  Nere Member Username: Nere Post Number: 53 Registered: 04-2007 |
What's the poorest part of the city in your opinion (based on your perception of its quality of life, etc)? If you had unlimited finances, what would you do to the land? | ||
Crew Member Username: Crew Post Number: 1277 Registered: 02-2004 |
I'd do away with all the car and the bars and the wars and I'd make sweet love to you. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 923 Registered: 10-2003 |
Turn it into a fulfillment center which would make use of our strategic location in the midwest and provide employment for our undereducated locals. This of course would be a brownfield, tax-relief area with right-to-work rules that encourage companies to do business in the area. | ||
Dexterpointing Member Username: Dexterpointing Post Number: 128 Registered: 05-2007 |
that would be the east side, chene, moran, mt. elliot up to the blvd. I would buy out the few residents left, bulldoze whats left and it aint much)and invite manufacturing corporations and computor corps to set up shop here by giving them tax incentives and deals on the land. Then you can concentrate on building up from the freeway past the new manufaturing/computor corps all the way to the core of Downtown and possibly beyond. More jobs, more people, less crime , less racism, more money more love. (Message edited by dexterpointing on June 12, 2007) | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1271 Registered: 04-2006 |
Your premise is based upon the assumption that the poor have no rights to their land. Please think about and restructure your question. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 434 Registered: 12-2006 |
Actually, 'planner, the City Ombudsman under Coleman Young, a wonderfully visionary lady named Marie Farrell-Donaldson (if I'm spelling it right) suggested something similar in the late 1980s. Ms. F-D is no longer with us, unfortunately. Everybody has equal rights to their land, and those rights are limited. If the government has a need to obtain your land they can force you to sell it. Thus, many people (mostly poor) had to sell and move to make way for I-94, I-375 and so on. It would be arguable that DexterP's suggestion is "public purpose" enough to justify that, but I'm not certain it isn't. Anyhow, it's a suggestion; do you have a better one? | ||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 647 Registered: 01-2006 |
Give it to Livonia. | ||
Noggin Member Username: Noggin Post Number: 91 Registered: 09-2004 |
Plow everything over and turn it into farmland. Then the developers would want to build on it. | ||
Haydenth Member Username: Haydenth Post Number: 225 Registered: 05-2005 |
Highland Park. Build a bigger Liquor Store. | ||
Ventura67 Member Username: Ventura67 Post Number: 136 Registered: 12-2003 |
How about a new mega sports stadium? Oh, you said poor, stadiums go into completely viable areas where there are architecturally important buildings with businesses. Silly me! | ||
Chocmalt Member Username: Chocmalt Post Number: 2 Registered: 06-2007 |
A well supervised playground and indoor play area in every neighborhood and a way for children to safely get there and back home. An enormous sandbox, water sprinkling toys for summer, crafts, no TV. A place were they can physically play hard and mentally use their imaginations. With a library, some minimally organized sports, etc. Field trips every month. Certainly this is cheaper than paying for the effects of crime, violence, drug abuse. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1108 Registered: 10-2006 |
"Highland Park. Build a bigger Liquor Store." While that is funny, I think that in all seriousness, Highland Park could actually use more strip clubs. It has enough liquor stores. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2926 Registered: 02-2005 |
Hard to say which area is the 'poorest.' You have the emptiest/most blighted areas (i.e. between Conner and Alter between Mack and Jefferson or the area between 94 and Forest between St. Aubin and the Blvd), and then you have the most dangerous areas (I don't have enough experience across different parts of the city, nor stats on hand, but I will throw out the area near Davison between the Lodge and Linwood). How do you judge poor; you may consider the far east side poor because there are so few people and so few assets such as houses (most lots are empty), thus you have an area with very little value...or you could go by per capita income (or pc income + home values), in which case density and the overall appearance of the neighborhood do not matter. If we use the latter criteria, I would guess Brightmoor is the poorest area. The small, one-story workers houses (more like large sheds) really don't give the neighborhood any additional value. In addition, the location has few marketable qualities, being far from the center of the city and near the unimpressive suburb of Redford. If there was once place in the city to start from scratch, it might be Brightmoor. Not the Grand River corridor, or the areas closer to Stoepel Park, but just along/inside of Outer Drive, south of Fenkel, and west of Kentfield or Evergreen. If I had a ton of money to spend on a redevelopment project, you'd probably have a lot of convincing to do to get me to go to Brightmoor, just due to that lack of marketable qualities. I'd probably go to the far east side, where most of the blocks are already blank slates anyway, and build affordable housing (partially for-purchase, partially for-rent) in a manner that imitates or improves upon the original housing and the density that was already there. I'd look to rehab any and all salvageable old homes. I'd make sure there is a small park with a baseball diamond and tennis courts near a prominent corner, and I'd probably pay off DPD to get them to open a station or mini-station in the middle of my development. Either that or I would bankroll the formation of privatized security like in Indian Village. Low-income people should not be deprived of security, and it's a sense of security that will allow even a poorer neighborhood to thrive and not unravel as so many of our neighborhoods have. Estimated cost for land acquisition and construction (assuming I go with unionized skilled tradespeople): $4 million per block (assuming 20-25 homes per block). Who's in? | ||
Dexterpointing Member Username: Dexterpointing Post Number: 141 Registered: 05-2007 |
you have to start closse to downtown the area must be near the major business district in order for the money to flow and the nabe to start appealing to people | ||
Sbyman Member Username: Sbyman Post Number: 7 Registered: 06-2007 |
farmland and meadows and all that other old irish themed stuff. it would be really nice. | ||
Penelopetheduck Member Username: Penelopetheduck Post Number: 12 Registered: 09-2006 |
umm...maybe I'd consider asking the people who actually live in, say, Brightmoor what they wanted in their community. It's kind of creepy how many people think that it's in any way ethical to just go around bulldozing somebody's house because they are poor. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1023 Registered: 07-2004 |
You could bulldoze whole areas and set up "work makes you free camps" where poor people can learn vital skills, like how to work until you die or how to become smoke that smells like hot dogs. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2932 Registered: 02-2005 |
Penelope, it would not be ethical if I bulldozed a house someone owned, but if I bought a bunch of houses and did whatever I wanted with them I don't see what the problem would be, plus the neighbors, with no financial power to affect any of these positive changes, would benefit as their neighborhood becomes more desirable thanks to my money. Ethical? Sure, why not? | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1273 Registered: 04-2006 |
There ya go Penelope knows where I was going with my answer! You can't just buy stuff up and expect change. You don't improve the City by kicking people out of their houses. This is what was learned through New York's Robert Moses experiments. | ||
Jrvass Member Username: Jrvass Post Number: 111 Registered: 01-2007 |
Penolope, I missed the part where Mackinaw said he was going to bulldoze houses in Brightmoor without paying market value. Isn't that what America is all about? Supply and Demand? Brightmoor residents have the supply that Mackinaw really doesn't want or demand. Technically, their homes just became worth, less. James BS, Management MBA Gigolo, Esq. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 371 Registered: 02-2006 |
I think the people who live in that community HAVE decided what they want in their community. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1274 Registered: 04-2006 |
321Brian, not everyone who lives there wants to live in that type of environment. Many people feel stuck there by their economic situation. This does not mean that their ideas about how to improve the area or their property rights should be discounted. Who knows an area and its needs better than someone who lives there? Some neighborhoods simply needs a few more stores, or to identify the most popular sites for drug activity to begin the process of turning the area around. Ivory tower planners with grand ideas and liberal ignorance could destroy an area quicker than just listening to those who have vested interests in a community. Planning is as much of a process as it is an outcome. Our problem here is that politics often elevates one over the other so that some very good plans lie dormant on a library shelf while the needs of very few are highlighted and pushed forward by politically connected self-interested individuals. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 372 Registered: 02-2006 |
Just because you don't have a lot of money doesn't mean you have to live in filth. I don't see a lot of people who live there cutting vacant yards and picking up trash in their free time. I see a lot of people who live there sitting around and waiting for someone else to come in and clean up their mess. A lot of things that simple can make all the difference. | ||
Miketoronto Member Username: Miketoronto Post Number: 570 Registered: 07-2004 |
I understand it is hard, but the people living in these hoods have to want to make it better also. You may be poor. But that does not stop you from keeping your front yard clean, and your house looking nice. I saw this in Philly, where my cousin lived. The area was middle class and working class, and then went downhill and turned into a pooer area. And it really bugged me cousin, because her house was nice, but all the people in the other houses kept their homes looking like crap. And the excuse they give "oh we are poor". Well like my cousin says you don't need lots of money to clean your windows and cut your lawn. I find so many people just don't give a crap about their homes anymore. Back in the old days even if you were poor, you took pride in what you had and kept it nice. But if you give up and don't care, then no matter what you do, the neighbourhoods will not turn around. | ||
Oladub Member Username: Oladub Post Number: 41 Registered: 08-2006 |
Columnist Fred Reed writes about that "curious mixture of just not giving a damn, lack of ambition, little interest in academics, and sometimes something that looks like lethargy." This involves "a slack attitude toward maintenance. People who could easily afford nineteen cents for a brake-light bulb don’t. They throw trash in the streets." It might be a dandy idea to re-hab a neighborhood but what happens to the people who destroyed the neighborhood? That should be a part of the planners' equation. Pacification operations did not work in Vietnamese villages and probably won't work in big city neighborhoods. Thugs and vandals just start mindlessly bulldozing the next place they move to or are driven off to. And please... "affordable housing" is just Newspeak for "subsidized housing". | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 914 Registered: 06-2004 |
Oladub, you can never blame individuals for the outcome of their lives or the choices they make, most especially their choice in local elected officials. Society is soley responsible. The poor do not have free will. They are merely the passive objects of oppression. While they can never be truly helped, society can atone for the evil it has perpetrated on them, this atonment being principally by wasting billions of dollars in dysfunctional school systems and other government programs. (Message edited by ray on June 13, 2007) | ||
Oladub Member Username: Oladub Post Number: 43 Registered: 08-2006 |
Ray, I don't have an answer for what to do with displaced thugs and vandals except hard labor if convicted. That said, here is an outline of how the poorest neighborhood could generate housing and jobs without subsidies. Detroit doesn't work because it is crime ridden and broke. Any mayor would have to get the cooperation of the council, city employee unions, and the DPS. Bankruptcy begs privatization. State handouts have only perpetuated Detroit's death spiral. 1)Define the poorest part of the City with boundaries. 2)Property owners association memberships would be required of all property owners who would be in control of internal zoning and other civic matters. This would be a private government completely controlled by property owners with votes proportional to property assessment. Existing home owners would have the option of joining the property owners association and abiding by its rules or being paid twice their property assessment and leaving. 3)Property owners would have to provide most of the police, trash, and other services now provided by the City. Because of this, assessed property taxes would be reduced by 60%. The remaining 40% of taxes would be greater than whatever the City is getting now taxing vacant lots with no owners. (Win -Win) 4)Residents would be required to provide their own private schools. Residents will otherwise not be attracted. DPS school taxes would also be reduced by 60%. http://www.reason.com/news/sho w/33014.html (about how government school choice works) 5)Detroit would encourage companies, including, say, Korean and Indian companies, to purchase large parcels to locate facilities, housing, whatever. 6)The neighborhood association would be able to partially restrict access for neighborhood security if necessary. | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 217 Registered: 02-2006 |
That's a great point...the quality of a neighborhood is almost entirely determined by its residents. No amount of government or volunteer organization efforts or funding can make up for that. One of the reasons I think older neighborhoods like mine continue to prosper is because the residents really care about it. We maintain our yards and homes. We tell each other when we're out of town and keep an eye on the neighborhood for suspicious activity. I probably put a good 3-4 hours a week into basic outdoor maintenance. I don't understand the notion that just because you're poor means your home goes to hell. I mow my lawn with a lawnmower I picked from the trash - it's rusty and ugly, but it works. I spent $5 in parts for it, and it has run perfectly for two years now. Yard tools are easy to come by at garage sales. Extras like weed wackers, etc. are great, but I didn't have one until this spring and always managed to trim borders by hand. Some home maintenance is certainly pricey, but a lot of it can be avoided or lessened by manual labor. | ||
Downtown_remix Member Username: Downtown_remix Post Number: 338 Registered: 03-2007 |
lots of neighborhood here in Detroit are very well kept, but 2 or 3 houses in shambles can bring a whole block down. We need some kinda movement helping neighborhoods develop stronger neighborhood block associations. Very little money can get the momentum going to at lease advise parents to get there kids involved in the cleanup effort. Saturday can be the day where adults and kids can get excited about cleaning up an empty lot. There are resources out there not being utilized. Ima investigate | ||
Nere Member Username: Nere Post Number: 56 Registered: 04-2007 |
Planner and Penelope, if you had "unlimited finances", you can give money to the poor to have them fix up their homes or relocated, etc. Not everyone would want to leave their homes, so why not take a freebie and fix them up? | ||
Frumoasa Member Username: Frumoasa Post Number: 20 Registered: 03-2007 |
I am biased, but I say Ward 9 (around Jos. Campau & Davison Fwy) needs a lot of help. The first thing is that Dequindre closer to 8 mile is actually quite well maintained and pleasant, so there is a good start. Hamtramck is also a destination location, so improving the surface streets will encourage suburbanites not to just take I-75. The houses are not my first concern. Let people keep living in their homes. I don't want to disturb anybody. I want every abandoned home and business on Jos Campau purchased for market value if it is not already owned by the city and a low tax renaissance zone enacted for especially small businesses that want to come in. The area can be mixed use, with consumer goods, as well as light manufacturing if there is a desire. If people can start walking around their community and finding places of employment there, the neighborhood at large improves and the homes will hopefully reflect the new attitude. I know it's optimistic...but there's a lot of vacant stuff in a large stretch of road flanked by pleasant homes at 7 and 8 mile, and a shopping district in Hamtramck. There is room for improvement. | ||
Downtown_remix Member Username: Downtown_remix Post Number: 361 Registered: 03-2007 |
ward 9? damn did i miss hurricane el' de'toit. certainly we should qualify for FEMA to come through for one good week. Honestly the worst sections of most neighborhoods are the main streets. In some cases, ones you drive into the neighborhood blocks, the homes are in decent shape. So less people and less burned out storefronts and homes means a better chance for the main streets to step up there game. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6067 Registered: 02-2004 |
Gentrified it to make homes for low-income families. | ||
Exmotowner Member Username: Exmotowner Post Number: 313 Registered: 06-2005 |
I think the poorest part of the city is Highland Park. I would annex it and then I would build a SuperMax prison there that would employee hundreds of people and let the criminals know thats where their going and cut the crap on crime in the city. | ||
Jjw Member Username: Jjw Post Number: 339 Registered: 10-2005 |
Regardless of what neighborhood is the "poorest" part of the area, I would: 1. provide more efficient mass transit for job accessibility 2. ask for more direct parent involvement with the neighborhood schools and provide adult education at night at the same schools 3. increase police presence and lock up habitual criminals 4. streetscape and trash pick-up on a regular basis 5. hopefully, offer a good package for an investor to create some mixed-used housing and retail in the area 6. start or increase a mentoring program for both the children and adults | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6070 Registered: 02-2004 |
Oladub, Great ideal to fix Detroit urban problems. However the larger tax base would be too difficult for low-income families and very easy for rich folks and private govt' and international companies. As a result Gentrification in Detroit's ghettohoods would speed up, lot's of low-income residents may flight to cheaper tax base areas, property values would accelerate and its population would increase VERY slowly. A Simular tactic happen when I went to Seattle, WA. to keep all po'folks out and bring in the "NOUVEAU RICHE" I see Seattle with lots of very expensive lofts popping up like mushrooms, people relying on 5 minute public transit systems, walking to flagships stores, restaurants, shopping malls inside corporate buildings and movie theatres in every block. If this proposal could happen in Detroit it would NOT accelerate population growth by families but by empty nesters, property values would be too high and the tax base would be too expansive to live. Detroit end up like Boston, Atlanta, Seattle, Portland or Omaha in no time. A cool city with good jobs but very expensive living conditions. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 6071 Registered: 02-2004 |
Jjw, I agree with you! But first you need to tell your message to the second silent generation folks who are not that honest with themselves or each other. We folks in Michigan or should I say "Mich-ississppi" are living in recessional times that the making " CHITTY CHITTY BANG BANGS" is not the solution of the system, people playing race cards, dumping our baby boomers in the trash cans, murder, crime and political corruption is law of the land. So many of the strongholds that the anti-christ is putting an advantage on our young folks. It takes God's love to knock his diabolical plans for our of minds. We folks in our great lakes state have came a long way to live a better life for our kids. I think its time to put away our problems and start making plans for the 21st Century. For far is I know the future is not what we see on the Sci-Fi Channel. | ||
Oladub Member Username: Oladub Post Number: 49 Registered: 08-2006 |
Danny, I don't think Detroit is in any immediate danger from gentrification. Detroit is bankrupt and not a cool city with good jobs. My idea (6/15, 12:05pm post) would hopefully attract companies that would put people to work. These companies could provide housing to attract employees. Also, and to the extent that missing groups such as empty nesters could be lured back into the city, jobs would be created providing goods and services to the new residents. The City would receive more tax money while providing fewer services. The lower tax assessments would offset increases in property value. The City could use the additional revenue to address problems in the remainder of the City. The poorest neighborhood already has a high percentage of empty lots so the threat of displacement by gentrification already has been reduced. My own concerns about this idea are that the people who trashed and destroyed the neighborhood are still around trashing some other neighborhood, corporate interests might dominate personal liberties, and that the City might want to meddle with this if it worked. I'll worry about gentrification after crime and poverty have been eradicated from most of the City. |
