"Right sizing"

[Detroitnerd]

I can acknowledge that the past should make us all skeptical of urban redevelopment plans. And even if Mayor Bing is earnest [[which he seems to be), that does not mean that future mayors/City Council member will be similarly earnest. Any plan involving allocations of resources or declaring winners and losers is susceptible to corruption. That said, I think we need to work to make any redevelopment process as open and transparent as possible, because sitting by and doing nothing will not help, either.

I'm all for openness and transparency. But if we had those things, I'll bet this would not be the direction we'd be heading in. Instead, wouldn't it be better if residents themselves framed the debate?

[Parkguy]

There is a model that is widespread in Michigan for what _could_ be done in Detroit to "rightsize." Take blocks off of the water and sewer system, take them off of the city lighting grid, and turn the street grid in that part of the city into non-maintained roads. If you go to rural areas of Michigan, you see forest roads and even sections of named roads marked as roads that are not maintained by the XXX county road commission. Very often you'll see these signs after the last house with children who need bus pickup for school. Offer homeowners subsidized well-drilling and septic systems, and set a date for the water, sewer, and streetlights to be turned off. Electrical power for the house is already a contract between homeowner and power company-- same goes for telephone service. Garbage services could require taking trash bins "out to the end of the road," just like people do up north. There is already a utility easement for power lines, so they could still be used. This may not make financial sense in every depressed, mostly-abandoned neighborhood, but in some areas there might be a net savings even after paying for wells and septic systems. And, to make it more palatable and fair, adjust property and income taxes in those areas to reflect the reduced services. If the residents want to stay, then fine. If they want to move instead, give them an incentive that reflects the subsidies they would get to convert to private services. They'd still own their property, and they could sell if they want. Just don't let them abandon their houses. Plan ahead and make sure state legislation and local ordinances align with your plan to minimize lawsuits and delays. Maybe it would work. Average well and septic systems cost in the neighborhood of $20,000 --$25,000 complete, unless I'm way off. Yes, I know that under some conditions it can cost much more, and may require other solutions if the soil doesn't percolate. We force owners to hook into a new system when it comes into an area-- perhaps we can entice them to unhook when they shut down.

[Detroitnerd]

Will we propose right-sizing plans for the unfinished exurban developments too?

[mam2009]

I must confess that I absolutely do not see how "right-sizing" can be accomplished as a practical matter. I try to break down these large scale ideas into very basic & relatable bites. Let's say I was laid off from my $75k/yr. job and now make $325/wk in unemployment. Let's say I own two houses in the city -- one I live in and the other is vacant and fire-damaged [[insurance policy canceled because City wouldn't cut down dangerous tree). Sitting there vacant, I need to go by and secure it until I finally have enough money to tear it down. I also need to cut the grass & clean up the trash that gets dumped there every now and then. My uncle [[S.Am) gives me the money to tear down the house, but I still have to cut the grass and clean up the trash. The house I live in is already in foreclosure so I already don't have extra money to begin with. How am I going to maintain this now vacant land without the proper monetary resources? What I really need is a higher paying job [[more revenue) and the proper skills to do the job. The real question is where is the City going to get more revenue from?!

This city cannot have long-term viability until we drastically expand our revenue base, exponentially improve vital service delivery [[health and safety) and sincerely emphasize customer service satisfaction. People are constantly knocking our leadership, but I believe that we have enough of the right people in key positions to accomplish great things, but just like in our own households -- if your breadwinner loses his/her main source of revenue, eventually even the best of them will fall behind on bills & household maintenance, have to face foreclosure and/or file for bankruptcy.

What is our leadership [[and we as citizens) willing to do to attract more tax-paying citizens and businesses to this City? What kind of bailout [[tax, education and investment incentives) is our federal government willing to offer us? My ideas...

1. Student Loans - Federal Student Loan forgiveness if you pledge to continue to live in or move to Detroit for 5 years or more. EDUCATED CITIZENRY

2. Federal and State Income Tax Credit for living in and/or headquartering your business in the City of Detroit [[the more Detroit employees you hire, the bigger your credit). No more local credits. We obviously cannot afford it. POPULATION AND TAX REVENUE INCREASES

3. Reinstate residency requirements for emergency services personnel. HIGHTENED SENSE OF SECURITY FOR RESIDENTS, INCREASE POPULATION & TAX REVENUE.

4. Residents - Cut your grass, clean up trash in front of your house and your neighbors' houses. Watch your neighborhood. Talk to children with respect and pride and encouragement.

5. Create a top-down customer service-friendly work culture at City Hall.

This is just a start, but let's hear more conversations about REAL solutions. Attract developers to come in to buy up large swaths of under-utilized land. Why are we trying to do their job? Even if we rope off an area, you've still got to drive to or around it to empty the trash or make an emergency run to get to another area, you've still got to cut the grass and patrol it for illegal activity, you've still got to maintain the water mains and other infastructure that runs through it to service other non-roped off areas. I just don't get it!

[royce]

There is a model that is widespread in Michigan for what _could_ be done in Detroit to "rightsize." Take blocks off of the water and sewer system, take them off of the city lighting grid, and turn the street grid in that part of the city into non-maintained roads. If you go to rural areas of Michigan, you see forest roads and even sections of named roads marked as roads that are not maintained by the XXX county road commission. Very often you'll see these signs after the last house with children who need bus pickup for school. Offer homeowners subsidized well-drilling and septic systems, and set a date for the water, sewer, and streetlights to be turned off. Electrical power for the house is already a contract between homeowner and power company-- same goes for telephone service. Garbage services could require taking trash bins "out to the end of the road," just like people do up north. There is already a utility easement for power lines, so they could still be used. This may not make financial sense in every depressed, mostly-abandoned neighborhood, but in some areas there might be a net savings even after paying for wells and septic systems. And, to make it more palatable and fair, adjust property and income taxes in those areas to reflect the reduced services. If the residents want to stay, then fine. If they want to move instead, give them an incentive that reflects the subsidies they would get to convert to private services. They'd still own their property, and they could sell if they want. Just don't let them abandon their houses. Plan ahead and make sure state legislation and local ordinances align with your plan to minimize lawsuits and delays. Maybe it would work. Average well and septic systems cost in the neighborhood of $20,000 --$25,000 complete, unless I'm way off. Yes, I know that under some conditions it can cost much more, and may require other solutions if the soil doesn't percolate. We force owners to hook into a new system when it comes into an area-- perhaps we can entice them to unhook when they shut down.

This quote by Parkguy is the only post by anyone on this thread that makes any kind of sense. I've expressed my views on this topic in the other thread so I'm not going to rehash them here. However, I just want to point out that some of you here say some of the most nonsensical stuff when it comes to this concept of "right-sizing. Where does the thought come from that there are these outsiders just waiting to get their hands on the land of homeowners living in these prairie like areas? What the hell are they going to do with the land? I am confident that they're not going to build condos for the rich. If anyone wants Detroit prairie land, then I'm sure it will only be landfill owners.

Some of you suggest, instead of right-sizing, that we come up with some "real" solutions. WTF are real solutions? The city is broke. It can't spend money that it doesn't have. Some of you talk about luring businesses back to the city, like whom? There are neighborhoods in the city where you can offer the land for a dollar and there'd be no takers. If a vast majority of neighborhoods in the city are poor, then who's going to spend the money to keep the businesses going?

Like Parkguy said, let those who want to stay in the prairie lands of Detroit stay, but discontinue city services and let them fend for themselves. For those who agree to move, then the city should offer a fair exchange for their property. Just look at the area just west of Van Dyke at Miller and St. Cyril. Those folks were cleared out and it didn't take a decree of eminent domain to get them to leave. As far as I can recall, there were no protests. The people just left quietly. If it can be done there, then it can be done in other areas of the city. Right-sizing is possible.

BTW, if right-sizing takes place, the land won't need a whole lot done to it. After water and gas pipes have been cut off, there won't be a need to dig them up. There won't be a need to dig up streets. There won't be a need to turn the vacant land into parkland. Honestly, before anyone else on this forum says why right-sizing won't work, just google map the area at Miller and St. Cyril and you will see that it can be done. If you don't, then you're just blowing hot air with every argument.

[mam2009]

Like Parkguy said, let those who want to stay in the prairie lands of Detroit stay, but discontinue city services and let them fend for themselves. For those who agree to move, then the city should offer a fair exchange for their property...

BTW, if right-sizing takes place, the land won't need a whole lot done to it. After water and gas pipes have been cut off, there won't be a need to dig them up. There won't be a need to dig up streets. There won't be a need to turn the vacant land into parkland. Honestly, before anyone else on this forum says why right-sizing won't work, just google map the area at Miller and St. Cyril and you will see that it can be done. If you don't, then you're just blowing hot air with every argument.

Discontinue city services and let them fend for themselves? That is an interesting point of view for someone who believes that others' views are "nonsensical". Do you know how expensive and time-consuming that legal fight would be. You would have every special interest, poverty rights, land owners' rights, minority rights advocacy group in the country lining up to fight cutting off municipal services to a group of people. That's like de facto eminent domain, but in an inhumane way. The bottom line is that even if the City could convince foks to move, the City still cannot IGNORE land in its borders. It will still HAVE to be maintained in some form or fashion [[i.e. roads that have to be open for emergency vehicles still must be maintained). The real issue is that we STILL wouldn't have the money to maintain it so let's figure out how to get the money to maintain it. We're not the only major American city that has faced this kind of decline. Other cities have fought back because at some point there was a decision made to invest IN them by growing and creating new opportunities, not by ignoring wholesale geographic portions of the city.

[Huggybear]

Surprising that those were not Exhibit A.

Another round of fires like we had the other day and I would say your time line could be shortened by a few years.

[mam2009]

From today's Detroit Free Press

http://www.freep.com/article/2010091...an-mean-better
[[excerpt) Look to suburban model

Getting smaller opens up the possibility for something new to take place. A smaller city creates the canvas to become a better city.
For those who find such a prospect frightful, look no farther than the suburbs to see how delightful a less dense urban landscape can be. In many of the leafier suburbs all across America, the homes are set far back from the street, open fields surround schools, and landscaped medians separate traffic on many corridors. Indeed, the population density in Oakland County north of Detroit is less than half of what it is within the city limits even today. ...
Given proper care, though, the empty fields in Detroit could look a whole lot better.

Get rid of the dumped tires and the smashed liquor bottles, cut the grass, plant sunflowers, raise vegetables, install some art objects, and pretty soon the landscape doesn't look bleak at all.

It looks hopeful, as if somebody cares.
From "Reimagining Detroit," Chapter 1, by John Gallagher, Wayne State University Press

The areas that are ripe for down-sizing are already drastically decreased in population density. What they need is proper care. And the City doesn't have have the money to properly care for it. And the few citizens who remain are not motivated [[and also can't afford) to fill up the enormous gap between what the City can afford and what is truly required to do what needs to be done to save this city. Drastic economic decisions need to be made. Our federal government must intervene. Our governor must intervene. This area needs to be made more attractive for major business investment and for working people to want to live here. Yes, we can have a cute little urban farm here or there, but that does not provide for the long-term viability of any major American city.

[royce]

Discontinue city services and let them fend for themselves? That is an interesting point of view for someone who believes that others' views are "nonsensical". Do you know how expensive and time-consuming that legal fight would be. You would have every special interest, poverty rights, land owners' rights, minority rights advocacy group in the country lining up to fight cutting off municipal services to a group of people. That's like de facto eminent domain, but in an inhumane way. The bottom line is that even if the City could convince foks to move, the City still cannot IGNORE land in its borders. It will still HAVE to be maintained in some form or fashion [[i.e. roads that have to be open for emergency vehicles still must be maintained). The real issue is that we STILL wouldn't have the money to maintain it so let's figure out how to get the money to maintain it. We're not the only major American city that has faced this kind of decline. Other cities have fought back because at some point there was a decision made to invest IN them by growing and creating new opportunities, not by ignoring wholesale geographic portions of the city.

Yes, mam2009, city services would be discontinued for those who CHOOSE to stay in the targeted areas. They would still own the land, with some zoning restrictions. The good news is that they wouldn't have to pay property taxes. However, they would have to find ways to get water and electricity, dump garbage and sewage. After awhile they probably won't stay because it would be too much work, unless they're the outdoorsman type. Mam2009, if you chose to live in a rural area would they be responsible for your septic tank if they didn't require you to pay for them? Also, who would sue if the owner gets to keep their property and pays no property taxes? They're not paying for services any more. And yes, mam2009, it is defacto eminent domain.

BTW, mam2009, what are the chances that a broke state government and a broke federal government are going to help Detroit with this problem? It's highly unlikely. So, what other suggestions do you have to improve Detroit, if right-sizing, in your opinion, won't work?

[mam2009]

Yes, mam2009, city services would be discontinued for those who CHOOSE to stay in the targeted areas. They would still own the land, with some zoning restrictions. The good news is that they wouldn't have to pay property taxes. However, they would have to find ways to get water and electricity, dump garbage and sewage. After awhile they probably won't stay because it would be too much work, unless they're the outdoorsman type. Mam2009, if you chose to live in a rural area would they be responsible for your septic tank if they didn't require you to pay for them? Also, who would sue if the owner gets to keep their property and pays no property taxes? They're not paying for services any more. And yes, mam2009, it is defacto eminent domain.

BTW, mam2009, what are the chances that a broke state government and a broke federal government are going to help Detroit with this problem? It's highly unlikely. So, what other suggestions do you have to improve Detroit, if right-sizing, in your opinion, won't work?

I gave my suggestions in post number 29. No need to be redundant. What are YOUR suggestions and others' suggestions? Not sure if you live in the area or not, but if you do you've noticed that the City can't cut the grass it already owns in a timely fashion [[hence the closing of some parks), can't afford to cut down all the dead and diseased trees that are an epidemic in the city, has a crumbling water & sewerage and public lighting infastructure, can't collect fines fast enough to truly punish illegal dumpers who happen to get ticketed.. What in God's name do people think is going to happen when you have wholesale abandonment of an area? How do I get water in my neighborhood for my fire hydrant and for my plumbing if you're blocking off the water and sewer lines three blocks from me? Why would I want to have a home across the street from the fenced off area with the overgrown weeds and warped fence from people cutting through to take the shorter distance to their destination or to use their drugs or service their johns in peace? People who believe fencing off areas is the solution cannot be people who actually live IN the city or they would see what WE already see in areas that have already been semi-abandoned due to the natural course of things. Desolation attracts criminal activity because criminals don't want to be observed and caught. Wake up "right-sizers", please. That is not the answer. I may not have all the answers, but that one is a sure loser.

[wolverine]

Ultimately, though, you cannot examine the statements of Detroit officials without looking at the context of the last century. Since the 1920s, Detroit has been bulldozing houses, businesses, apartment buildings, all in the name of progress. Most often, the structures razed have forced the poor to relocate. And those who've benefited from these demolitions have often been very well-connected elite types. You simply cannot tell Detroiters that nobody will be relocated, that this will be a plan that benefits all. You simply will not be believed, even when it's true. Which isn't to say that Detroiters are wrong about mistrusting the city's motives; too often they are right.

The way I see it, people are jumping the gun.

First of all, such a plan is in its infancy. It would likely take years of planning, community meetings, and various input from CDC's to even develop the plan on paper.

It didn't surprise me so soon that Bing would make a statement that residents would not be located. Better say it now than later. But you are going to see residents relocate and they'll do it at their own will. If someone has been waiting for this moment to leave they will. For the holdouts, they aren't going to be there forever.

I don't know how the "cut off utilities" mess got into this discussion, but there is no way that would ever happen. It's not even legal.

[Hypestyles]

the status quo is not acceptable.. something needs to be done.. hopefully folks will come to the public meetings..

[bailey]

well, they are off to a rip roaring start. Might be fun to go to the next one just for the spectacle of it all.

"You don't even know what they are saying," said Eloni Wilks, a retired teacher and resident who added she came to the meeting with high hopes of reporting back to neighbors. "The facilitators appear to be novices. ... [[The people) expect more."
Maureen Taylor, of the group Welfare Rights, said the logistics were a sign of disrespect.
"Whoever organized this dog and pony show, this should have been handled better," she said. "We deserve better than this."

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...troit-s-future

On WDET one of the attendees was discussing his fear of gentrification and the people being run out because property values would be too high. Seriously...as if were going to happen tomorrow.

Also, as a bit of a side note...it's often mentioned here and elsewhere that a gayborhood or at least a gay/progressive presence are often the foundation of urban turnarounds. Pretty clear message to teh gheys to stay the hell out by having Bishop Charles Ellis III running the advisory task force and holding the meeting in a virulently anti-gay church isn't it?

[cman710]

Bing's project now has a website, www.detroitworksproject.com.

[GPCharles]

Great idea for a new tv show - Detroit After People.

Just look at the eastside, Alter Road to Connor & Mack to Jefferson. Not much left in that quadrant.

[Hermod]

I

Anytime you see a plan with a farm, you can bet it will be a factory or industrial park. As the years go by, you understand that they are intent on pleasing the elite by catering to their short-term visions, not matter what PR ploy they use [[urban renewal, urban ag). You can bet your boots the worst of the SOS [[same old stuff) crowd is salivating at the prospect of free land and subsidies.

That would be truly terrible, having someone build a factory in Detroit with [[ugghhh) manufacturing jobs [[and worse, knuckle-dragging blue collar workers).

Just wave our magic wand and Silicon Valley will float into downtown Detroit and all those IT types will move into lofts and spend their money providing sumptuous livings for all of the arts, music, and culture types.

[Cooper]

well, they are off to a rip roaring start. Might be fun to go to the next one just for the spectacle of it all.

Here's my take on the first meeting:

http://www.rethinkdetroit.org/2010/0...izing-process/

I'd call it a qualified failure. There was a lot of confusion and frustration, but the turnout was huge, and most people there seemed genuinely open to what the mayor would have to say and were ready to comment on and critique the presentation. However, there was no presentation. The mayor only spoke at the end, not the beginning, and people weren't ready to lead the discussion themselves. Bing's opponents, however, came prepared, and they dominated many of the discussions with complaints and attacks against the administration. With better facilitation though I think there's a genuine opportunity here to engage the audience and generate significant support and input for the land use plan [[whatever form it eventually takes).

[Hypestyles]

I guess the group session I was a part of was one of the more civil, i guess, though there was a very brief, mildly testy exchange with two elderly gentlemen, one was black the other caucasian [[things settled down quickly)... certainly bing's detractors came with an agenda, and it seems like they were predisposed to find everything wrong with the event.. I had no idea of the exact format before I came, so I find it hard to accept the allegation of "disrespect" based on having smaller, breakout sessions.. based on some comments in the DetNews article, some folks are clearly bashing agribusiness.. the one guy who was a heating contractor, i'd ask him when the local labor/trade unions are going to start adopting Detroit schools and teaching students in their respective disciplines, so when they graduate they can get jobs in those fields or start their own service..

[Detroitnerd]

As a person who believes this is all a dog-and-pony show, I find it hilarious to accuse the people who are coming of "having an agenda."

[GOAT]

As everyone's favourite psycho, Charles Manson said. "Do it! Get it done!"

[mam2009]

The Detroit Works meeting I went to at the Whittier Manor on Saturday was VERY well organized, very tame and constructive. Its a shame that the mayor HAS to do these types of meetings so early in the process, but if he didn't everyone would jump on him for not including the public in the infancy stages. They couldn't tell us much in terms of what they intended so there was nothing for audience to "respond" to. It was just a rehashing of the same old complaints that we hear over and over again. Its time to move toward solutions and away from pure bit*hing.

[Hypestyles]

Its time to move toward solutions and away from pure bit*hing.

Kiosko hall is tonight, I'll check it out..

[Cooper]

Kiosko hall is tonight, I'll check it out..

Tonight's meeting has been moved to Western International High School to accommodate more people.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...s-new-location

[Relayer76]

I think some fashion of this is a no-brainer, but of course you cannot have the government force people to move.

Ideally you do not want a government that forces people to move but when you have 2 houses on a block for block after block, providing services to these scattered homes has got to be enormously costly and subsidized by more populated areas. That is why other residents of the city [[represented by the government) have the right to have a say. At the very least, certain areas should be identified as "no repair" areas. When their municipal water and sewage pipes burst or hydro lines come down - no repairs - residents have to move. The city can take over their home in exchange for a comparable home in a neighbourhood designated as a "keeper" at a cost of $20, 30, 40,000. No mega payouts - just comparable real estate in a serviced area.

[Hypestyles]

...when will the smaller community meetings [[approx. 40) start to come together? Hopefully there will be an announcement before the end of the year.