Fascinating article from the NY Times on the ecology of vacant lots and how scientists are studying them. Anyone know if this is going on in Detroit?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/ga...ewanted=1&_r=2
Printable View
Fascinating article from the NY Times on the ecology of vacant lots and how scientists are studying them. Anyone know if this is going on in Detroit?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/ga...ewanted=1&_r=2
I hope it is going on somewhere in Detroit. From what I was told, when they tore down my family home in 1974, the demolition crew did not cart away the wreckage of the 2-flat structure; they pretty much just buried it in its basement. True? I haven't a clue. I sometimes wonder what we'd find if we excavated that property. Is the floor of it still linoleum? Would we find [[pieces of) our old Grinnell player piano that we left behind [[as did the erstwhile new owners)? What effect did decades of enamel-painted plaster walls have on the soil this many years after being crushed up and covered?
The practice of fiulling in the foundation has not been going on for years but 1974 is before my time.
The article does not go into the social ecology that makes the lots empty in the first place. There had to be a reason behind why one person would abandon the lot. It could be crime, death, a slow erosion of the social fabric that the person once new that was replaced by one that was less familiar. It could be that the housing stock of the neighborhood was inferior when it was built and just wore out. One thing that is sure is that if this was pure science you would not have the agglomeration of empty lots in some neighborhoods while others remain largely unaffected.
I believe a ground-penetrating radar survey of the city is one of the most important things that could be done...recognizing where these in-fill demos occurred...so we can escavate them and re-use the foundations and sewer/water connections. Those are some of the most expensive costs of building.
I'd love to see the sustainable living folks get license to test various building designs...including the venerable geodesic dome [[thanks Bucky, again!)...built over these buried treasures.
Years ago, at a harvest party at Gregg Willerer's, I met a beautiful young lady who was performing research on the vast collection of plants and trees in three of the city's largest parks...one of the by-products of a successful auto industry, since much of the money for the importation and planting of these was done by auto-magnates' spouses [[from what I understand).
It would be nice to also survey the open, abandoned land to identify fruit trees and gardens run amok...and aim to 'conserve' them as best we can. This is a portion of the legacy of Detroit...people moved here from all over the world for our industry...and brought their native habits and plants into this ecosystem. I'm betting there are more than a few now-wild grapevines and olive trees and rose bushes that can be identified and protected. Apple, pear, peach trees as well.
The ecology of vacant lots is a huge untapped potential...and what does the city do with it all? Waste money mowing it all down twice a year, while the rest of the time they are on their way to being overgrown trash receptacles. I drive through the 'hood between I-94 and Mack all the time...and it is simply amazing how much trash is dumped openly in these lots. It is so ugly the way some people treat the city.
<sigh>
I really want to see some hope in all of this...but so much gunk gets piled on it is tough.
As I remember it, this practice was approved by CAY, but ceased in the late 70s because of criticism about it. As I recall the criticism came about from the utilities companies who would have to do work around the lot & came across all this debris from demolished housed essentially being buried underneath them.Quote:
Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner
Hey Gannon, PM me.
I have been trying to reach you but your inbox is full.
What would the elements defining "inferior housing stock" be? I have a wood-frame house SW Detroit, built in 1900. The floors are simple pine. The basement was added later. The kitchen has aan extra room that functions as a skullery because that's where the farmhouse-style sink is and the original cupboards [[which were built to be painted). All in all, by many regional definitions, this would be "inferior housing" - not brick, small lot, painted pine woodwork, not even a full two stories, little closets. Aluminum siding!
Yet, the house was lovingly cared for. Bathrooms added [[fitted in). When I had a wired-in security system installed the installer marveled at the number of fire-stops in the walls and said that the house was built to last. I see photos of similar houses in other places liike on the east coast and those similar houses appear valued.
Over time I have added some nice amenities: a beautiful kitchen with even a pastry center, a lovely classic bathroom, brick walks, a small Victorian porch, etc. I never thought that the house wasn't worth the improvements - even though its small and wood-framed. I will certainly leave it better than i found it and the block, too.
I don't understand "inferior housing stock" - if Detroiters had valued and cared for what they had, wouldn't the city be fuill of good houses? In this day and age of high energy costs, wouldn't small houses be worth saving?
Lets say you had a shotgun shack in Brightnoor that originally had no basement or plumbing. The baasement and plumbing were added later by someone who did not know what they were doing in the 1930's or 1940's. The home became a poorly maintained rental in the 1950's and has had no electrical updates. That would be an inferior home. You seem to have a silk purse instead of a pigs ear.Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMAP
The bulk of the houses I've encountered in the city cannot be called inferior in any way...there are dozens upon dozens of beautiful and unique brick houses for every shack, shotgun or otherwise.
But I understand what you're talking about.
There was once a little shack in Corktown that had a bad fire...and an ex-forumer resurrected it, while another bought it and made it quite the charming palace.
I wouldn't get too hasty with tearing down all the wee shacks in this town...
As a kid, I stayed weekends at my grandparents house quite often. There was a house on their street that was torn down and while I didn't see the demolition, I seem to recall my grandma saying that they just tore it down into the basement and covered it up. Again, I was pretty young but I would say that would have been early-80's. I would think that, over time, the underground contents would decay and settle, which could open up sinkholes. Unless maybe they just left the basement walls and floors but took away everything else.
Re: Shotgun Houses: many cities make concerted efforts to save them and update them for contemporary living. New Orleans and Albany come to mind. The National Trust for Historic preservation has abig effort going on. Just not Detroit. We don't really like anything that doesn't smack of suburbia here. Victoria Park is great example.
What about all the preserved shotgun shacks in Corktown?Quote:
Originally Posted by SWMAP