Gilbert wins Brewster-Douglass

[Lowell]

And the beat goes on. Gilbert's invasion of Ilitchville's sphere of influence gets finalized.

"Dan Gilbert’s Bedrock Management Services LLC and three other companies, including two national real estate developers, are part of a joint venture that has been selected to build a mixed-use development of primarily multifamily housing on about 25 acres of land in Eastern Market and around Brush Park on the site of the former Brewster-Douglass housing projects, the city of Detroit said Saturday.

When all is said and done, the multiple-phase project by Choice Detroit LLC is expected to include 900 to 1,000 units of housing ranging from low-income to market rate and costing approximately $267 million."

Interesting background to one of the developers Columbia, Md.-based Enterprise Communities Partners, a national developer with significant low-income housing experience...

"This is the only team that brought together a national leader in affordable housing and two African American developers, one Detroit-based, both experienced in affordable housing," said James Arthur Jemison, the city’s director of housing and revitalization, in a statement.

"This team will work with the city and the community to build a mixed-use development that will honor Brewster’s past and provide affordable housing for our future.”

Enterprise has since 1982 created nearly 340,000 homes and invested $18.6 billion nationwide.

[ABetterDetroit]

900-1000 MORE housing units with 267 Million investment plus partnership with huge players. This is big.

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...or-267-million

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

I wish there was a map of the development area in that article

[Hypestyles]

So in this context, what does "affordable" mean? What's the monthly rent supposed to be? Can single people with no kids qualify?

The design of the new residences is extremely important. The old standard of oppressive towers should be completely abandoned.

Security should be paramount. Regardless of the income, everybody should be made to feel safe living here. The cliche's of the 70s and 80s [[gangs, drugs, prostitution) need to be avoided at all costs.

[Junjie]

So in this context, what does "affordable" mean? What's the monthly rent supposed to be? Can single people with no kids qualify?

The design of the new residences is extremely important. The old standard of oppressive towers should be completely abandoned.

Security should be paramount. Regardless of the income, everybody should be made to feel safe living here. The cliche's of the 70s and 80s [[gangs, drugs, prostitution) need to be avoided at all costs.

I think the good news is that the towers in the park style has pretty definitely been rejected at this point [[I mean in current construction by developers who know what they're doing, not anything specific about this project).

"The plan is required to have at least 224 public housing units, in mixed-income neighborhood settings on and off the original Brewster-Douglass site, according to the RFQ. Unit residents must pay no more than 30 percent of their income for rent.

“The new community should include a mixture of deeply subsidized, affordable and market rate rental and/or homeownership units as determined to be viable and advantageous to the overall development effort,” the RFQ said."

The idea is to have a mix of income levels and therefore avoid the concentrated poverty that breeds social ills.

Not sure what the standards are for "deeply subsidized" [[section 8?) and "affordable" - maybe someone else can speak to that. 30% of income doesn't tell us much without an income level.

[bust]

This could be great. I'm encouraged by the mixed-income and mixed-use aspects of the development. Looking forward to the design. Its success or failure will of course depend in large part on the specifics of that. And on not shortchanging its maintenance once built. Its location bodes well, nestled as it is betwixt Downtown, Eastern Market, and Midtown, next to the future Rec Center project and the other large Brush Park development bringing needed vitality to the area. I'm optimistic about this one.

Jane Jacobs said it a long time ago; studies say it remains true today: dense, diverse, walkable neighborhoods are good for the local economy.

http://www.citylab.com/work/2015/11/the-connection-between-vibrant-neighborhoods-and-economic-growth/417714/

http://urbanland.uli.org/news/walkable-downtowns-drawing-companies-talent/

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/20/up...g-to-live.html

http://cityobservatory.org/ynr/

[royce]

This sounds like a HUD Hope VI development. Not for young single people. This is the new "projects" that is the new model for former projects' sites like Brewster-Douglass. It's interesting to me that Dan Gilbert would want to attach his name to this. Probably doing it for good PR reasons. It shows that he's about "inclusion" and that he's not just focused on residential development for "hipsters."

[royce]

The shock in all this news is the plan to develop Shed 4 in Eastern Market into a closed-in market and apartments. I'd love to see those plans.

BTW, where is Shed 4?

[casscorridor]

This sounds like a HUD Hope VI development. Not for young single people. This is the new "projects" that is the new model for former projects' sites like Brewster-Douglass. It's interesting to me that Dan Gilbert would want to attach his name to this. Probably doing it for good PR reasons. It shows that he's about "inclusion" and that he's not just focused on residential development for "hipsters."

Not necessarily. Let's hope it's more like Cabrini Green redevelopment in Chicago.

[Honky Tonk]

So in this context, what does "affordable" mean? What's the monthly rent supposed to be? Can single people with no kids qualify?

The design of the new residences is extremely important. The old standard of oppressive towers should be completely abandoned.

Security should be paramount. Regardless of the income, everybody should be made to feel safe living here. The cliche's of the 70s and 80s [[gangs, drugs, prostitution) need to be avoided at all costs.

And yet there are towers all over the planet, with efficiency sized units, commanding high rent to live there, without the issues the Brewsters had. Why do you think that is?

[Honky Tonk]

The shock in all this news is the plan to develop Shed 4 in Eastern Market into a closed-in market and apartments. I'd love to see those plans.

BTW, where is Shed 4?

https://www.easternmarket.com/explore/maps

[Hypestyles]

I don't like towers model, regardless. try something else. the designers need to be much more creative.

[Junjie]

And yet there are towers all over the planet, with efficiency sized units, commanding high rent to live there, without the issues the Brewsters had. Why do you think that is?

Probably because they're not clustered together in a park and limited only to poor people. Why do you think it is?

[EL Jimbo]

Probably because they're not clustered together in a park and limited only to poor people. Why do you think it is?

The design itself has nothing to do with the social issues. Be it a towers, row houses, whatever. The issue was concentrated poverty. Wherever poverty is concentrated, problems occur. The fact that this is planned to be mixed incomes makes it much more likely that problems won't occur than if it were strictly low-income housing.

[MSUguy]

I don't like towers model, regardless. try something else. the designers need to be much more creative.

There will be no towers in park.
"Dan Gilbert’s Bedrock Management Services LLC and three other
companies, including two national real estate developers, are part of a joint venture that has been selected to build a mixed-use development"A n

Anyway there's more info and interesting stuff in the city's website

http://www.detroitmi.gov/choice

April 20 Brush Park community presentation:
http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/d...=1462811424600

[Danny]

Well, there goes the poor. As Gilberttown expands.

What about the poor welfare and food stamp supported black people who live there?

[Honky Tonk]

Probably because they're not clustered together in a park and limited only to poor people. Why do you think it is?

Total nonsense. So if you're rich and clustered together, something magic happens, if you're poor and clustered together, shit happens?

[ekleezy]

Total nonsense. So if you're rich and clustered together, something magic happens, if you're poor and clustered together, shit happens?

You can't deny that it's more likely that there will be more problems with concentrated poverty than concentrated wealth. There can still be problems with mixed incomes living together but it's less likely.

[dtowncitylover]

There can still be problems with mixed incomes living together but it's less likely.

LOL This is called a real and functional city.

[Shai_Hulud]

Total nonsense. So if you're rich and clustered together, something magic happens, if you're poor and clustered together, shit happens?

Seriously? It's 2016 and you're acting as if concentration of poverty isn't real?

Take all the poor, ignorant and desperate that you can find, cram them in as tight as you can, isolate them and just watch the Nobel winners start popping out?

Oh ok.

[MSUguy]

Total nonsense. So if you're rich and clustered together, something magic happens, if you're poor and clustered together, shit happens?

Nothing magical there is decades of research on the effects growing up in concerted poverty has on people.

[Wesley Mouch]

Probably because they're not clustered together in a park and limited only to poor people. Why do you think it is?

I subscribe to the theory that the problem is cultural, not from poverty. If you were to ask most residents of any public housing, you'd probably find that security is their number one concern. Likely not in favor of the BLM crusade to cure the world of active policing.

[southen]

I subscribe to the theory that the problem is cultural, not from poverty.

Poverty creates the culture, there is no separating the two.

[Honky Tonk]

Poverty creates the culture, there is no separating the two.

Southen, we weren't destitute, but we were by no means rich. We helped and respected our neighbors not took advantage of them. The biggest issue IMO is attitude, not monetary status. I have no idea how to change that in some one else.

[southen]

Southen, we weren't destitute, but we were by no means rich. We helped and respected our neighbors not took advantage of them. The biggest issue IMO is attitude, not monetary status. I have no idea how to change that in some one else.

Attitude and culture are derived from your surroundings. Not everyone is impacted the same way by poverty, but it clearly has an impact on people, especially in urban communities where opportunity isn't as readily available. I would like to think that I would have respect and would not resort to bad behavior if I grew up the son to a single mother in Detroit vs. growing up the son of a single mother in Rochester like I did, but I can't say for certain I would have ended up the same.

Given the amount of Detroit youth that make their way into the prison system im not sure there is a surefire way to change that in a person. I think it boils down to making inner city neighborhoods a priority and providing opportunities and a good education.

Every time I want to yell at my television "Why?!?!?!" when I see another one of these stories I have to remind myself that I didn't grow up on a block with three burned down homes, in a neighborhood with no street lights and in a school district that has a mushroom and rodent problem. There is definitely a culture to a lot of this, I just happen to think that it starts with poverty and goes from there.