Maybe the residents of Connant Gardens during the depression?
Maybe the residents of Connant Gardens during the depression?
Yeah these houses probably should have never been built in the first place. Like many areas in Detroit, this area was built to fail.
The market for one or two bedrooms can be easily filled with apartment buildings, flats and carriage homes. There is no reason for single-family homes with two bedrooms or less.
I think our neighborhoods wouldn't see so many abandoned buildings if there weren't so many single-family homes. An apartment building can loose more than half of its tenants before being shuttered. But a single family house is stripped within weeks, if not days, after being unoccupied. We could have lost half our our population without loosing many buildings if multi-units were dominate over single-family. But since we are a city of primarily single-family/duplex housing, loosing half of our population means loosing half of our buildings, and therefore, half of many neighborhoods.
With all due respect, I can't agree with the above. I remember distinctly back in the 1970's there were twice as many apartment buldings as remain now. I'm not saying Detroit ever was as apartment rich as New York or Chicago. I'm saying whatever apartments we had we lost half of. Buildings would have a fire that damaged a unit or two, or a floor or two and they never got repaired. Or dope dealers would move in and the decent tenants would move away. Large buildings in particular are very difficult to manage.Yeah these houses probably should have never been built in the first place. Like many areas in Detroit, this area was built to fail.
The market for one or two bedrooms can be easily filled with apartment buildings, flats and carriage homes. There is no reason for single-family homes with two bedrooms or less.
I think our neighborhoods wouldn't see so many abandoned buildings if there weren't so many single-family homes. An apartment building can loose more than half of its tenants before being shuttered. But a single family house is stripped within weeks, if not days, after being unoccupied. We could have lost half our our population without loosing many buildings if multi-units were dominate over single-family. But since we are a city of primarily single-family/duplex housing, loosing half of our population means loosing half of our buildings, and therefore, half of many neighborhoods.
Some do remain. I'm not how or why. I drive by some buildings that have been standing for decades in terrible areas of the city of and they seem like they're doing fine. Mabe the owners live there, or they have great live in management. There must be some secret I'm not aware of.
|
Bookmarks