Judge orders Packard Plant Demolition

[Richard]

It's time. It is in bad shape. Parts of it have collapsed. All of it needs to be torn down. Clear the entire site and promote it as a site for a distribution center or giant warehouse. Proximity to I-94 is a definite selling point.

The city owns parcels,the other guy owns parcels,others own other parcels,the city cannot clear the entire parcel.

Just because it looks like one continuous building,legally it is not.

It was built by assembling multiple lots and they were never merged into one.

Whatever the lot size happens to be on the parcel they want to demolish they can only demolish that,so they can take 100’ from the center but not on each side.

So if they demolish 100’ then they have to spend money securing the open parts of the buildings on each side and by default they could be opening the city up to lawsuits because the argument could be they are compromising the structural integrity of the adjoining property’s.

It’s akin to taking a row of houses in a city block,demolishing one in the center,what have you accomplished outside of creating an empty lot that can only support one more house?

There are lots under that building that are only 25’ wide,what they are demolishing is not going to give them anywhere near enough for a distribution center or anything else substantial.

[Richard]

For the person[[s) that questioned; yes, we can extradite from Peru.

A : He has it in a corporation name,all he has to do is bankrupt the corporation and walk.

B: He has not done anything different then what the city has done by acquiring parcels there and allowing them to deteriorate or become a danger to the public.

The city has made no attempt to secure their parcels.

So you want to charge somebody with something,the same exact thing you are doing?

You guys could have told the city to fix or secure their parcels,or actually your parcels,so you would be just as guilty on a criminal aspect as him.

The money being used is pandemic funds,so it was never city taxpayer funds that you can say it cost the taxpayers and you want to sue in order to be reimbursed for those funds.

My guess is he did not realize that he was building locked verses land locked when he purchased it and the city would not sell him their parcels which prevented him from having continuity,which is why he concentrated on just the administration building.

No matter who bought it,no matter how much money they had,if the city did not want to give up their parcels it was a dead duck from the start which is why it has been sitting there all these years.

Where I am at,if you buy a property at a city tax sale or property auction and fail to maintain it or fix it within a certain time frame,it automatically defaults back to city control without the foreclosure process.

You waive the right of due process when you purchase it.

[night-timer]

Does the Packard still have security staff? It did just after Fernando Palazuela [[spelling?) purchased it. I remember talking to one of the guards.

Allan Hill owned a workshop and residence inside the Packard Plant too. I heard he passed away a few years ago. A few Doco's were made about him and his existence inside the plant.

Either way, it looks like parts of the Packard Plant will remain. It won't all be torn down. [[Will it actually look any better, or worse?)

There were grand plans for retail and residential and concert venues and the like at the refurbished Packard site, but I guess that has all died, too.

The suburbs around the Packard are blighted and not safe, IMHO.

[Király]

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3790...7i16384!8i8192

The Packard Motel hung in there for a good many years but it has closed within the last two years.

That's too bad, Google Street View shows it was being renovated in 2019, the 2021 photo shows it looking better than it has in years with new windows and doors. Too bad it didn't last.

[royce]

The city owns parcels,the other guy owns parcels,others own other parcels,the city cannot clear the entire parcel.

Just because it looks like one continuous building,legally it is not.

It was built by assembling multiple lots and they were never merged into one.

Whatever the lot size happens to be on the parcel they want to demolish they can only demolish that,so they can take 100’ from the center but not on each side.

So if they demolish 100’ then they have to spend money securing the open parts of the buildings on each side and by default they could be opening the city up to lawsuits because the argument could be they are compromising the structural integrity of the adjoining property’s.

It’s akin to taking a row of houses in a city block,demolishing one in the center,what have you accomplished outside of creating an empty lot that can only support one more house?

There are lots under that building that are only 25’ wide,what they are demolishing is not going to give them anywhere near enough for a distribution center or anything else substantial.

I'm not understanding the line I highlighted in bold-type. If Packard built the factory, why wouldn't all the properties be owned by them? At any rate, the city should simply tear down the whole thing and settle any claims later. When a kid falls through a floor and dies, the City is going to held responsible even if they didn't own that part of the building.

[Richard]

Packard Land Development corporation was the real estate arm of Packard Motor Car company,as a separate business, they purchased the parcels and built the factory and then leased or sold the factory to the Packard Motor Car Company.

Packard Motor Car Company needed a factory to build cars,Packard Land Development provided the factory for them,everything else was irrelevant.

At that time laws etc were different or non existent in regards to real estate cases we know it today,it was not necessary to combine all of the lots into one big parcel because Packard Land Development corporation owned title to all parcels.

There is over 150 separate parcels there that make up what you know as the Packard factory,each parcel is a lot with legal boundaries,no different then a house on a street.

What has happened during the years because of that,it was legal to sell individual random lots which was done.

If you remember the current owner purchases it at the auction with the understanding that it was indeed the entire factory as you see it,he found out after the fact that he did not,because when the city foreclosed on the property before the auction they only could foreclose on the individual lots that were behind in taxes,so he bought a collection of lots that were not attached to each other,he then had to go and make a separate deal with the owner of some of the other lots in order to be able to have a connected building.

The lot on the corner across from the admin building,where the collapsed walkway used to connect is owned by the city but not the connected buildings on either side.

Then as you go up the street,you can go 50’ then the city would own another parcel of the building,still a part of the factory but legally the land it sits on is a separate legal parcel that can be sold separately.

That factory has not set derelict because it has no opportunity,it is empty because of the legalities of the land it sits on,there are also many other owners there that you never heard of that own parcels there.

Think of it this way,The factory shell is a mall,all the individual parts of it,like the stores within a mall,are separate entities.

It like going into the mall and buying the empty Sears building,you may own that particular parcel but you do not own the entire mall.

So when they say,Joe Blow bought the Packard Plant at auction,they actually did not,they just bought pieces of it.

Yes on your second part.

If you look at the factory as it borders the street,the city goes in and demolishes their parcel it will leave open walls on the adjoining parcels and compromise their structural integrity,creating a domino effect,unless they secure the adjoining parcels they are liable.

The city can only demolish the parcels they have control of,and not the entire factory as you see it,unless they spend millions more buying everybody else out.

My argument is not that it should stay or go,my argument is that the city is spending millions to demolish their parcels with no end game,it’s not going to be enough land to build another factory.

It would have been different if the city spent the same amount of money to purchase all of the parcels,demolish it at that point or not at least they would have had something to work with in the end.

Because of that,to me anyways,it would have been more productive to spend the money in existing neighborhoods to build them up and add to the tax base that way.

The end game for the city seems to be in addressing this as a long term goal of over the next 10 -20 years they do acquire all of the parcels and level the entire plant,but that comes at a cost of millions to the taxpayers,which really did not have to happen in the first place.

When the headline reads The City Demolishs the Packard Plant it is deceptive,because they are not demolishing the Packard Plant as the public knows it,they are only demolishing the parts that they control which is not the entire plant.

Its going back to the mall,you can demolish the Sears building but the rest of the mall remains,if the rest of the mall is derelict,what have you actually accomplished?

[slick]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...More%20Stories

The demolition continues!

[royce]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...More%20Stories

The demolition continues!

After reading the article, I'm perplexed that Mayor Duggan wants to leave standing the portion of the Packard Plant that fronts E. Grand Blvd., with the hope that a developer will come and restore that portion. Isn't that portion in as bad a shape as the parts being torn down? If a developer like Palazuelo couldn't redevelop his sections, what makes the Mayor think that there's another developer interested in developing this front facing property? To the Mayor: "Don't get our hopes up high that the Packard Plant [[all of it) is being demolished and then leave portions standing."

[Gistok]

^ A pity Duggan didn't have that kind of philosophy for the Kelvinator/AMC HQ building on Fenkell in front of the vast factory.

[Richard]

After reading the article, I'm perplexed that Mayor Duggan wants to leave standing the portion of the Packard Plant that fronts E. Grand Blvd., with the hope that a developer will come and restore that portion. Isn't that portion in as bad a shape as the parts being torn down? If a developer like Palazuelo couldn't redevelop his sections, what makes the Mayor think that there's another developer interested in developing this front facing property? To the Mayor: "Don't get our hopes up high that the Packard Plant [[all of it) is being demolished and then leave portions standing."

I am more perplexed by the reasoning.

At first it was a danger to the public
Then it became a symbol of decline and a bain on Detroit because it brought national attention in a negative way as a symbol of decline.

I kinda think it would have been more prudent to turn it around and say,we did not let decline get us down,look we took this and repurposed it and beat it.

It just follows the trend of destroying symbols in order to get them out of site and out of mind.

Scorch n burn urban renewal did not work in the 60s what makes them think it will work now.

The 12 million spent to demolish it is really not that much in the grander scale of somebody rehabilitating it,they would have received that back in incentives,now it is 12 million to create a site that is going to cost millions more to incentivize somebody to build there.

Some cities have allowed demolition of historic buildings but required the facade to be retained and incorporated into the new build.

So now it is going to end up as an empty trash strewn lot not maintained.

What exactly has been accomplished?

[Jimaz]

Packard Plant Demolition 2/20/2023 Detroit, Michigan 4K

Jaws of death. Let gravity do the work.

• Packard Automotive Plant

[Richard]

I guess it all boils down to perception.

The city and state said it had to go because it represented blight in Detroit and was a bad image and putting Detroit in a bad light.

To me it represented a building built by an innovative company located in an innovative city that held themselves to a higher standard,when that car company stopped being innovative ,much like the city it was based in,it led to its demise.

The same defeatist mentality has led to the buildings demise now,it is much easier,even more so with free money,to destroy instead of building.

It was not a symbol of blight in Detroit,it was a reminder of what happens when failed leadership is allowed to maintain that path.

So leadership instead of taking the opportunity and turning a negative into a positive,they took the path of least resistance,the easy way out and just erased the mistakes of the past,while recreating the same mistakes in the present.

So what exactly was accomplished?

Another building was demolished in the hopes that somebody will come in and invest millions building a new one,how has that worked out ?

Scorch and burn in the name of urban renewal did not work in the 60s and 70s and it does not work now.

But it is a good way for the politicians to make it look good like they are accomplishing something without accomplishing anything.

If they were and had been doing their job in the first place,there is no need for mass demolitions,a 12 yo with an excavator can demolish anything,it’s easy and does not require any real commitment.