Printable View
A lot more people, when they drive down I-75, have to drive past and see the Brewster Projects than the Train Station. Why isn't City Council and the Mayor demanding that the Brewsters are torn down? After all, if they want to use tax dollars to tear down these eyesores then why not charge the government to tear down its own eyesores?
great idea, but with one major oversight, that plan wouldn't benefit a billionaire who would kickback [[more) cash to the elected official's campaigns
I agree completely. Those projects have been vacant over a year and the fencing that was put up around them has been completely removed and anyone can have unrestricted access to them. Squatters have taken up residence inside and have been causing trouble in the surrounding areas. I'm ready to see them down.
Matty Moroun is too convenient a target. There are things that the City should be doing all over. He gets the blame for everything that's wrong on the Southwest Side regarding air quality. All he has, for all intents and purposes, is a piece of road. There are over 50 factories in that area, some of which that have been cited for environmental vioaltions.Quote:
Originally Posted by gravitymachine
Heck, when you go to these hearings, you see a lot of parents testifying about how sick their children are. Yet, who's looking at the fact that a lot of those children have attended Beard elementary school which was built on contaminated land. This is well documented in court for anyone that wants to look it up.
That is my problem with Rep. Tlaib and former Rep. Toboccman. They use Matty Moroun and air quality as a way to get elected. Then they use the people in the area in an attempt to block or delay his projects. But, once the issue with his projects are over, then who's doing anything about the environmental quality in the area.
Where was the protests when the air quality monitoring devices were removed in from the Southwest side in 2007? What is being proposed as far as soil remediation in this city? Harbortown was built on toxic land. When all of those people living there get sick the blame is probably going to be placed on all of the boats going down the Detroit River.
We don't need scapegoats in this City, we need results.
Half of the brewster towers have already been torn down. They consolidated the people into the towers that were left. They spent money on renovation of the remaining towers to try to save them.Their efforts were in vain. The towers were quickly abandonned, scrapped out and left in their current state of decay. This all happened within the last 5 years.
Efforts were recently made to save the towers. It hasn't been the 30 years of non ininvestment like the MCS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndavies
Good point. But, do we wait and leave the Brewsters to keep deteriorating for another 25 years?
I thought there was an active project to tear them down under way? I had heard or read somewhere that the towers were coming down this spring or summer. Maybe I'm wrong, but it was last year I looked into it casually for a minute. I see 'em out of one side of our office building.
I'm sure they'll come down in time for the next Superbowl, final four or all star game at Ford field or Comerica park. ;)
The council and/or mayor have a long history of tearing down buildings they own.
I certainly won't be defending the Matted Moron, since his gargantuan wealth could go to stabilize, or indeed renovate completely the MCD.
There is still NO EXCUSE for that building looking the way it does.
There is plenty of money available- Matted Morons' money. Last I noticed, he was still the owner, and ultimately responsible for the MCD.
As far as the projects are concerned, it's a comparison of apples and oranges.
It will take some well publicized murder, drug deal, rape, etc, for the city or government to act.
Or perhaps continued pressure from surrounding residents, pickets, etc. You'd be surprised how an ongoing video of displeased citizens gets results.
Perhaps a viral video of marching citizens [[needs to be hundeds or maybe a thousand individuals) in front of city hall sent worldwide, and then you'd see some action.
The whole point of Risk Management is to do something to prevent murders, rapes, robberies and etc. from happening. I hope that what BSHEA said is right and something will be done with the projects this summer. Now, as far as it being apples to oranges, I beg to differ. Blight is blight, period. If I'm someone looking to move my family and/or business into the City how long something has been abandoned vs how long something else has been abandoned would be beside the point. I wouldn't want to relocate around either one of them. Now, if that's my thought process, where can I move to in the City where I'm not going move into close proximity of an abandoned house or structure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorax
That's what elected officials should keep in mind and not have a who is it beneficial to hate on mentality.
Certainly blight is blight- the apples and oranges comparison had to do with the ownership and nature of the two different properties we're talking about here.
My point is that Matted Moron has the ability to do something quickly to remedy the MCD situation. The housing projects have layers of bureaucracy to get through, and too many people in the process to get something done quickly.
That's why they usually react to a bad situation before being proactive about it.
The Matted Moron has the werewithal to be proactive and chooses not to.
How many other owners of commercial property have the means to be proactive about their structures and aren't? We aren't doing the same thing to Mike Illitch or any of the others. Matty Moroun is not an elected official, he's a businessman and he's going to do what's in his best interest. Now, the elected officials are voted in to do what's in the publics best interest. The Train station was targeted because of who owns it, not because of the delapidation. If it's a public safety issue you would think they would target the building he owns that had the frozen dead body in it. But, there was no resolution passed for that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorax
I had always heard the Brewster high rises buildings were to be stipped and refitted as market rate/senior apartments with the townhouses being demolished --this was a supposed tie in with all the new housing that was going to be built in the Brush Park neighborhood...seemed like reasonable planning and a way to bridge Eastern market/Brush Park/Midtown. This had surfaced years ago from a friend who worked in City Planning and surfaced again during KK's reign.
Sounds like you're defending the rights of the Matted Moron and Ilitch to me.
Nothing wrong with that stance if they are doing the socially responsible thing.
The city has an obligation to do exactly what you said as well, and often fail.
The truth of the matter is with one person making the decision and having the great wealth to implement that decision, there is no excuse for allowing any building, whether an architectural treasure or not to fall into such a dilapidated state.
These building are just as unsafe and present a public hazard, and need to be secured at THEIR OWNER'S EXPENSE.
Same is true of the housing projects.
If I were you, I wouldn't want to look like I'm defending the wrongheaded decisions of a couple of billionaires with the means and motive to to do the right thing. They have NO excuses.
The city has no excuse either when the public's safety is at risk, though often the budgeting isn't there when there is little tax base coming in. Things just move slower because of the bureaucracy.
I think Bill Shea is correct. If I remember, correctly, there is an active plan to tear them down. I'm also surprised that no one has mentioned that this is the domain of the Detroit Housing Commission under the auspices of HUD meaning that the plan has to go through quite a few public hearings [[more so than your average project) and such before it can be finalized. HUD announced, last summer, that they are going to tear them down and do what they've done/ar doing at Gardenview [[Herman Gardens) and Woodbridge Estates [[Jeffries-West). They've sited the cost of maintenance for the next five years to be higher than starting all over and partnering with the private sector.
BTW, just as a note, the towers are officially/formally the Frederick Douglass Apartments. The Brewsters are the low-rises and such.
Well if someone does want to attempt something with the towers it's possible. They are in good condition inside in terms of structure, but a lot of pipes have been removed, and of course all the windows. Paint has flaked off all the walls, and the floor tiles have all popped up. There are no appliances to be seen, and just a handful of units have cabinents...surprisingly in good condition, but ready to fall off the walls. The only action going on there is the smoke detectors chirping to one another from floor to floor.
A weird site. Part of me felt it should be leveled just because it was so open and failed to sustain itself through the years. Yet, I also felt it was a big waste...that the buildings essentials are there, and that housing units would be lost that are so desperately needed by some.
Yeah, there really isn't much a good justification to get rid of the remaining towers, not even the argument concerning the cost or renovation, especially considering the remaining ones at Jeffries-West were saved and thoroughly refurbished.
If the Housing Commission burned its budget at Jeffries, cost does make a difference. Remember, these are the people who did nothing with the Lee Plaza so they could renovate the three Brewster-Douglass buildings - and look what we have now - four scrapped buildings.Quote:
Originally Posted by MIRepublic
You keep missing my point. I'm not defending the billionaires, I'm pointing out the wrong headed thinking of our elected officials. They're not going after the building for public safety purposes, as they should, they're going after the building because they don't like the owner. When emotional decisions like that are made, due diligence isn't carried out and mistakes can happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorax
City Council rendered their decision before the Building Department could hold its hearing and make a recommendation to City Council, at which time City Council would hold its own hearing and make its decision. That lack of process could hurt the City in court and possibly allow Matty Moroun to not only be allowed to not pay for the demolition but still retain his rights to the property.
Additionally, by not doing due diligence. The city failed to discover that the unsecured portion of the property that everyone is trespassing on is actually owned by the City of Detroit as was reported in the Detroit News yesterday. There is also a restriction in the deed that doesn't allow demolition for another 126 years.
So now the City of Detroit may have to use tax dollars that could have been used to demolish a building in a neighborhood to secure our property at the site.
Now, back to me defending the rights of the billionaires. This is America, everyone's rights, no matter their economic status is worth defending. That's what makes this country what it is. And everyone should recognize that a billionaire is going to have the resources to protect their own rights, so if you're going to take him to court you better have your act together. Which the City of Detroit never does.
"If you come at the king, you best not miss".
Omar Little, The Wire.