Hantz Woodlands/Farms-- Seeking insights/opinions

[DETNYC]

Hi Folks,

I live on the east side [[Jefferson-Chalmers), and am familiarizing myself with the Hantz Woodlands development. I'm interested in hearing all pro- and con- arguments to the site, the process in which the land was acquired, and whether you think it's a positive for the neighborhood, as part of a film I'm associate producer of. Please respond with any opinions, thoughts, facts, etc, and if you're interested in being interviewed on the topic, I'd love to hear from you.

[gvidas]

The topic has been covered here at some length, albeit in a lot of short threads rather than a single monolithic one:

https://www.google.com/search?q=hant...detroityes.com

[sumas]

I am ambivilant and have been. They got a crap load of property super cheap.

They have removed blighted property and have planted trees. No way do they plan to farm.

It is a bit of a joke to me. No harm, no foul, they are lieing however.

[downtownguy]

I am ambivilant and have been. They got a crap load of property super cheap.

They have removed blighted property and have planted trees. No way do they plan to farm.

It is a bit of a joke to me. No harm, no foul, they are lieing however.

Why do you say they are lying? What's the point of purchasing the property, cleaning the property, and planting trees if they have no intentions of farming them eventually? Where's the profit in that? Is it because you think they just plan to flip the properties at a profit somewhere down the road, even though the agreement with the city doesn't allow that?

Isn't hundreds of formerly blighted parcels now growing trees better than was there before? As for buying the properties super cheap, what do you think their value should have been? I don't recall there being a crap load of buyers standing in line to purchase them before Hantz came along.

[gvidas]

Is it because you think they just plan to flip the properties at a profit somewhere down the road, even though the agreement with the city doesn't allow that?

I had a hard time following the negotiation, but I thought where it ended was with only a requirement that the land be used for tree farming for five years.

From an abstract, I-don't-know-much-about-economics-but-I'll-post-about-it-on-the-internet perspective, the value of vacant land in Detroit is in a really interesting place right now. The value of a standard 1/8 acre lot varies wildly. $1 opening bid in foreclosure auctions, $100 as a side lot, $500 from the county tax auction, $1k and up if privately owned. The Hantz deal was a massive move in terms of establishing the lower bound on the value of land in the city, and it alienated a lot of people because at the time [[and more or less still today) there was no clear process for individuals to buy vacant city-owned land.

Now at least you can sometimes buy side lots depending on neighborhood, and there is an entity to at least direct inquiries towards.

[sumas]

Why do you say they are lying? What's the point of purchasing the property, cleaning the property, and planting trees if they have no intentions of farming them eventually? Where's the profit in that? Is it because you think they just plan to flip the properties at a profit somewhere down the road, even though the agreement with the city doesn't allow that?

Isn't hundreds of formerly blighted parcels now growing trees better than was there before? As for buying the properties super cheap, what do you think their value should have been? I don't recall there being a crap load of buyers standing in line to purchase them before Hantz came along.

What they are doing is fine with me.

No way will it be tree farms. I've worked landscape most of my adult life. Nothing is prept to harvest at all. If it was to be tree farms, the noise, the dirt and heavy equipment add nothing to quality of life for Detroit.

It's just a joke for land grab for future development. No doubt set up like suburban type development. Bless them and good luck. Maybe they will do better then past shlocky developers.

[Packman41]

...<snip> The value of a standard 1/8 acre lot varies wildly. $1 opening bid in foreclosure auctions, $100 as a side lot, $500 from the county tax auction, $1k and up if privately owned. The Hantz deal was a massive move in terms of establishing the lower bound on the value of land in the city, ...<snip>...

I’ve heard the terms like “below market value” and “land grab” tossed about, but is that true?

Whenever you buy a large amount of anything you generally get a discount for volume purchases. Back in 2012 the CofD had 60,000 lots available for sale – some vacant and some with dilapidated structures.

According to this Free Press report Hantz paid $520,000 in 2012 for 1500 lots/140 acres:
http://archive.freep.com/article/201...ands-land-sale

That works out to $347 per lot or $3,714 per acre. And that was before he was required to pay demo and cleanup costs of any remaining structures.

Anybody know how many structures he had to tear down? That costs $10,000 to $15,000 to complete. Let’s do some math. Assume:

• 10% of the lots had structures on them [[150 lots)
• Demo costs were done for the cheapest estimate: $10,000 apiece

That would add $1,500,000 to the acquisition price or $1,000 per lot to the total cost. Therefore his average cost per VACANT lot becomes $1,347 dollars each.

Suddenly, that discount price for volume purchases does NOT look so “discount.” Besides, after he bought that huge parcel of 1500 lots, the CofD still had 58,500 lots left to sell.

BTW, the Hantz website states they budgeted $3.0 million for cleanup costs, but that could be somewhat self-serving, so my estimate is about half that.

[EL Jimbo]

What they are doing is fine with me.

No way will it be tree farms. I've worked landscape most of my adult life. Nothing is prept to harvest at all. If it was to be tree farms, the noise, the dirt and heavy equipment add nothing to quality of life for Detroit.

It's just a joke for land grab for future development. No doubt set up like suburban type development. Bless them and good luck. Maybe they will do better then past shlocky developers.

If I recall correctly, the tree plantings were part of phase 1 of the plan as the trees would help remove the lead contamination that would need to be eliminated before any edible crops could be planted and harvested.

However, that was several years ago and my memory on the subject might not be correct.

[jolla]

Yes, he stole very valuable land to develop and sell for millions.

OR, it was a bunch of blight that NOBODY wanted and he paid for it and is cleaning it up.

Land grab, for cripes sake. It's not a land grab if nobody wants it.