rec centers, why not golf courses? | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 67 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
How about your money going to parks? Wow, I am surprised at how some people will give up their green spaces. When a golf course pays for itself, tax payers do not have to pay anything. I do not believe that Rackham is loosing money at all however the article mentions revenues are down. This is a short term solution to help Kilpatrick save his own A$$ with regards to the impending deficit. | ||
Rrl Member Username: Rrl Post Number: 526 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.181.212.60 |
This smells for several reasons: 1) No bid. What kind of moron sells anything without taking it to market for the highest bidder. 2) I agree w/ 1953; plan is very short sighted and the City loses a recreation facility forever. What's next; selling Belle Isle? You may scoff, but what's prohibiting Kwame from doing the same? 3) Pissing off another City benefactor's family. Never bite the hands that feed you. While the Rackham family may not be donating or contributing to the City any longer, do you think any future benefactor will think twice about future donations to the City when they see what schitty stewards the City is of previous endowments? Bad idea, all the way around. | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 341 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.41.145.5 |
Maybe when Horace and Mary gave the land to the city to be used for a golf course there was a stipulation that it had to remain a golf course unless a future administration needed the money because of an out of control budget? I'm interested to hear what the Rackham heirs have to say about this. If I were part of the Rackham family I'd tell the City to go to hell. If the money were to be for another philanthropic endeavor, maybe, but to just put a bandage on a budget problem? | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 744 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 65.221.183.120 |
This is a terrible idea for the City and for Huntington Woods. The sale price is nothing in relation to giving up all the things that make a City a desirable place to live. For Huntington Woods, although tax revenue would go up, it would ruin the charm of the City | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 68 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
Good point Rrl "3) Pissing off another City benefactor's family. Never bite the hands that feed you. While the Rackham family may not be donating or contributing to the City any longer, do you think any future benefactor will think twice about future donations to the City when they see what schitty stewards the City is of previous endowments?" | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 70 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
The best part about this story is that people who live on the golf course currently own homes that are worth $400,000 and up. Some people have added additions to their home that cost around that much. If the golf course land can hold 200 homes that fetch a minimum of $400,000 to purchase, there is a great deal of money to be made. I wonder which Kilpatrick family member or friend is part owner of Premium Golf LLC? How long has Premium Golf LLC been around for? Was it recently created for the sole purpose of purchasing this course? The people of Detroit are getting ripped off once again. The people you elected to work for you are looking out for your best interest as always. Wake up people! | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1888 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
Rackham golf course does nothing for the city. It isn't even in the city. Comparing the golf course to a rec center might be the dumbest thing I ever heard. Most rec center are located in neighborhoods and don't cost $50 to play. Also who cares what impact this has on Huntington Woods. If removing the course hurts the city then Huntington Woods should talk to the city and buy it. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 872 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 209.104.146.146 |
Why can't a city have recreation land outside of its boundaries? The idea of a city is that its mostly developed - otherwise it wouldn't be called a city. To maintain recreation facilities outside of the municipal boundaries is common to many large cities. I know we want everyone to live in walkable communities, but that doesn't negate the ability of people to travel to greenspaces outside of the city limits. And how can you say it does nothing for the city? The man pictured in the freep article was a Detroit resident. I bet he thinks it does something for the city. | ||
Hornwrecker Member Username: Hornwrecker Post Number: 1241 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 63.41.40.250 |
Looks like the Diversified Property Group LLC sets up a new LLC for each project, they also like to litigate a lot, according to few searches. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1108 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226 |
"...Lots of municipalities all over the country own golf courses. If anything, it's a good opportunity for city kids to learn a sport that is a fantastic business networking tool..." Yes, it's great for networking/schmoozing, but you're mistaken on one important point. Golf is not a sport. It takes no athleticism to play golf. It's a game; a recreational activity that involves skill and coordination. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 654 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 68.61.194.237 |
Golf is a sport, but being a golfer doesn't make you an athlete. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1109 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226 |
It takes no athletic ability to play golf. It takes learned skills. It is recreational, like shuffleboard, roller skating, lawn darts, croquet, and horseshoes. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 438 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.24.54 |
4th. ed. of American Heritage Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin, 2000 The first definition of "sport:" "Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively." Golf sure sounds like a sport to me. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 655 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 68.61.194.237 |
It definately does take athletic ability. A golf swing forces a person to use musles you never knew existed on the sides of your torso (especially when you over swing). It's a combination of skill, and strength. When Tiger Woods revamped his swing, he had to put on more muscle. | ||
Rrl Member Username: Rrl Post Number: 529 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.181.212.60 |
This fella is rolling over in his sub-six box:  One small part of his gift to the City:  | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1111 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.222.11.226 |
We'll agree to disagree, Tetsua. I think golf barely qualifies as "physical activity." | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 439 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.24.54 |
Fury13 wrote, "It takes no athletic ability to play golf." OK, back to my American Heritage dictionary. First definition of "athletics:" "Activities, such as sports, exercises, and games, that require physical skill and stamina." You sure as hell require physical skill to be able to execute a successful golf swing, and you need stamina to be able to do it multiple times. Ask my grandfather. He no longer has the ability or stamina to swing a golf club repeatedly. | ||
Ron Member Username: Ron Post Number: 178 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.174.93.104 |
Searched for: PREMIUM GOLF LLC ID Num: D0188U Name:PREMIUM GOLF LLC Type: Resident Agent: RYAN ROSETT Registered Office Address: 28800 ORCHARD LAKE ROAD SUITE 200 FARMINGTON HILLS MI 48334 Mailing/Office Address: Formation/Qualification Date:3-31-2006 Jurisdiction of Origin:MICHIGAN Managed by: Members Status: ACTIVE Date: Present From the state Labor and Economic Growth website. The only issue I have with this is that it is a no-bid contract. How were these developers chosen? Other than that, it doesn't necessarily sound like a bad deal, particularly with the deed restrictions. It will be very expensive to litigate this issue. The loss of a golf course for the city is tragic, however, I would rather lose a golf course rather than more police officers. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 27 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 63.102.87.27 |
Have you ever played at Rackham? It sucks. I hope they put houses there. I'd love to buy one. It's a perfectly central location, yet would have new homes, unlike the old oudated homes of R.O., Pleasant Ridge and Ferndale. I had to move to Rochester hills from PR to get a new construction home, yet I'd rather live central--right where that dumpy golf course is. | ||
Wally Member Username: Wally Post Number: 240 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 136.1.1.101 |
Do us a favor and stay in Rochester Hills in your flimsy drywall and vinyl sided new construction home. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 29 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 63.102.87.27 |
My house is brick and my drywall doesn't crack like the plaster in my previous Pleasant Ridge house did. Never again with the old junky homes. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 257 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254 |
Sounds like you messed up and bought a junky home, what does that have to do with anything? | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1510 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.34 |
So back to the topic of the thread... With the restrictive covenant on the golf course property, the homeowners living in these $400,000 homes will likely file a partial taking claim if a development happens there. Folks who can afford that sort of home likely have the means and methods to figure out how to do this. I can't imagine the mess that this would create if dozens and dozens of people filed partial takings claims against the CoD and the developer. This thing will be mired in the courts and financial limbo for years. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 1913 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 129.9.163.233 |
Also, No title insurance company in the world would handle a house built on land that had that restrictive a covenant. No title insurance = no mortgage = no new homes. The minute you put a house on any of that land the Rackham heirs would be entitled to that plot of land back. I can't see any court in the land overturning that perfectly legal covenant. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 83 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 141.209.33.145 |
I'm not a golfer, but doesn't the city also own a course on Belle Isle? | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1023 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 205.153.103.15 |
Why do we need more homes? Regardless of how you feel about the course, golf, the city, blah blah? There should be enough housing stock as is. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 30 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 63.102.87.27 |
More homes are needed because the population grows every year. More people means more homes, Holmes. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2301 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.143 |
I agree Ndavies.... I remember reading an article in the Freep about 10 years ago about the Zoo and Rackham next door. The reporter mentioned that the deed restriction says that if the property ceased to be a golf course, then the land reverted back to the Rackham family. Don't know the details or the whole truth, but that is what the Freep reporter stated. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1890 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
The city owns a few golf courses I think 5 in total that are run by American Golf (I think that is the company). | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 260 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 209.220.229.254 |
It does? Enough that all the empty and for-sale homes right around the corner are already spoken for? I don't think so. (Message edited by focusonthed on June 14, 2006) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2302 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.143 |
Spacemonkey, I take exception to your hasty generalization of old houses.... come back in a hundred years and I bet those old houses will still be around, while many of the new ones will not. The craftmanship and quality materials are just not there anymore in todays McMansions. My 50 year old house has a wonderfully curved cove ceiling in the living room.... try getting a cove ceiling out of drywall!! And oh yes those new windows with the "faux" mullions or panes. I've seen even new Palladian windows with those fake window panes.... looks very cheap and flimsy! But I guess if that is what you like... so be it... | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1511 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.33 |
Spacemonkey, The problem is that the population of SE Michigan is not really growing. This is why sprawl is such a problem in SE Michigan. And Jerome 81 is right, there is enough housing stock in Metro Detroit as it is. Huntington Woods, no matter the outrage of the folks living near the golf course, will likely salivate at this deal. Tax revenue is flat or declining in nearly every built out city in MI. The only way to grow tax revenues these days is to built new construction or significantly renovate existing buildings. But, alas we have some significant legal hurdles as laid out by Ndavies and myself. (Message edited by BVos on June 14, 2006) | ||
Susanarosa Member Username: Susanarosa Post Number: 899 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 208.39.170.90 |
Huntington Woods... you're on the wrong side of town there Bvos. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 156 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 68.62.6.147 |
"Rackham golf course does nothing for the city. It isn't even in the city." Couldn't the same have been said about the Zoo? The city was very protective of turning that "asset" over. I like to see the bumbling idiots who work for the city try to work around the deed restriction. If the city wants to get anything out of that property they are going to need to find a way to make it a more profitable golf course, and it is profitable. Rackham gets 60,000+ rounds a year. Sun up to sundown in season. What would be great is for the Rackhams estate to take it over and sell it to Huntington Woods for $1 with the same restrictions as a big F.U. to Detroit. | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 745 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 65.221.183.220 |
Having played Rackham 50 times or so, I would say it is definitely heavily used by Detroit residents and the golfers of the City certainly would miss it. I think virtually every person I have ever been paired with at Rackham was a City resident. Golf courses, parks, pools, beaches, zoos, museums, etc are what make a major city attractive to live in. The City really needs to think this one through, maybe there are alternatives like the Zoo where they could maintain ownership. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3794 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.209.184.151 |
I must admit I've never played Rackham so I can't speak to the condition of the course, but Rackham is a Donald Ross design and that should count for something. Ross was premiere golf course architect of the early 20th century. As I golfer, I can't say it thrills me to see a Ross course turned into a cul-de-sac. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1891 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
I think some people are confused about what a city needs vs. what a city should own and operate. City Needs: Golf courses, parks, pools, beaches, zoos, museums City services: police, fire, trash collection, good roads | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1892 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
Donald must of had a bad day when he designed Rackham. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 71 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
Huntington Woods is one of the most desireable cities to live in with respect to South East Michigan. Homes do not stay on the market long at all and if you ride through the neighborhoods there are a lot of home renovations happening, kind of like Birmingham. I have not heard that the city is looking at adding housing to increase tax revenue. The only people who want to build homes there are the ones who do not currently live in Huntington Woods. | ||
Eastsidedog Member Username: Eastsidedog Post Number: 539 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.20.140.8 |
Rackham Estates here we come... | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 709 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 68.42.133.85 |
Huntington Woods is a neat town, but it would sure be great with a small commercial mainstreet where you could get coffee, groceries, maybe a cafe or a bookstore. I wonder if as part of the redevelopment of the golf course this could be put into place. On the bright side, this isn't sprawl. It's infill housing in an 80 year old community near the geographic core of the region. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1024 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.142.86.133 |
Now, if the city of detroit owns this land (do I have this correct?), and sells it for development, then does Detroit get the tax revenue from the homes or Huntington Woods, even though the golf course is technically in HW? | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 343 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.41.145.5 |
I can't help but think that with Horace Rackham being a lawyer and having a lot of money to hire the best lawyers to handle the gift to the city that the restrictions would be iron clad and almost impossible to get around. I just wonder if this is nothing more than a public relations move by Kwame. He comes across as making an effort to try to find ways to balance the budget knowing that this can't go through because of the restictions on the deed. Plus the Rackham heirs could be painted as people standing in the way of Kwame's efforts to keep more police on the streets. You already have the city/suburban animosity which could play to his advantage on this issue. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1517 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.40 |
Huntington Woods gets the tax revenue since the land is in HW. The only thing Detroit gets out of this is $5 million plus possible percentages from homes being built. So KK grandstands and proposes something that couldn't be done in the first place and he uses it as a wedge issue to play suburbs off of the city. It would take a sick and desparate man to use this tactic. Hopefully he's not that desparate. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1895 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
I think people are looking for something that isn't there. A developer approached the city about possibly purchasing the golf course. The mayor liked what he heard so there is a good chance that a deal might be made. I don't think this is a KK plot to screw people over. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2311 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.225 |
That begs the question Bvos.... why would he want to do something to provoke the suburbs?? It's not an election year.... I don't think Detroit/Suburb animosity has anything to do with this issue. He's just trying to get some money to balance the budget. And what good would it do for KK to make Detroit philanthropists look bad?? Can't think of a better way to dry up philanthropic money than something dumb like that... | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 344 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.41.145.5 |
"And what good would it do for KK to make Detroit philanthropists look bad?? Can't think of a better way to dry up philanthropic money than something dumb like that..." Dumb like what? Taking a gift to the city, that according to reports is suppose to be used only for a golf course and using it to help with a 60 million dollar deficit? I wonder how much Kwame could get for Rodin's "The Thinker" (another gift from Horace and Mary)? I'm sure the Toledo and Cleveland museums among others would pay a good chunk of change for that. That deficit will be down to nothing before we know it. My point about the animosity between the city and suburbs comes more from the city side than it does the suburbs. It's a lot easier the Kwame to sell off a golf course in the suburbs than it would for him to sell off the Palmer Park Golf Course. I doubt that there are all that many suburbanites upset about this golf course other than the people living close by it. As many have stated there are just as many Detroiters who use Rackham as suburbanites, at least that's been my experience when I have golfed there. I do golf at Rackham occasionally, but it will be no great disappointment on my part if it ceases to exist. A great course it's not. Having said that I think I'll be golfing at Rackham for many years to come. If this even goes forward this will be tied up in the courts for years and my guess it that the city will give up on it. (Message edited by rjk on June 15, 2006) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2316 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.225 |
No, Rjk.... what I said was dumb was.... if KK makes the Rackhams out to be the bad guys... period. First we have the touchy situation with the Ford Auditorium and the Ford family. And now the potential situation with the Rackham family. If KK makes philanthropists out to be the bad guys, then THAT IS WHAT IS DUMB. I can't think of a better way to dry up (non-foundation) philanthropic money than to make the philanthropists appear to be the bad guys. If I were rich and was thinking about giving a large donation, I would certainly be watching this unfold. And after the rejected $200 million donation from the Thomson family for charter schools, as well as the Ford Auditorium situation, the Rackham situation would probably be the proverbial icing on the cake, as far as future philanthropy goes. Let's just hope KK makes some wise decisions.... | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4293 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Tetsua, Back in the 1950s there was a housing development on former Ridgemont Golf Course on 8 Mile Rd. Between Gratiot and Kelly at Eastpointe fomally called (East Detroit). Lot's of full line of brick covered cookie cutter 3 bedroom houses built for WHITES ONLY middle class families who want to escape to the inner city problems of Detroit and to keep blacks and other ethnic minorites out. The neighorhood is predominately white middles class with housing restrictions and codes kept in place to reduce " illegal renting" to other families until HUD said " YOU MUST SELL OR RENT YOUR HOMES TO ANY RACE!" Black-folks mostly from Detroit started to moved over there in the late 1980s due to good schools, retails and mingle with the white folks. Today you can find about 5 to 10 middle class black family per block in southern portion of Eastpointe from Toepfer to 8 Mile and Gratiot to Beaconsfield St. near the St. Clair Shores border. They will continue to moved over there and occupy most the homes for the near future as property values decreases. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1520 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.40 |
But at what point does philanthropy get in the way of what a city's current needs are? I think Ford Auditorium is a very good example of a very nice gift that is not needed at this time. If the Ford family was honest with themselves they'd say that it was a very nice gift when it was built, but it's now outlived its usefullness and it's time to move on to things that will further the city, the reason that the money was given for Ford Auditorium in the first place. However there is a big difference here. Ford Auditorium is standing in the way of some amazing progress on the riverfront. The golf course is fine the way it is, it's just a financial liability for the city and not in an area that most folks in the city have a great deal of connection to. | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 345 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.41.145.5 |
Gistok, I understand now. Looking back at my point, and maybe it wasn't clear, was that Detroiters could look at KK as someone who attempted to do something to address the deficit and outsiders prevented it from going through. Whether Detroiters understand the Rackham's Heirs point or want to paint them as people standing in the cities way is up to their own interpetation, hence my choice of the words, "could be painted as people standing in Kwame's way." When you have an attorney saying that a judge may have to appoint an attorney to protect the interest of the unborn heirs of H & M Rackham I see the city fighting a losing battle or at least one that may not be worth fighting. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 32 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 63.102.87.27 |
These homes will sell for close to a million a piece, no doubt. Centrally located, in Huntington Woods with one of the best school systems around, and all the modern conveniences of new construction, like walk-in closets, a spacious kitchen and a first floor laundry. They'll easily go for near a million. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 443 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.24.187 |
The important issue here is that selling a golf course does not address the real reason there's always a budget deficit: there are too many employees on the city payroll. Since Kwame can't or won't take on the unions, irreplaceable things of value to the city will be sold off piecemeal. A similar situation is happening in Lansing, with Mayor Virg Bernero wanting to sell off golf courses instead of making payroll cuts. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1900 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
KK is willing to take on the unions it is the CC that won't. | ||
56packman Member Username: 56packman Post Number: 370 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 129.9.163.234 |
Spacemonkey: and the TAXES will be a million/year too. H-W has some high taxes, only 20 or so businesses, the rest is paid by residences. Whats that noise?........................ ....... It's Horace Rackham, clocking about 5,700 RPM in his grave. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 33 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 63.102.87.27 |
Detroit is Rackham Roll City! | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1536 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.50 |
Breaking News: Huntington Woods proposes buying the Rackham golf course: http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20060615/UPDAT E/606150468 | ||
Rrl Member Username: Rrl Post Number: 531 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.181.212.60 |
Nice. Good to see that some communities value their green spaces. Provided there isn't some pre-existing purchase agreement between the developers & CoD that would create a legal mess, this seems like a win-win for everybody. Maybe Mr. Rackham can RIP once again. | ||
Morena Member Username: Morena Post Number: 429 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 216.45.5.114 |
The City is actually considering selling city property to white guys? WOW! Wait, doesn't Council have to approve the sale? Why isn't Art Blackwell in on this deal? Wait, why isn't Freman in on this deal? Isn't he a golf course type investor? As Detroit turns ... | ||
Fishtoes2000 Member Username: Fishtoes2000 Post Number: 103 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 69.14.26.135 |
Whether Rackham is spinning in his grave or not may depend on how you view his intent. Was it a gift to the public with Detroit as the steward? If so, requiring the public (Huntington Woods) to purchase this donated gift for a large sum is not a win-win. The golf course is not a financial liability. "Rackham generates about $100,000 a year for Detroit," according to a Detroit News article. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060616/M ETRO/606160365/1003 I understand Detroit's dire budget situation, but one-time sales of capital assets is not a sustainable solution. | ||
Rjk Member Username: Rjk Post Number: 348 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.41.145.5 |
"If so, requiring the public (Huntington Woods) to purchase this donated gift for a large sum is not a win-win." Agree. If I'm a citizen of HW I want the city attorneys to make damn sure that Detroit even has the right to sell the property before they ask the citizens to cough up the cash for it. I keep reading "If the city can get around the deed restriction." The whole idea of selling land that was gifted to the city on the stipulationn that it remain a golf course just doesn't sit well with me. If the Rackham heirs tried to get around the deed and have the land given to them so they could sell it I'm sure people would be madder than hell. As the article states, it is a money maker, so it's not a drain on the city of Detroit. I'm still waiting for comments from the Rackham heirs. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1940 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.150.244 |
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2006606220411 | ||
Paulmcall Member Username: Paulmcall Post Number: 735 Registered: 05-2004 Posted From: 68.40.119.216 |
Looks like the Rackham family heirs are willing to sell if the price is right. Nice. Seems like everyone wants to make money out of a public trust site. Old man Rackham must be spinning in his grave while Kwame, Rackham's heirs and every developer in town are licking their chops hoping to get a piece of the action. They still have plenty of affordable land in Detroit proper you know. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1655 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 75.9.243.171 |
Since Detroit owns the golf course, any way that any homes built on this site would have a Detroit address. Wouldn't that be great to have an enclave of Detroit in Oakland County? Boy, I can see L. Brooks turning redder than a radish. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1044 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.12.116.204 |
A lot of cities are favoring golf courses being turned into housing, because it creates more tax revenue for the municipality where it is. Although this seems somewhat stupid since the economy of MI is in such bad shape. The next course to go will be Maple Lane in Sterling Heights. They were out there doing GPS surveying today. | ||
Wilus1mj Member Username: Wilus1mj Post Number: 81 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 67.149.62.53 |
Huntington Woods would have to approve any housing on the land, which I doubt they will do. I see it staying as a golf course, owned by H. Woods or a private company. | ||
Thecarl Member Username: Thecarl Post Number: 803 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 69.14.30.175 |
royce, it doesn't work that way. let's say that the city of los angeles bought a parcel of land in huntington woods. that doesn't mean the addresses would become l.a. addresses, nor would taxes be collected by l.a., or l.a. cops patrol the streets. nonetheless, feel free to pleasure yourself over l. brooks' complexion. | ||
Metrodetguy Member Username: Metrodetguy Post Number: 2654 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 70.228.57.202 |
Spacemonkey, 1. Huntington Woods residents are in the Berkley School District, hardly "one of the best school districts around". 2. The (proposed) homes won't go for anywhere near "a million dollars each". To many others on this thread, are you really that naive to believe that Kilpatrick's last minute, no-bid deal doesn't involve friends and family as investors and their primary motivation is not about the city budget. | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1026 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 64.142.86.133 |
A one time sale of a golf course is trading all that green space and recreation of the past and future for a quick, one time hit to help balance the budget. And its not even a money loser. Its just that for this 1 time they can get a $5 million lump sum. Seems like a dumb idea to me. Something like that will be lost forever. Work on the cost side. Detroit doesn't have enough assets to sell itself into profitability.... | ||
Sardonicus Member Username: Sardonicus Post Number: 1 Registered: 08-2005 Posted From: 69.14.182.152 |
I sure hope you are right Wilus1mj. Since I moved to Ferndale, I golf this course 2 or 3 times a month and would be pissed to lose this asset. As far as looking at this as a city/suburb battle I prefer to see it as a loss for Metro Detroit. Most golf courses in Metro Detroit south of 20 Mile Road are being developed and pushing golf as an option further and further out. I want to stay in or close to the core city and have a great variety of options that big cities should have. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 3474 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.209.176.251 |
Danny, I lived in that area you talked about in Eastpointe. Great memories! | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1660 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 75.9.243.171 |
Never would I believe that golf courses would fall out of vogue. Every new development listed in the "Real Estate" section of the Sunday paper advertizes access to or proximity to a golf course. I guess the excitement over trying to be like Tiger Woods. Also, I guess old cities like Huntington Woods don't garner the appeal to want to move to in order to be near a golf course. What strange times we live in. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2347 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.105.98 |
I want to preserve the Golf Course for a different reason. In case metro Detroit gets booming again, and some philanthropists decide to kick in some big bucks to do a zoo expansion (so that we can get some elephants back!). Can't it if there's no land available.... | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 490 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.22.202 |
Rackham Golf Course closer to going condo The developer who wants to buy the Rackham Golf Course from the city of Detroit has upped its cash offer and today told the City Council they had reached a monetary settlement with two of the Rackham heirs that would pave the way for the course to be turned into a housing development. http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20060626/NEW S99/60626009 | ||
Mjb3 Member Username: Mjb3 Post Number: 99 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 24.145.154.7 |
With talk of selling another CoD asset(DeHoCo site in Plymouth, now Rackham) I wonder why they have to keep having these "garage sales." It seems obvious to me that the city cannot continue to go on until it gets it's budget into a sustainable direction. I have no problem with privatization. But it seems KK is only looking at these garage sales instead of making tough decisions(cutting city payroll by 5k-7k employees, cutting taxes) which will "right-size" the city and allow it to actually add population. I'm now convinced that only recievership may force these tough decisions. And Granholm may desperately need "blue" votes; don't count on it this yr. Sorry to hijack this thread, but the Detroit receivership thread is gone... |
