Brewster-Douglass Projects Demolition Proceeds

[Gannon]

When I lived in the Market, they broomed everyone out.

The neighborhood largely returned to hang out together anyways. It was both heart-warming and completely saddening. Maddening.

Then they put the twenty-foot high fence around the complex...AFTER the windows were scrapped out [[and I assume the plumbing removed)...and within a few weeks the WHOLE FENCE was scrapped. Only the poles remain. For now.

You still see people hanging out there. It is kinda like the group which meets up in Chandler Park daily...old friends with no-where else to go, apparently.

[izzyindetroit]

What a joke.

There is no need to demolish these historic towers. If downtown and midtown rental occupancy rates are truly at 90-something percent then that would make them perfect for redevelopment. There is a ton of opportunity for a developer to develop the land just the way it is. No need to spend any public money on demolition.

I don't understand many of you hypocrites on this board.

[JVB]

What a joke.

There is no need to demolish these historic towers. If downtown and midtown rental occupancy rates are truly at 90-something percent then that would make them perfect for redevelopment. There is a ton of opportunity for a developer to develop the land just the way it is. No need to spend any public money on demolition.

I don't understand many of you hypocrites on this board.

Often times it costs more to redevelop old buildings than build something new, especially after scrappers and mother nature have done their damage. A few years ago several developers wanted the property but balked because the costs for demo/clean-up was too high. Once the site is cleared, the city will be able to get that land back on the tax rolls again.

[hybridy]

Often times it costs more to redevelop old buildings than build something new, especially after scrappers and mother nature have done their damage. A few years ago several developers wanted the property but balked because the costs for demo/clean-up was too high. Once the site is cleared, the city will be able to get that land back on the tax rolls again.

I can confirm this. A local firm pitched a proposal to redevelop them this spring. They planned to save the towers and add
mixed us e to the remaining space. City turned it down based on lack of low income space...so now developers are saying 'yes but' Leaving the city the only option to scrape the site clean. Much more lucrative for them developers. For the naysayers, the city has the best intentions, but they need a reputable partner to design and redevelop. This could be a good opportunity if done right. It's always more complicated than it looks folks.

[jtf1972]

On the one hand, Detroit has enough "low income" housing. On the other, it is important for new developments to have a mixture of low income among the middle income. It is an effective way to bring people out of the hole they are stuck in when simply having nobody around that is doing any better than they are.

[syrett4]

On the one hand, Detroit has enough "low income" housing. On the other, it is important for new developments to have a mixture of low income among the middle income. It is an effective way to bring people out of the hole they are stuck in when simply having nobody around that is doing any better than they are.

Detroit does have enough low-income housing. If you have a low-income, Detroit is a place you can actually afford a home. The city council is what is really holding the city back.

Let a developer come in and put in a middle, or even upper-middle development and suddenly you are generating REAL property tax dollars for the city. The location of this plot of land is ideal for nurses, college professors and entrepreneurs. Just like a business, Detroit needs to maximize profits of its best locations to generate tax money. They need to charge a pretty penny for the land, let the developer be creative and then value the property at FMV for the tax bill.

[izzyindetroit]

Often times it costs more to redevelop old buildings than build something new, especially after scrappers and mother nature have done their damage. A few years ago several developers wanted the property but balked because the costs for demo/clean-up was too high. Once the site is cleared, the city will be able to get that land back on the tax rolls again.

I call bullshit on this and hybridy's response. For starters there are at least a dozen redeveloped buildings I could give you within a mile radius of this location which were in equal or worse condition. Within the same one mile radius I could give you another dozen which were demolished to be "put back on the tax rolls." Please remind me how much tax revenue the following properties bring in: Lafayette Building, Tiger Stadium, Hudson's Building, Ford Auditorium, Cass Tech.

Oh and a local firm pitched a proposal. Wow! Very proactive Detroit. They could put out a national RFP, apply a local historic designation, and other financial assistance to turn the buildings into something useful again. Instead they request $6.5M from the Feds. Why? Because the buildings are blighted, crime-ridden, and in a highly visible area. Bullshit!

[izzyindetroit]

Actually now that I think about it, I highly doubt the City is going to be able to move forward with this demolition. I have a hard time believing the funds will get Section 106 approval.

[wolverine]

What a joke.

There is no need to demolish these historic towers. If downtown and midtown rental occupancy rates are truly at 90-something percent then that would make them perfect for redevelopment. There is a ton of opportunity for a developer to develop the land just the way it is. No need to spend any public money on demolition.

I don't understand many of you hypocrites on this board.

JVB is correct. There's no possible alternatives at this point. They've been explored seriously, but the buildings have gotten too far damaged.

And unlike other complicated abandonments like MCS, the towers can not serve any flexible purpose except residential. There's no way you could get a return. The time for renovation was nearly a decade ago.

The other buildings you mentioned like the Lafayette had a much better shot. Building conditions were better, center of downtown, variety of conversion opportunities. While Detroit lost a great historic building, it had a much better shot than Brewster Douglas.

[Detroitdave]

Detroit does have enough low-income housing. If you have a low-income, Detroit is a place you can actually afford a home. The city council is what is really holding the city back.

Let a developer come in and put in a middle, or even upper-middle development and suddenly you are generating REAL property tax dollars for the city. The location of this plot of land is ideal for nurses, college professors and entrepreneurs. Just like a business, Detroit needs to maximize profits of its best locations to generate tax money. They need to charge a pretty penny for the land, let the developer be creative and then value the property at FMV for the tax bill.

I totally agree with you . Detroit has more than enough low income housing .
Like sryett4 said , let a developer come and a put in a middle/upper middle class development there . Make it a controlled entry, at the most two
ways in and out, both controlled/ guarded .

The city is full of areas that attempted the upper income/ lower income mix , without much success , unless it 3 to 1 , upper/lower I doubt it will work.

It has to be done in a way that will help the entire area any other way it's a losers bet.
Lets be honest, it can't be 50/50, it will almost ALWAYS slide to lower.

In small areas like that history proves it won't work .

The only way I see anything like this working is in a city like nyc were the upper middle class can live in an controlled building , controlling the balance .

Using a prime location like this for anything else will be just another empty lot in Detroit, i.e, Hudson, tigers, ect

I know this may seem insensitive, but the city cannot afford to waste more land and time.

[Pcm]

If you want to see an example of what redeveloped projects look like, see Cornerstone Estates:

http://www.dhcmi.org/DevelopmentSite...aspx?siteid=10



or Woodbrige Estates:

http://www.woodbridgeestates.com/

[detroitsgwenivere]

Are those of you who claim that we have more than enough low-income housing making an opinionated statement, or do you believe this to be fact based? Because there are some folks that disagree with you:


http://www.axispropertyinvestment.co...ssessions.html

http://www.shelterlistings.org/details/32157/


And apparently it's a national problem:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ralph-...b_2082377.html

This uses New York as an example, but these groups work here in Detroit:

http://www.freep.com/article/2008112...-housing-drain

And this paper makes a case for low income housing as a neighborhood development incubator:

http://closup.umich.edu/files/closup...ng-detroit.pdf

Hate to disappoint you guys, but according to this article the highrises are to be replaced with more affordable housing:

http://www.freep.com/article/2012111...ousing-project


Sorry, but I thought a reading punishment was in order....

Just some food for thought.

[syrett4]

Here is some low-income housing.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/40...88097580_zpid/

$100 for a house. Will it need work? Yes. If we define low-income as $8-$13 per hour. I'd rather have my tax money spent on fixing up this house for a low-income single mom or family and get her on her feet and point them toward self-sufficiency.

When people speak of "low-income" housing, what they really mean is government subsidy and government dependency. The more people that depend on government, will continue to vote for those officials in local elections.

If we use those same tax dollars the way I described, 1. Detroit maximizes the value of the property in a sale at the demo site. 2. Recoups more tax money from the value of the developed property. 3. Helps a low-income family become a homeowner and gets that property back on the tax rolls. 4. Gets a family on the road to self-sufficiency.

[Wheels]

Here is some low-income housing.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/40...88097580_zpid/

$100 for a house. Will it need work? Yes. If we define low-income as $8-$13 per hour. I'd rather have my tax money spent on fixing up this house for a low-income single mom or family and get her on her feet and point them toward self-sufficiency.

When people speak of "low-income" housing, what they really mean is government subsidy and government dependency. The more people that depend on government, will continue to vote for those officials in local elections.

If we use those same tax dollars the way I described, 1. Detroit maximizes the value of the property in a sale at the demo site. 2. Recoups more tax money from the value of the developed property. 3. Helps a low-income family become a homeowner and gets that property back on the tax rolls. 4. Gets a family on the road to self-sufficiency.

You left out the part about how that $100 house was once a nice home until low income "you owe me a living " family's moved in and destroyed it. Now you want to start the cycle over? They suddenly learned how to take care of property and have money to pay tax's. Wake up.

[syrett4]

You left out the part about how that $100 house was once a nice home until low income "you owe me a living " family's moved in and destroyed it. Now you want to start the cycle over? They suddenly learned how to take care of property and have money to pay tax's. Wake up.

I actually would believe that NO income people are the squatters etc moving into homes like this. We are talking about low-income. A single mom with a couple of kids, cleaning rooms at the Marriott and trying to make ends meet. I'd rather give her the $100 house, than get her into some kind of government subsidized housing. If she destroys it at that point, then it is on her.

I'm totally awake thank you.

[GUSHI]

Lets keep giving people things, that really motivates them, right?

[syrett4]

Lets keep giving people things, that really motivates them, right?

The larger point is the city needs to maximize what it can from the value of the this property. This should not be low-income, subsidized housing.

[royce]

Detroit had an opportunity to bring in a development that could bring in "market rate" residences and not "affordable" housing. I'm not saying that it would have been easy, but there already exists "affordable housing." It is in the form of the lovely Brewster Homes" between Wilkins and Mack and the I-375 service drive. Why add more "affordable housing" in an area that is prime for a different kind of redevelopment?

Well, I really know the answer to my own question. The city can't afford to tear down the "Brewster's" with its own money, yet it wants the eyesore to be gone. Call on the "feds" to help out with the demolition, but remember you don't get something for nothing. The "feds" will now dictate how the land is to be used. So therefore, any '"shot" of having a development that's 100% market rate is gone.

When the Brewster's are finally redeveloped they will look like Cornerstone Estates, Gardenview Estates, and Woodbridge Estates. Very few, if any, Broderick Tower-types or Detroit Yes young urban-living types will be moving in there, even if the development offers "some" market-rate units. How many of you on this forum or people you know live in any of the "Estates" I just mentioned above?

I had hoped that for this site that the city would "think outside of the box" by taking the land back from the feds and doing something unique with it, but as usual, they fall back on their previous behaviors. Too bad.

[Gannon]

If we use those same tax dollars the way I described, 1. Detroit maximizes the value of the property in a sale at the demo site. 2. Recoups more tax money from the value of the developed property. 3. Helps a low-income family become a homeowner and gets that property back on the tax rolls. 4. Gets a family on the road to self-sufficiency.

Bravo. May I add a fifth?

5. Trains individuals on reconstruction instead of destruction, which seems to be the default of human nature.

I think window glazing should be taught to everyone in junior high...so early on the appreciation of the beauty of an unbroken window can be instilled ubiquitously. That would be a true anti-broken-window policy...

[Hermod]

I think window glazing should be taught to everyone in junior high...so early on the appreciation of the beauty of an unbroken window can be instilled ubiquitously. That would be a true anti-broken-window policy...

In the fall of 1951, in 7th grade General Shop at Jackson Intermediate School, the DPS taught me how to glaze a window. We were given an wooden frame with a 12"X12" opening and a piece of metal that fit the opening. We had to drive in the little points to hold it in place and put a nice triangular bead of putty all the way around. It came in handy when I broke one of our basement windows with a baseball one afternoon. I went to the store and bought a pane of glass and had the job done before my father got home. I didn't even get chewed out for breaking the window.

I guess DPS doesn't teach that any more.

[Gannon]

In the fall of 1951, in 7th grade General Shop at Jackson Intermediate School, the DPS taught me how to glaze a window. We were given an wooden frame with a 12"X12" opening and a piece of metal that fit the opening. We had to drive in the little points to hold it in place and put a nice triangular bead of putty all the way around. It came in handy when I broke one of our basement windows with a baseball one afternoon. I went to the store and bought a pane of glass and had the job done before my father got home. I didn't even get chewed out for breaking the window.

I guess DPS doesn't teach that any more.

Yeah, the school systems HAVE changed. That was about the time they had a working GUNRANGE in the basement of Western High School, too. [[found that while wandering around during their auction pickup days a few weeks back)

But seriously, teach someone the value of the work, and the effort involved in repairing something unnecessarily broken wantonly, hopefully the peer pressure reduces unto elimination those who willingly break windows.

I do so think that a flat glass manufacturing plant downtown would be a grand idea. Make it precision enough that we can make glass for solar panels and greenhouses and even a geodesic dome or three thousand. [[we're gonna need those domes to protect above-ground structures from wind-destruction...the storms might be getting stronger, seem to be)


I've been thinking casually about 'old school' technologies for many years, stuff that takes raw materials and creates objects of worth...allowing those who make things to sell them to the world. We need to make an economic funnel that collects wealth and delivers it here.

Sand into glass is one basic old school thing we can utilize, because Michigan has lots of sand.

The flat-glass plant to fix all of the broken windows will allow future production into the stuff that'll serve us well later.

No caffeine yet, so I hope that made sense...

[Honky Tonk]

"I guess DPS doesn't teach that any more."

No, They teach kids to tex' a window company.

[Rocko]

DPS DOES still teach these skills....to a few students in a program through the Randolph Technical School. See this link for the work the students are doing at Historic Fort Wayne: http://www.mhpn.org/?page_id=138

I hope that whatever development fills this space makes sure to return the street grid to this area. Alfred Street and Division Street should run all the way across to the I-75 service drive...NO MORE SUPERBLOCKS!

Could not have said it better myself. Both Gardenview and Woodbridge estates have accomplished this, at least in part. Relaying a grid pattern across this part of the city will openup accessibility and make it less confusing. And for the record, I hope they are able to preserve the library, especially if everything else is leveled.

Since the high-rises have been effectively rehabbed and reused at Woodbridge Estates, it's too bad the city is not making an effort to reuse the shells of the highrises at Brewster-Douglass. They could be surrounded with a mix of lower-to mid-rise residential. The sheer volume of rubble which will go into landfills that doesn't have to if at least some of the structures are reused is staggering.

[Honky Tonk]

"The sheer volume of rubble which will go into landfills that doesn't have to if at least some of the structures are reused is staggering."

I don't get this, [[but I don't seem to get a LOT of things), unless the Brewsters have SERIOUS structural damage, [[read: I-beams, brickwork, on the verge of collapse), they're going to have to run wiring, heating, lighting, windows, etc., etc., anyway. Wouldn't it make sense to rehab the existing structures? By now, they have got to be gutted to the bare walls. Or is it just the fascination of knocking it down and starting all over?

[p69rrh51]

I am very happy!

http://detroit.curbed.com/archives/2...cking-ball.php