Citizens need voice in Detroit renewal

[begingri]

Mayor Bing, others need input from residents before wholesale change is forced upon the city

By: Robert Goodspeed

Detroit is facing big problems: declining population, budget deficits and a stagnant economy.

Discussions about fixing the city has generated dramatic ideas, including the Detroit Works Project — Mayor Bing's roadmap for the city's future. The plan calls for closing neighborhoods, cutting services and cultivating new industries. But even with the best of intentions, if city leaders don't learn from the city's urban renewal mistakes of the past, Detroit will be doomed to repeat them.

Although Detroit's population has declined by more than 1.3 million since 1950, the problems of how to make tough decisions remain unchanged.

After I moved to the state to attend the University of Michigan, I fell in love with the city of Detroit. I chose to write my senior thesis about how the city had made decisions in the past.

In particular, I sought to answer a simple question: Why had Detroit demolished Hastings Street, its culturally rich black main street, and other neighborhoods during urban renewal? I found a complicated story where flawed urban renewal policy and city politics came together at the expense of some of the city's most vulnerable citizens. As the city debates renewal again today, the history of Hastings Street offers lessons for Detroit's future.

In the 1940s, Detroit's city planners captured the era's best ideas about how modern cities should be designed. Captured by the 1946 Detroit Plan, this vision separated residential, industrial and commercial buildings by a network of freeways. The plans also proposed tearing down large neighborhoods that were deemed "slums," but also proposed building dozens of housing projects, a mass transit system and other public facilities.

The Housing Act of 1949 made federal urban renewal money available for Detroit to implement the plan, but the local political process intervened. When Mayor Albert Cobo was elected in the fall of 1949, the carefully laid plans were changed.

A white Republican, Cobo was the first mayor who won by splitting the electorate along racial — not class — lines. Advocates for housing and a more sensitive approach to urban renewal were forced out of city government. The slum clearance went forward. Public housing and desegregation of the housing market did not.

Within two years, Hastings Street was cleared for Interstate 75. The 120-acre "Gratiot Area Redevelopment Project" area was razed, displacing 1,238 dwelling units and more than 7,000 residents.

After sitting empty for over a decade, eventually the site would contain the Lafayette Towers project. Thousands were forced from their homes around the city, often in the poorest neighborhoods.

Continued at: http://detnews.com/article/20110602/...#ixzz1O8UjUtzO

About the author

Robert Goodspeed is a Ph.D. student in the MIT department of urban studies and planning. His research is in the use of the Internet and geographic information systems technologies for collaborative regional urban planning.

[DetroitPlanner]

This guy lost my interest when he pointed out "A white Republican Cobo"

Enough with this race card clap-trap.

Yest there has to be public involvement for the plan to work. My biggest question is how to get around those trying to shout down each others opinions or suggestion so that they can shape the plan the way that favors them. In a lot of ways these folks are just like Maroun and playing cards close to thier vests.

[ghettopalmetto]

This guy lost my interest when he pointed out "A white Republican Cobo"

Enough with this race card clap-trap.

Would you have an identical reaction if he had mentioned the "white Democrat" Jerry Cavanagh, during whose term the race riots occurred?

Maybe you should separate your ideology from your profession.

[lilpup]

I take it this guy knows nothing about the public forums that were conducted, among other things.

And since when do editorials constitute a place for mini autobiographies?

[Detroitnerd]

I take it this guy knows nothing about the public forums that were conducted, among other things.

And since when do editorials constitute a place for mini autobiographies?

In my humble opinion, those were little more than well-orchestrated dog-and-pony shows.

[Jason]

What more could the residents say than "don't demolish my neighborhood, demolish that other one".

[professorscott]

Yep, that's precisely what'll happen.

[DetroitPlanner]

Would you have an identical reaction if he had mentioned the "white Democrat" Jerry Cavanagh, during whose term the race riots occurred?

Maybe you should separate your ideology from your profession.

Why yes I would. Those are nothing but red herrings to be divisive.

Why not mention The black Democrat Kwame Kilpatrick?

At least Lafayette Park, for what it took became something. All Kwame did was take and gave nothing but a giant hole to dig out of.

In the 1950's cities were shortsighted in putting in all of these freeways. However, there was a general plan that was forced upon them and the states by the Feds through the National Defense Highway System. These were seen as avenues of commerce and a way to get people out of cities should the bombs drop. Lots of money came into Detroit at this time for defense spending nike air bases, and freeways in order to keep us safe from what was seen as the red commie devils. Freeways had to go somewhere. Where I grew up the Jeffries kicked out a bunch of white people. Times were different then, there was no NEPA, public comment, or environmental impact statements. Bings Plan must contain public involvement and hopefully it won't get twisted for the wishes of a few as things were in the 1950's. Without public involvement no court in the world will uphold the plan today. Then, it was an afterthought.

[Woodward's Cousin]

Kirk Cheyfitz offers his critique of the Detroit Works Project: "Political Schizophrenia in Detroit":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirk-c...tml?view=print

Note also Cheyfitz' reference to a proposed new newsgathering organization " Detroit 143".

[BrushStart]

Kirk Cheyfitz offers his critique of the Detroit Works Project: "Political Schizophrenia in Detroit":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kirk-c...tml?view=print

Note also Cheyfitz' reference to a proposed new newsgathering organization " Detroit 143".

I love that picture that HuffPost used; it makes it look like the only people who give a damn is a room full of old ladies!

[DetroitPole]

If anything, this guy is a day late and a dollar short.

The Detroit Works Project has officially been put on hold until "next year." The Bing administration got nothing done when they were riding high, and now that they've drained their political capital and goodwill, it seems pretty unlikely this will take shape in any meaningful form. They've had two years and just waffled about nothing while his administration has had a revolving door.

Remember Project 14? Can you guess how that's going? It's not, in case you were wondering.

I think the bigger issue right now for anyone who actually knows whats going on on the ground here [[read: not this Goodspeed guy) is whether anything is going to actually get done, especially under this administration, or if the city is just going to continue its slow, painful downward spiral endlessly.

[BrushStart]

If anything, this guy is a day late and a dollar short.

The Detroit Works Project has officially been put on hold until "next year." The Bing administration got nothing done when they were riding high, and now that they've drained their political capital and goodwill, it seems pretty unlikely this will take shape in any meaningful form. They've had two years and just waffled about nothing while his administration has had a revolving door.

Remember Project 14? Can you guess how that's going? It's not, in case you were wondering.

I think the bigger issue right now for anyone who actually knows whats going on on the ground here [[read: not this Goodspeed guy) is whether anything is going to actually get done, especially under this administration, or if the city is just going to continue its slow, painful downward spiral endlessly.

I'm not suggesting the project hasn't stalled, but I think people are naive about how something like this has to work. I'm sorry to say it, but public input in this process cannot guide decision-making. It would be a complete quagmire. Few residents are going to be happy with whatever decisions are made about specific neighborhoods. "Mam, I'm sorry, but we can no longer provide any services to your neighborhood, we will be offering you an option to relocate here, here or here; take it or leave it." Very few residents are going to want to hear that and the ones affected are going to be pissed off and uncooperative.

Secondly, any plans spelling out which neighborhoods will be losers and winners must be kept absolutely secret. I mean no leaks whatsoever. As soon as word gets out, speculators are going to converge on the receiving neighborhoods like the hounds of hell. They will buy up everything and hold it ransom. On the flip side, guys like Michael Kelley, who own a bunch of the land slated to be deserted are going stampede the 3rd Circuit with an army of lawyers w/ injunctions in-hand. They may tie the process up in the courts for years. Nothing like this has ever been done before.

Where Bing has dropped the ball, IMO, is that he hasn't explained thoroughly enough why this project is so desperately needed. He hasn't explained the downsides and benefits. He hasn't given even a rough time line. He could explain all of those things w/o showing his cards and it might help put people at ease, or at least give them something to chew on. Right now, everyone is in the dark and that's leading to restlessness and anxiety, which is quickly becoming apathy, and which will eventually become malcontent and anger. Aside from completing the actual plans, Bing's biggest job is getting people mentally and emotionally prepared for change. He has to hold their hand instead of hiding behind a curtain. At this point it's all about public relations, and if the public doesn't trust or understand Bing's motives, the situation is going to blow up.

[royce]

Good points, Brushstart. Someone is always going to be left unhappy. If you offered people in an area slated to be mothballed a million dollars to relocate, you would still have a few that wouldn't take the money and would rather stay where they are. In any decision, you can't please 100% of the people. Even if you lay out the most logical facts, some will still go against you or your plan. This forum verifies this statement everyday. What Bing proposes through Detroit Works is unprecedented. With eminent domain out of the picture, very creative ways will need to be implemented to achieve the desired objective. Even with them, there's no guarantee that right-sizing Detroit will ever get off the ground.

[bailey]

Good points, Brushstart. Someone is always going to be left unhappy. If you offered people in an area slated to be mothballed a million dollars to relocate, you would still have a few that wouldn't take the money and would rather stay where they are. In any decision, you can't please 100% of the people. Even if you lay out the most logical facts, some will still go against you or your plan. This forum verifies this statement everyday. What Bing proposes through Detroit Works is unprecedented. With eminent domain out of the picture, very creative ways will need to be implemented to achieve the desired objective. Even with them, there's no guarantee that right-sizing Detroit will ever get off the ground.

Emminent domain IS NOT out of any picture. The use of "eminent domain" to take property and then give to a private business entity is. The Poletown case was overrulled [[that's were the government seized land and gave it to GM under the theory that the factory was a public good [[even though owned by GM))...not the eminent domain scheme itself. The problem is in the real world, it won't work for a large scale project like this because no one will ever agree to what the value of the land being seized is because of the speculator/hold outs. Those unwilling to move, or those that stand to lose out on their slum lording will be unwilling to go along with the "right sizing" and will stop the entire process in it's tracks for decades upon decades of legal wrangling over why their 1200 square feet of squalor, empty building, or vacant lot is really worth eleventy billion dollars.

The only thing that will "right size" the city of Detroit is a natural disaster or figuring out how to attract people back to rebuild a tax base. Talking about relocating people, diverting services...etc will NEVER HAPPEN. EVER. NEVER EVER. THey should just stop. it's pointless.

[BrushStart]

The only thing that will "right size" the city of Detroit is a natural disaster or figuring out how to attract people back to rebuild a tax base. Talking about relocating people, diverting services...etc will NEVER HAPPEN. EVER. NEVER EVER. THey should just stop. it's pointless.

I don't think it is impossible, but you're right, it is going to be very difficult. In the end, it may prove to be even more costly than to just leave things as they are. Eventually, the city will right-size itself as people in desolate areas move away or die off, it'll just take longer. It's not as if anyone new is moving into those areas. We're basically talking about the fate of older, long-time residents.

A much more effective way to accomplish right-sizing the city is to decommission certain areas, whereby control reverts back to the county and state. Essentially, those areas would no longer be within the city of Detroit, they would simply be treated the way rural land is treated elsewhere in Michigan, where the county and state provide minimal services, but basically, you're on your own. At that point, Bing should approach those residents in the "decommissioned zones," explain to them what is going on, and offer them a voucher to relocate to a more populated area within the city. That way, Bing does not need to outwit developers and land owners and he gets the same result. That's how I'd do it anyway...

[English]

I was hoping to see more nuanced and informed discussion here about what happened to Hastings Street after reading the article. Where are the forum old timers?

[Detroitnerd]

Hastings Street! Wow, you'll never understand Hastings Street unless you talk to the actual old-timers. I wish I could find them all and get their stories. Listen to some of them and you would think it was an amazing street of perpetual sunshine, thick with people you knew well and from top to bottom filled with the best bars, hotels, barbershops, undertakers and doctors in the city. Listen to others and you'll hear it was the poorest, most ramshackle bunch of houses ever strung together, a blighted slum where children played next to prostitutes and pimps, and where four families would sometimes share the same apartment. Truly, it was the best of times and the worst of times back then. All we have now are the pictures -- and a string of six fire hydrants between Mack and Wilkins on the southbound service drive, formerly known as Hastings Street, U.S.A.

[Wesley Mouch]

Robert Moses didn't need no stinkin' citizen input. He just got things done. If you want results, elect competent leaders, write good laws, and let 'em break a few eggs. Detroit has lots of eggs.

Input from citizens is over-rated.

[mwilbert]

Robert Moses didn't need no stinkin' citizen input. He just got things done.

Perhaps not the most felicitous example for people living in a center city. In any event, the world is a different place now. Robert Moses couldn't be Robert Moses today, and personally I think that's OK, although I wouldn't disagree with someone who thought we had gone too far in the opposite direction.

[royce]

I don't think it is impossible, but you're right, it is going to be very difficult. In the end, it may prove to be even more costly than to just leave things as they are. Eventually, the city will right-size itself as people in desolate areas move away or die off, it'll just take longer. It's not as if anyone new is moving into those areas. We're basically talking about the fate of older, long-time residents.

A much more effective way to accomplish right-sizing the city is to decommission certain areas, whereby control reverts back to the county and state. Essentially, those areas would no longer be within the city of Detroit, they would simply be treated the way rural land is treated elsewhere in Michigan, where the county and state provide minimal services, but basically, you're on your own. At that point, Bing should approach those residents in the "decommissioned zones," explain to them what is going on, and offer them a voucher to relocate to a more populated area within the city. That way, Bing does not need to outwit developers and land owners and he gets the same result. That's how I'd do it anyway...

Brushstart, I'm basically with you on your plan. However, before decommisioning or unincorporating certain areas of the city, the mayor would inform people living in those areas that they have one year to accept a voucher and move into the desired areas. After one year, the area reverts back to the county or state and if the homeowners still want to live in the area they can but without any city services.

Now, my next thought is, "Is Bing willing to physically make the city smaller, giving control of portions of the city's 139 square miles to the county or state, never to get that land back? That's not an easy decision, but it would make relocating citizens a lot easier than keeping the land in Detroit's control.

And for Bailey, how would you use eminent domain to take land from people if the goal is not to use the land for any reason? Mothballing land means not putting into use. Can you use eminent domain to take land from a land owner and tell them that you are going to turn it into wilderness?

[Wesley Mouch]

Perhaps not the most felicitous example for people living in a center city. In any event, the world is a different place now. Robert Moses couldn't be Robert Moses today, and personally I think that's OK, although I wouldn't disagree with someone who thought we had gone too far in the opposite direction.

Had to look up 'felicitous'. Good word. Thanks.

You got my point.

And of course citizen input is of necessary and good. But we need some balance.

One balancing factor is some kind of respect for people's engagement. If you just show up at the first meeting about your neighborhood, should you have the same voice as the community activist who has learned their stuff, listened to others, attended meetings, volunteered in the community? We take this one-man/one-vote shit too far. Everything must be 'fair'. Every voice must be heard.

Sometimes you must earn your 'voice'.

[bailey]

Brushstart, I'm basically with you on your plan. However, before decommisioning or unincorporating certain areas of the city, the mayor would inform people living in those areas that they have one year to accept a voucher and move into the desired areas. After one year, the area reverts back to the county or state and if the homeowners still want to live in the area they can but without any city services.

So, tax paying citizens in a municipality will be told that their taxes will not pay for any services in their area? I'm thinking lots of lawyers would take that case and make a nice retirement on the fees.

And for Bailey, how would you use eminent domain to take land from people if the goal is not to use the land for any reason? Mothballing land means not putting into use. Can you use eminent domain to take land from a land owner and tell them that you are going to turn it into wilderness?

If they can prove [[probably after a few decades of legal wrangling) that the land is being left fallow for a public purpose or a public necessity, then yes they can. however.. that is really the second question. The first being how much are they going to pay the citizen or entity that owns it for the property. IIRC they need to give you 125% of the value of the property based on it's highest and best use. [[I'm sure someone will correct me if wrong). the rub is how do you value an empty building/last house on the block/ vacant lot being turned into grass land?

The owner is going to say [[just like the rivertown owners circa 1995 casino developing) that the empty blighted building they've owned for 35 years and done nothing with should be valued at 11 million dollars. Which is why we now we have a destroyed blighted riverfront where there once was a cool vibe of bars and restaurants and casinos randomly shotgunned all over the city instead of a coherent and dare i say "vibrant" casino district on the river.

Same thing will happen here. Hold outs and slum lords will guarantee any effort to cut off services, seize property, or decommission areas will be met with lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. It's foolish to waste anymore effort, time or [[most importantly) money on any proposal to shrink the physical size of the city. its not going to happen.

[Danny]

Dr. Robert Goodspeed is almost right on the money about Detroit's woes. Years of xenophobia, segregation, slum clearance, political corruption, police problems, violent crime, flow of drugs, 1943 RACE RIOTS! 1967 riots, the election of Coleman A. Young and this determination at remain as Mayor of Detroit til the end. Black takeover of all Detroit city governments, Black dominance of most neighborhoods since 1975, broken Detroit Public Schools to KING KWAME'S pimping parties took its tool on Detroit's image. Now were are in next decade in the new millenium and still Detroit is stuck in the dark ages [[ like Medieval Europe) while the suburbs thrived like developing ancient Muslim emipires of the 7th century.

Our Detroit black leaders are indeed planing to fail even though think they are not failing, but struggling. The more middle class leaving the city, the lower population; federal and state grants will decline. Folks you all have some options either we stand up, take back Detroit from those "I don't care about Detroit people' or move away and tell your folks fondest memories of Detroit before the best stuff of gone.

WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET!

Because fixing Detroit takes action, not talk for Neda's Sake.

[royce]

So, tax paying citizens in a municipality will be told that their taxes will not pay for any services in their area? I'm thinking lots of lawyers would take that case and make a nice retirement on the fees.

If they can prove [[probably after a few decades of legal wrangling) that the land is being left fallow for a public purpose or a public necessity, then yes they can. however.. that is really the second question. The first being how much are they going to pay the citizen or entity that owns it for the property. IIRC they need to give you 125% of the value of the property based on it's highest and best use. [[I'm sure someone will correct me if wrong). the rub is how do you value an empty building/last house on the block/ vacant lot being turned into grass land?

The owner is going to say [[just like the rivertown owners circa 1995 casino developing) that the empty blighted building they've owned for 35 years and done nothing with should be valued at 11 million dollars. Which is why we now we have a destroyed blighted riverfront where there once was a cool vibe of bars and restaurants and casinos randomly shotgunned all over the city instead of a coherent and dare i say "vibrant" casino district on the river.

Same thing will happen here. Hold outs and slum lords will guarantee any effort to cut off services, seize property, or decommission areas will be met with lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. It's foolish to waste anymore effort, time or [[most importantly) money on any proposal to shrink the physical size of the city. its not going to happen.

Bailey, I failed to mention that people living in decommissioned areas would no longer pay property taxes since they would no longer have city services. I don't see how they could sue then. No property is being seized. If anything, the city is giving the property to the owners to do what they deem fit. Without street lights, water, police and fire service, sewage service, garbage pick-up, and road repair, only diehards will remain in the decommissioned areas. If anything is going to be done to relocate people to better neighborhoods, then this, along with vouchers, is the only way in my view that right sizing will ever work.

The problem I have with your view, Bailey, is that your solution is to let things take there course without trying to do anything. Your solution seems to be walk away and call it a day regarding Detroit's future. As a citizen of Detroit, I can't accept that approach. I'm thinking like a surgeon. Cut the disease out of the patient and have the patient live a long and disease free life, instead of doing nothing and letting the disease attack the rest of the patient's body, shortening the patient's life. That's not acceptable to me.

Also, Bailey, I can't determine at times on what side of an issue you are on, You explain the debacle in Rivertown, but do you blame the city or do you blame the property owners for what happened? On one hand you appear to blame the city for attempting to get all of the casinos in one place. Yet, you obviouly don't like them being spread all over the place. On the other hand you talk about the property owners not doing anything with their properties for years and then wanting the city to pay them millions, yet you liked the few cool bars and restaurants in the area while the rest of the area had abandoned buildings and abandoned properties. I'm not understanding the contradictory views. Would you care to elaborate? At any rate, to solve Detroit's problems, something has to be done.

BTW, there were only five restaurants/bars in Rivertown during its boom time that were affected by the casino debacle. You had the Soup Kitchen [[restaurant and bar), the Bastille[[bar), BC [[brewing company or Franklin BC - bar), Rivertown/Dancery nightclub [[dance club and bar), and the original Rhinoceros [[restaurant and bar). At the time of the announcement to put the casinos in the area, only the Soup Kitchen and Rhinoceros were still open.

[Zacha341]

Good point!

...those that stand to lose out on their slum lording will be unwilling to go along with the "right sizing" and will stop the entire process in it's tracks for decades upon decades of legal wrangling over why their 1200 square feet of squalor, empty building, or vacant lot is really worth eleventy billion dollars.