environments of decline
play

Environments of Decline Demolition as a Regional and Political - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Environments of Decline Demolition as a Regional and Political Process in Detroit, Michigan Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 2018 Meeting Buffalo, New York Michael RJ Koscielniak | PhD Candidate | University of Michigan What is


  1. Environments of Decline Demolition as a Regional and Political Process in Detroit, Michigan Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning 2018 Meeting Buffalo, New York Michael RJ Koscielniak | PhD Candidate | University of Michigan

  2. What is the political-economic and political- ecological role of residential demolition in post-crisis and declining American cities?

  3. Demolition I Category Explanation Citation Cronyism and collusion to Backroom Deal LeDuff 2018 enrich real estate interests Bulwark Shielding neighborhoods from Mallach 2011 creeping residential blight Belief in Progress Renewing cities and Ammon 2016 neighborhoods through largescale intervention

  4. Demolition II Category Explanation Citation Displacing undesirable Banishment Goetz 2010 populations from neighborhoods Eliminating outcome of Bailout Rosenman and Walker 2016 reckless activity to enable redevelopment Eradicating depopulated Burial Hackworth 2016 neighborhoods

  5. Are these approaches sufficient for understanding demolition in Detroit, MI?

  6. 14097 MARLOWE | JULY 19, 2016

  7. 2005 AmeriQuest sells to Phoenix Real Estate 2006 Phoenix sells to Lamar Watkins 2008, 2010-2012 Wayne County Forfeiture Notice 2012 Wayne County Tax Foreclosure 2013 Wayne County Quit Claim Deed to Detroit 2014 Detroit Quit Claim Deed to Detroit Land Bank

  8. 2016 Rickman Enterprise Demolition Asbestos: $13,500.00 Removal: $7,106.00 Greening: $3,129.00 Management: $500

  9. Greening Grading: $1043 Backfill: $1486 Seed: $600

  10. Greening Grading: $1043 Backfill: $1486 Seed: $600

  11. Mack-Ashland II Detroit, MI • Source: July-August 2016 • Contractor: Rickman Enterprise • 71 demolitions • 46 HHF-supported • 7,996.00 cubic yards • $69,233.21 • Low-Income Housing Tax Credit • 14 townhomes • 28 units

  12. Mack-Ashland II Detroit, MI • Source: July-August 2016 • Contractor: Rickman Enterprise • 71 demolitions • 46 HHF-supported • 7,996.00 cubic yards • $69,233.21 • Low-Income Housing Tax Credit • 14 townhomes • 28 units

  13. Sources Site Demolitions Cubic Y ards Manistique 71 7,996.00 Lakeside 19 4,164.00 Castleton 72 25,000.00 Derby 12 2,706.00

  14. 960 Lakeside Birmingham, MI • Source: 2016-2017 • Contractor: DMC Group • 19 HHF-supported demolitions • 4,164.00 cubic yards • $46,200.00 • Speculative new-build • Sold 12/2015 • $987,000.00

  15. 960 Lakeside Birmingham, MI • Source: 2016-2017 • Contractor: DMC Group • 19 HHF-supported demolitions • 4,164.00 cubic yards • $46,200.00 • Speculative new-build • Sold 12/2015 • $987,000.00

  16. 14800 Castleton Detroit, MI • Source: June 2015 • Homrich • 72 HHF-supported demolitions • 25,000 cubic yards • $261,250.00 • Owner: Kelly Holdings • Temporary land use permit • 3/25/2015 – 9/25/2015

  17. 14800 Castleton Detroit, MI • Source: June 2015 • Homrich • 72 HHF-supported demolitions • 25,000 cubic yards • $261,250.00 • Owner: Kelly Holdings • Temporary land use permit • 3/25/2015 – 9/25/2015

  18. 19499 Derby Detroit, MI • Source: September- October 2015 • Contractor: 313 Construction • 12 HHF-supported demolitions • 2,706 cubic yards • $12,000.00 • Owner: Echo Rentals • Purchased: $1,000 in 2014 • Tax Foreclosure: 2018

  19. 19499 Derby Detroit, MI • Source: September- October 2015 • Contractor: 313 Construction • 12 HHF-supported demolitions • 2,706 cubic yards • $12,000.00 • Owner: Echo Rentals • Purchased: $1,000 in 2014 • Tax Foreclosure: 2018

  20. Demolition Backfill • 449 unique sources • Expansive • Extractive • Speculative • Manipulative • Productive • Destructive • $15,333,305.46 in Hardest Hit Funds • MSHDA finances backfill, City of Detroit monitors sources • Excavation, purchase, and hauling costs undifferentiated

  21. Source Address Demolitions 14411 Oakland, Highland Park, MI 3196 27120 Haas Road, New Hudson, MI 497 16575 Ida West Rd. Petersburg, MI 377 110 Cabelas Blvd E., Dundee, Mi 48131 267 5531 - 5121 Ternes Street 258 Brush Park Project, Brush Street, Detroit 231 1322 Lycaste Street, Detroit, MI 162 7667 Chubb Road, Northville, MI 123 5699 Ready Road, South Rockford, MI 117 25241-25042 Fairway, 26261-25001 Riverdale, 1454-1284 Whitter Pl; Dearborn MI 110 9400 W Fort 106 14039 Grand River Avenue, Detroit, MI 48227 99 35100 VanDyke Sterling Heights, MI 92 21000 W 10 Mile Rd Southfield, MI 48075 83 3874 Ashland; 3898 Ashland; 3814 Ashland; 3832 Ashland; 3780 Ashland; 3831 Ashland; 3843 Ashland; 3867 Ashland; 3873 Ashland; 3897 Ashland -- DETROIT MI 69 9600 Telegraph Rd, Redford Charter Twp, MI 48239 68 200 Matlin Rd, Carleton, MI 67 12235 Oelke Rd, Maybee, MI 48159 65 3492 Grove Lane, 3496 Grove Lane, 3500 Grove Lane, 3504 Grove Lane, 3443 Grove Lane, 3447 Grove Lane, 3451 Grove Lane, 3455 Grove Lane, 3448 Grove Lane, 3452 Grove Lane, 3456 Grove Lane, 3460 Grove Lane, 3432 Grove Lane, 3436 Grove Lane, 3440 Grove Lane, 3 60 313 Park Avenue, Detroit, MI 59

  22. Implications I • Construction firms possess considerable control over how residential demolition enacts Detroit’s future • Institutionally and geographically embedded supply chains • Subsidy to speculative new construction at the periphery • Circulating material without robust monitoring by state or city • Pooled demolition costs • Construction firms act as real estate capital • Purchase land for backfill production • Purchase land for stockpiling backfill • Fabricate residential addresses to bypass soil testing

  23. Implications II • Decline has a hinterland expressed in regional and urban geomorphology through demolition supply chains • Demolition is not a technical feat on a discrete location • Demolition is a political and environmental intervention • Demolition serves a purpose beyond stabilization or redevelopment • Backfill to the City Movement • Reclaiming LAND within labor, capital, and land • Who controls the constituents parts of property? • Producing “developable” property exhibits contradictions

  24. Michael RJ Koscielniak PhD Candidate | University of Michigan mkosciel@umich.edu

Recommend


More recommend