Hantz Farms urban agriculture plan close to reality for Detroit

[bailey]

I agree with SWMAP. Maybe this is some underhanded scheme to raise tons of money for himself, but in the meantime, until the land IS worth something, at least it will be used for SOMETHING other than dumping trash.

Unless there is going to be a 15ft high wall around all 175 acres and 24 hour surveillance, what is going to stop it from having just as much dumping, drug dealing, squatting/camping, and crack head fornication as goes on there now? The guy is just planting a bunch of trees in empty, non contiguous lots shotgunned around the area.

I wonder, despite best intentions, if the planting of more trees is going to provide more cover for very activities people wish to see eliminated.

[iheartthed]

I agree with SWMAP. Maybe this is some underhanded scheme to raise tons of money for himself, but in the meantime, until the land IS worth something, at least it will be used for SOMETHING other than dumping trash.

The fundamentals for making a project like this work are... dubious at best. How long will it take this to be profitable? Or generate revenue period? How long will it take for these trees to grow? It would take them the amount of time to reach maturity as it took for Detroit to decline from 2 million residents to 700,000 residents.

It just sounds like another dumb hare-brained scheme to "rescue" Detroit. Another huge top-down development that is supposed to reinvent the fundamentals of what makes a city work... all while diverting attention from actually investing in the fundamentals that are proven to be what cities thrive on.

[kenp]

It just sounds like another dumb hare-brained scheme to "rescue" Detroit. Another huge top-down development that is supposed to reinvent the fundamentals of what makes a city work... all while diverting attention from actually investing in the fundamentals that are proven to be what cities thrive on.

Well said....

[poobert]

JoAnn Watson prides herself on standing up for Detroit residents as business owners so I am confident she will intervene on the behalf of John Hantz, a Detroiter, in the face of his racist opposition.

This guy is a multi-millionare. He didn't make his money by accident so I doubt he's setting himself up for failure. He isn't demolishing anything. He's taking land that has been vacant for years now and grows increasingly vacant.

I'm sure illegal dumping will occur but realize it doesn't happen hourly. The problem is that currently there is no one to clean it up.

Of course for the sake of black power we can all just smugly stare at the vacant lots full of couches, tires, and body parts instead I guess.

So Malik Nobody is head of a non-profit advisory board? Boy, that sounds annoying, noisy, and useless, whatever it is. I doubt he's done many favors for his brothas and sistas himself. Getting a 501c3 is a great way to essentially run a tax-free business, though, as I'm sure he's discovered.

Maybe there is concern that his "trees will attract rodents" a la the Palmer Park Orchard.

It seems it is high time for a new motto that better reflects the Detroit of today:

Detroit: Better off blighty than whitey.

Wonder what that is in Latin.

[Wheels]

Detroit: Better off blighty than whitey.

Wonder what that is in Latin.

Detroit: melior blighty quam SUBALBUS

[Blueidone]

stasu1213, why cut and paste a long post that was the last post prior to yours and only add one sentence? Anyway, the issue of Hantz being able to buy these city-owned lots is no different than Jerome Bettis or Dave Bing getting city-owned land to build condos on the riverfront. The difference is Hantz is a "wealthy white guy" and Bing and Bettis are black. Some Detroiters will always raise cane when the person perceived to get an advantage over others is white as opposed to being black. I think some opposed Bing getting riverfront property because he didn't live in the city. However, there doesn't seem to be any opposition to local boy and super bowl hero Jerome Bettis getting parcels of land of the riverfront.

What amazes me is that those parcels of land that Hantz wants to purchase probably were available to residents in the "disputed" area a while ago when there were more homeowners. As I understand the procedure for selling city-owned property, the city would offer homeowners next to a vacant lot first crack at it if the previous owner did not want it or didn't pay prior property taxes. Now, are these nonprofits that want to have "community gardens" on these vacant lots upset because they never had a chance to buy these lots or are they upset because after all these years Hantz is able to do something that they couldn't?

I don't understand the mentality of some Detroiters and some Detroit organizations that essentially say, "If you're intelligent, enterprising, have money, or white, you need not offer your help because we don't need it." Someone's offer to help should not be based on their skin color.

These parcels were never offered to residents of the City for $300 each. My objection to this "land grab" as a prior poster put it, is that the urban gardeners in the City of Detroit [[whether they are white or black is irrelevant) have never been offered parcels at that price, to my knowledge.

Being involved with the Georgia Street Community effort to expand our gardens over the last few years, I can tell you for a fact that nothing has ever been offered to us at that price. We were not even allowed to purchase 4 contiguous lots at ANY price, unless we offered a plan for "development", meaning building houses or apartments or something.

The City has put up road blocks every time we try to purchase more land. And GSCC is feeding the residents of the area with what we grow. We are trying to expand and work with the residents to teach them to grow their own food. But each time we approach the City, there is some reason why we cannot have this lot or that lot.

I don't have much faith that the "hardwood" planting will survive...or the orchard plan, or the vegetable farming, or any of the other plans that have been presented. But if the Hantz Group want to put their money up, that's fine with me. Just offer the same deal to citizens and non-profits of the City that are trying to help each other to survive.

[SWMAP]

Well, Wayne County is offering empty lots in the property auction for $500. In Hubbard Farms, property owners can buy City-owned lots abutting their properties for $200.

[Blueidone]

Well, Wayne County is offering empty lots in the property auction for $500. In Hubbard Farms, property owners can buy City-owned lots abutting their properties for $200.

Yes...just the lot abutting them. Try to buy four or five in a row.

I can't speak to Wayne County..only the city-owned properties.

But even so, $500 is more than $300. Most non-profits need to save every penny they can, including GSCC.

[Richard]

Well, Wayne County is offering empty lots in the property auction for $500. In Hubbard Farms, property owners can buy City-owned lots abutting their properties for $200.

Currant auction vacant lots are $200 lots with structures $500