What would the elements defining "inferior housing stock" be? I have a wood-frame house SW Detroit, built in 1900. The floors are simple pine. The basement was added later. The kitchen has aan extra room that functions as a skullery because that's where the farmhouse-style sink is and the original cupboards [[which were built to be painted). All in all, by many regional definitions, this would be "inferior housing" - not brick, small lot, painted pine woodwork, not even a full two stories, little closets. Aluminum siding!

Yet, the house was lovingly cared for. Bathrooms added [[fitted in). When I had a wired-in security system installed the installer marveled at the number of fire-stops in the walls and said that the house was built to last. I see photos of similar houses in other places liike on the east coast and those similar houses appear valued.

Over time I have added some nice amenities: a beautiful kitchen with even a pastry center, a lovely classic bathroom, brick walks, a small Victorian porch, etc. I never thought that the house wasn't worth the improvements - even though its small and wood-framed. I will certainly leave it better than i found it and the block, too.

I don't understand "inferior housing stock" - if Detroiters had valued and cared for what they had, wouldn't the city be fuill of good houses? In this day and age of high energy costs, wouldn't small houses be worth saving?