 
Detroitman32
Member
Username: Detroitman32
Post Number: 23
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 2:06 pm: |    |
Well, I see a future for Detroit in a family city. The gridded layout provides ample oppertunity for decent suburban homes to be built inside the city. I personally hope that one day Eight Mile would be a mere city boundary, not one in culture or atittude. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4065
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 2:10 pm: | |
quote:The gridded layout provides ample oppertunity for decent suburban homes to be built inside the city.
Anyone else have a problem with the principle of this idea? |
Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise
Post Number: 1840
Registered: 09-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 2:13 pm: | |
I sure do. It's a huge contradiction. |
Jgavrile
Member
Username: Jgavrile
Post Number: 57
Registered: 09-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 2:39 pm: | |
Having grown up in Highland Park, it was probably the first of the suburbs to go down hill. It really went down. It was a supercity once. Yea, it had its couple of run down streets right near the city hall, but they too went through the first "Urban Renewal "In the country. it was supposed to be the model city at one time. Used to get awards for the cleanliness of the streets, the quality of the schools,the services the city provided, beautiful trees, well kept homes, etc. Woodward was so busy when I was a kid,you could hardly get anywhere in town.Everyone seemed like they were hustling to and fro from work.Ford and Chrysler and smaller companies were thriving. What the hell happened??
I think it was corrupt politicians that got in that took the money and ran. Plus the loss first of Ford, and then finally Chrysler.Minor players like Excello, Destaco, Sanders,Canada Dry,Mckesson, and many others.
Lawlessness on the part of young people and dope heads.
Man, when I was kid, they had the best in police protection, fire protection. Had their own water,seperate from Detroit, picked up the trash and garbage ,twice a week, removed the snow from all city sidewalks, not just the streets.Sprayed all the trees along the streets and the alleys.
This was when people were proud to live there.
My Father settled there in 1912 and lived there all his life. I am glad he is gone,so he wouldn't have to see what has happened to his town, that he was so proud to live in. There sure wasn't any lack of quality in those houses. Some of the best built homes in Wayne County.
The crap they build out in the suburbs now, will never last as long as the homes in Detroit.Hell they are all made out of chipboard. The damm builders let them get roughed in, unprotected from the elements, for weeks before they finally secure the roofs and the siding and windows. By that time the chip board is saturated with water and already starting to decay. Then they wrap them in that Tyvac to hide the poor quality. |
Angry_dad
Member
Username: Angry_dad
Post Number: 184
Registered: 02-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 3:27 pm: | |
Damn, all these slums need a bunch of gays to move in and fix things up.
Can't be racist, may as well be homophobic.
(sarcasm button on) |
Detroitplanner
Member
Username: Detroitplanner
Post Number: 1589
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 3:28 pm: | |
If you build suburban style homes in the City you often get what appears to be pig or dog shaped buildings with the garage being the snout and blocking the home from the street.
You can have new homes on City Streets, but you should be cognizant that they should be in keeping with the older homes. I'd rather have a small lawn in front of my home than a driveway. Put the garage in back. If there is an alley so much the better. |
Mackinaw
Member
Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 4522
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 3:31 pm: | |
Indeed, DPlanner. The Crosswinds development by Jefferson/Marquette is a great example of what to avoid. |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 569
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 3:37 pm: | |
Ah, yes, the "garage with an attached house" school of residential architecture. When having a convenient place to put your car is more important than having a house that is not hideously ugly, there's something wrong with society. I like the alley and rear-facing garage layout myself. With a front-facing detached garage, half your yard is concrete, and you never get to know the people who live behind you. |
Skylark
Member
Username: Skylark
Post Number: 35
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 3:45 pm: | |
I couldn't agree with you more about the ''garage with the attached house''. The garage belongs in the back not on the front lawn. The front entry door should be the prominent feature not an ugly garage door with a slab of concrete running into it. |
Evelyn
Member
Username: Evelyn
Post Number: 188
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 6:28 pm: | |
Thanks for the article- very interesting read!
When I think of inner-ring 'burbs, I think of Ferndale, Grosse Pointe, Dearborn- cities that border Detroit, have older housing stock, and are (relatively) walkable. |
Trainman
Member
Username: Trainman
Post Number: 663
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 7:03 pm: | |
The $32 Million dollars per year that SMART lost in state funds from the fuel tax is now planned to match federal funding for large freeways.
The city of Livonia voted out SMART because they no longer qualify for federal transit grants for the low income and are no langer funded by state fuel taxes for operating expenses anymore.
This is a recipe for slums.
Livonia is much like Warren, it's divided in two. West of Farmington Road is much like the outer suburbs and in the east you can see the vacant and run down buildings.
SMART transit officials will not fight the large state and federal transit cuts or the freeways.
Yet,the vast majority of you DY'ers will likely vote YES next August 2010 to renew the SMART millage.
We can stand up and fight this open discrimination and neglect of our leaders who refuse to take care of Detroit.
But, will we? |
Sec106
Member
Username: Sec106
Post Number: 23
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 7:14 pm: | |
The houses that the builders throw up in places like Brownstown are crap. We know of two couples who had huge problems with there $200,000 there. The worst being the foundation and walls cracking. |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 7232
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 7:16 pm: | |
Saintme,
Oh there slums all right! Their downtowns are ghetto like. I even was one burn down abandon house on Fort Park St. north of Southfield Rd. |
Fareastsider
Member
Username: Fareastsider
Post Number: 860
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 9:40 am: | |
Many of the new homes built from 1980 on do age really poorly. modern "wood" siding which is a glorified press board starts to age pretty quick on some of these homes. At least we have more brick newer homes than say Chicago suburbs. Many new houses I saw in metro Chicago were all vinyl I suppose because of high housing costs. For all the bitching about Macomb Twp many of the new homes there are all brick with the exception of the second levels of two story houses. |
Sec106
Member
Username: Sec106
Post Number: 24
Registered: 03-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 10:57 am: | |
The whole McMansion thing has been disgusting for years anyway. Nitwits who can't afford them but move in because well gosh we deserve a big house. Then they can't even furnish them! I will dance a jig of joy when the McMansions tumble. |
Civilprotectionunit4346
Member
Username: Civilprotectionunit4346
Post Number: 666
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:07 am: | |
Speaking of the McHomes. My sister lives in New Baltimore and in all the new sub-divisions are all new brick homes. But inside they are bland and as vage as a empty paint canvas.
Most of them are all white painted walls and bland counter-tops and cabinets. They also inside look cheaply made & I know by what mean Fareastsider about the cheapness of some of these new homes.
Like I said I want to buy an older home. I just like the style of them & they seem to have more character and soul then alot of the new homes ive seen on the market. |
Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 5800
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:16 am: | |
Those above who mentioned the "garage with attached house", you have my kudos. Nothing makes a house look uglier in my opinion than having a good portion of the front of it be a garage door. I recognize it is nice to have an attached garage (mine is seperate and behind my house), but a front facing garage was a big NO on my house purchasing wants. |
Civilprotectionunit4346
Member
Username: Civilprotectionunit4346
Post Number: 668
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:33 am: | |
Good point Johnlodge. Who's smart idea was to do that to these new homes, putting the garage up front. I think it looks completely un-appealing to me that whole garage in the front thing. |
Saintme
Member
Username: Saintme
Post Number: 102
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 12:07 pm: | |
Danny,
Walk down Emmons, River Dr, Shore Dr, Kings Hwy areas, etc. The cities are just quiet and boring. They are certainly not Grosse Pointe or Royal Oak, but they are not slums. Blue collar, lower income than G.P./R.O. but not slums. People who live their don't live in fear of crime or what have you. They are just boring. LOTS of old people. |
Tammypio
Member
Username: Tammypio
Post Number: 173
Registered: 04-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 1:41 pm: | |
I live on the southern end of Lincoln Park and am very happy with my choice of homes and the neighborhood it is in. It is a blue collar city. Hard working people who keep up their homes and help one another out. I am not worried about crime and feel extremely safe walking through my neighborhood at any time of day or night. No, it's not full of McMansions and it's not G.P. or Royal Oak. The homes are well built and well maintained. As far as old people, we have neighbors who are the original owners of their home when this subdivision was built in the mid-50's. They are wonderful people and get along well with the rest of us....young families, newly marrieds and single people who work a lot. I wouldn't trade my home....I love it! I would love to do some updating and plan to when I have more time and more money. Until then...I live in my happy home and enjoy Lincoln Park for what it is...a small and quiet city of REAL people. |
Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone
Post Number: 116
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 2:43 pm: | |
If I were a betting man, I'd wager that in, say, the 1940's, people who built 'brand new' homes were probably criticized and laughed at by others who had 'older' houses at the time. Yet now they are cherished. News flash: I'm sure a lot of those houses looked largely 'the same' when they were built. Of course they have more character now, they have an extra 50 years on their side to develop said character.
Every house, new or old, is going to have problems. Yes, some newer houses are cheaply built, but not all of them. Many older houses have little or no insulation, have unsafe materials such as asbestos or lead paint, have wiring so old that it's lucky the damn house doesn't burn down every time a lamp comes on, or have settled to a degree where nothing in the house can ever be level without jacking the whole thing up and putting on a new foundation. Yes, these are correctable things, but some people just don't want to deal with it or put it as a priority.
I completely understand the points being made about the style of old homes generally being more unique. I can agree. But where I laugh is reading how some take offense to people choosing new. |
Saintme
Member
Username: Saintme
Post Number: 103
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 2:50 pm: | |
I think people take offense to people choosing new homes only when that home was built on land that looked better without any homes on it. I think it's the idea of sprawl associated with new homes that get's most people fired up.
(Message edited by SaintMe on March 27, 2008) |
Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone
Post Number: 117
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 2:57 pm: | |
What defines sprawl? Being outside of the city limits? I hope nobody answers yes, that'd be too easy. Don't you think 50, 60, 70 years ago that when they started building further and further away from downtown, that people may have considered that 'sprawl'? I'm sure that 'land' probably looked great 100 years ago too! |
Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 5813
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:03 pm: | |
quote:News flash: I'm sure a lot of those houses looked largely 'the same' when they were built.
I have to strongly disagree. Have you seen a Pulte subdivision? Compare that to any inner ring suburb. Planned neighborhoods these days have maybe 3 models, and even the different models basically look identical. They will still look basically identical in 40 years. |
Saintme
Member
Username: Saintme
Post Number: 104
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:05 pm: | |
50 years ago people sprawled out because there was no room left to build new homes closer to the center, it was all built up. Now there is plenty of useful land that doesn't require people to move out to former woodland/farmland to build a new home. And the cost to expand the infrastructure to support the homes of people who move farther and farther from the center also aggravates people. Money is a good motivation for anger. |
Johnnny5
Member
Username: Johnnny5
Post Number: 721
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:11 pm: | |
In the neighborhood my parent's grew up in (off of 10 Mile Rd and Hoover in Warren) most of the houses were built between 1950 and 1965 and the same house designs are repeated throughout the entire neighborhood. When I was a kid and visiting my grandparent's neighbors you never had to ask where the bathroom was, every house was virtually identical. |
Professorscott
Member
Username: Professorscott
Post Number: 1193
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:18 pm: | |
Sprawl is easy to define, though any definition generates arguments (but what the hell, that's what blogs are for, right?).
My definition is this: Using more land area for residential development without a commensurate increase in population.
If your region's population increased 10% to 15%, and the land used for housing increased 10% to 15% at the same time, you have no sprawl. If your region's population is flat, and the land used for housing increased 10% to 15% at the same time, that's sprawl. I believe metro Detroit has experienced sprawl, by that definition, from about the mid 1960s until a few years ago when the housing market collapsed.
Prior to the mid 1960s the increase in residential land use could be explained by regional population growth.
(Message edited by professorscott on March 27, 2008) |
Saintme
Member
Username: Saintme
Post Number: 105
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:19 pm: | |
In response to Johnny 5
Yeah, in my humble amateur opinion, architecture kind of took a nose dive in the late 40s through the 70s. In general. But I got spoiled growing up in a neighborhood of early 19th century homes. If I grew up in a modern suburb I may feel differently.
(Message edited by SaintMe on March 27, 2008) |
Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge
Post Number: 1158
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:20 pm: | |
Older homes have problems, yes, but you can upgrade the electrical systems, blow in insulation, and even jack the house up and replace the basement.
The question is not how the homes look, but what materials they were made out of. You cannot upgrade the quality of the wood used to build a McMansion, even if you tear it down and start over. My house, built in the 50's, has oak flooring throughout. Try pricing that today. A house that I wanted to buy, built in the mid-1800's, was entirely built of oak. Those materials are not available at any sort of reasonable price today. Flakeboard should not be used anywhere in building a house. I cannot believe that it is now common practice to use it as sheathing material. I don't care how much Tyvex you wrap it in, it will eventually get wet.
I would recommend that you not buy a house that is newer than the 50's. |
Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge
Post Number: 5815
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:22 pm: | |
I think you're spot on Saintme. 40's homes tended to be alright, somewhat like 20's homes, but with less architectural detail. 50's in our area is when things really started getting plain, and brought the introduction of those god-awful aluminum awnings and fake wrought iron work. |
Detroitmaybe
Member
Username: Detroitmaybe
Post Number: 53
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:43 pm: | |
As someone that is currently involved in both land development and building construction... it is important to remember that the creative direction of the project, rather master plan for neighborhood or direction of residential development, is based on the designer of the project. |
Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone
Post Number: 118
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 3:52 pm: | |
quote:Older homes have problems, yes, but you can upgrade the electrical systems, blow in insulation, and even jack the house up and replace the basement.
I agree. In fact, I said this above. However, I also said that a lot of people aren't interested in doing this. Not everybody wants to spend months of their life coordinating this. Also, this would often involve months of not being able to live in your home while it is reconstructed. Most people I know couldn't afford mortgage + construction costs + rent to live somewhere else in the interim.
quote:Those materials are not available at any sort of reasonable price today.
Spot on. I'm sure a lot of people would love to have homes as durable or with the 'cool' materials that many older homes do. I'd absolutely love it. But most can't afford that anymore. So, are people accepting less? Sure. But costs have a lot to do with this. |
Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge
Post Number: 1162
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:01 pm: | |
In that case, I would look for an older renovated home.
People want a new home for the wrong reasons in my opinion. They want the "new car smell" but don't think about what is behind the drywall or what the condition of the house will be in 10 years time. |
Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone
Post Number: 119
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:04 pm: | |
quote:My definition is this: Using more land area for residential development without a commensurate increase in population.
I like this definition. And using this, I will agree that sprawl exists. I never denied this. But, what I wish I'd see more of in these discussions is about how to live with what we've created. Let's face it, sprawl exists and has been going on for quite some time. I think to suggest that we 'abandon' all the McHomes or pretend that they don't exist is short sighted, and won't solve this. Besides, even if everybody in Brownstown woke up and one day said 'Woops, I should move back to the city and cut out this sprawl business', we can't just erase what's there off the map, can we? No. Otherwise, we'd just see decay and blight there. Is that the answer? God, I hope not.
Bottom line, the infrastructure that led to this has been in place for many, many decades, and it's not going away. Are we really supposed to tear up the roads and freeways, and rip out the power lines and water mains that have accelerated sprawl? I'm sure some will say yes, and if that's really your attitude, more power to you. But, everybody reading this knows that's never going to happen. Instead of pointing fingers and playing the 'who's right' and 'who's wrong' game or having the 'suburbs' versus 'city' argument, why not realize that what we have today isn't going away? It is what it is. And the only way we move forward is to figure out what to do from here, and not how to erase the past.
I'll get off my soapbox now. Sorry for preaching. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4073
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:04 pm: | |
quote:Spot on. I'm sure a lot of people would love to have homes as durable or with the 'cool' materials that many older homes do. I'd absolutely love it. But most can't afford that anymore. So, are people accepting less? Sure. But costs have a lot to do with this.
I strongly disagree! In this area, you'll find people who spend $500,000 to "accept less", if you define "accepting less" as a cheaply-built 3000+ sf home 30 miles from downtown. But damn, it's got granite countertops!•••
Has anyone seen the tilt-up precast foundation "walls" lately? Wow. What a disgrace these things are! I'm amazed anyone buys a house with only 2" of concrete between the interior and subgrade. |
Goose
Member
Username: Goose
Post Number: 64
Registered: 02-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:20 pm: | |
well, to say that the quality of materials and innovative technology used in new homes today is inferior to that used in the past is like saying a modern car is inferior to a car built in the 50's. Sure, like any field, there are materials that were used and probably shouldnt have been, but it has been refined, and homes built today have huge advantages of efficiency as opposed to those of the past, insulation, windows, roofing, electrical systems, heating and cooling have all come a long way from the knob and spindle wiring, the octopus armed gravity furnaces, the leaking wood windows, galvanized pipes that corrode, etc etc.... people pick a few materials that may be inferior and say all new construction is crap.....
me personally would love to live in a old school 3000 sq. ft. oak and plaster beuaty maybe in palmer park or indian village, but you know what, i also need to drive less than 10 miles to a grocery store that you dont have to pass your money through a plastic cage and i have kids that i would like to have walk to school one day (and get an education), so im looking in macomb township at the mini-mc-mansions if you want to call it that....
someone suggested never buying a home built after 1950.... how about never buying a car built after 1950 also..... maybe you should move one of those house sized IBM braniac computers into your house instead of a laptop...
don't resist modern technology..... |
W_chicago
Member
Username: W_chicago
Post Number: 12
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:22 pm: | |
"W_chicago, Livonia is about as griddy and inner ring as you get,
They just want to be an oakland county exburb so bad.
As a matter of fact, all of the cities you listed are in the grid and about 15 minutes from downtown Detroit.
Now Clarkston, Romeo, Woodhaven and Belleville is where you lose me "
When I said Inner-ring, I meant places like South Warren, Grosse Pointe, Alen Park, parts of Redford, Ferndale and Royal Oak, etc.
Livonia is on the Mile Grid, but a great deal of there side streets are windy and loopy and insane. There is some places in Livonia which resemble what I call "inner ring", like Old Rosedale Gardens, which also resembles a great deal of Detroit, such as Grandmont-Rosedale. Much more suited for infill development.
Here is an Example...
Canton
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF 8&ll=42.332852,-83.508883&spn= 0.014181,0.043259&t=k&z=15
Grandmont-Rosedale (Detroit)
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF 8&t=k&ll=42.393719,-83.201609& spn=0.007084,0.021629&z=16
A think its a bit different. hahahah. |
W_chicago
Member
Username: W_chicago
Post Number: 13
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:24 pm: | |
oops. that last google link was a little off. that actually wasn't grandmont-rosedale, but a little south east (the corner of greenfield and grand river)
but i hope you get the point i'm trying to make.
not all suburban is the same. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 479
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:31 pm: | |
"Are we really supposed to tear up the roads and freeways, and rip out the power lines and water mains that have accelerated sprawl? I'm sure some will say yes, and if that's really your attitude, more power to you. But, everybody reading this knows that's never going to happen."
I'm sure they said that about the railroads and the interurbans too. |
Treelock
Member
Username: Treelock
Post Number: 301
Registered: 03-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 4:37 pm: | |
There is a row of three new homes – not sure when they were built, but I'd guess within the last five years – on Ardmore at Hilton in Ferndale that I really admire. In fact, they're probably the most handsome homes on the block.
They stand out from the neighborhood in their use of materials, which include corrugated metal roofing and other metal siding products, and in their strong design perspectives. But they fit in with the other homes in that they occupy the same physical footprint and retain the front-porch, sidewalk aesthetic.
I also like the design of the new infill homes that have taken shape in the North Corktown area along Cochrane and the other streets. LIke the Ferndale houses, they were built economically, but thoughtfully, with the character and history of the neighborhood in mind.
Think the Detroit area needs a lot more like them. |
Kid_dynamite
Member
Username: Kid_dynamite
Post Number: 483
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 5:15 pm: | |
My Cousin Tony owns one of those houses. It is a cool looking crib. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 480
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 5:28 pm: | |
"But they fit in with the other homes in that they occupy the same physical footprint and retain the front-porch, sidewalk aesthetic."
This is the key to winning over the hearts and minds of the neighbors. People will learn to live with new homes in their midst if they seem to fit into the neighborhood. But when you drop a McMansion or an apartment block into a neighborhood, expect the neighbors to be up in arms. |
Mwilbert
Member
Username: Mwilbert
Post Number: 148
Registered: 11-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 5:48 pm: | |
"me personally would love to live in a old school 3000 sq. ft. oak and plaster beuaty maybe in palmer park or indian village, but you know what, i also need to drive less than 10 miles to a grocery store that you dont have to pass your money through a plastic cage and i have kids that i would like to have walk to school one day"
You certainly don't have to drive 10 miles from Palmer Woods to get to such a supermarket. Nor have I seen any supermarkets around there where you have to pass money through a plastic cage.
Party stores, yes, but I don't buy groceries (or anything else) at party stores. |
56packman
Member
Username: 56packman
Post Number: 2121
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 6:36 pm: | |
I'll believe this when I see cars parked in front of the houses that are worth more than that house, and the upkeep of that house goes to shit. |
Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge
Post Number: 1165
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 7:22 pm: | |
Goose,
Obviously you would upgrade the windows, electrical, plumping etc. You have to upgrade those from time to time on any house. I am talking about the framing of the house and the materials that hold it up and keep the rain out.
To compare homes to computers or cars is totally disingenuous. The technology used to frame a house has not developed as fast (or at all) as the technology to build a car or a computer has. We are still using the same materials and mostly the same technology (sometimes inferior technology) to build a house that we did in the 40's. The improvements in technology has primarily gone to making it cheaper and faster to build houses, not making them better. Do you really think these McMansions will last 100+ years like many of the homes in Detroit? The materials are poor and the workmanship is worse.
If you want to buy one of these hulks it is up to you but you might want to read these first:
http://home.att.net/~pulte/
http://www.camplemonadestand.c om/
http://www.justanotherlemon.co m/CCFL/pulte.htm
http://www.hadd.com/websites.p hp
There are more, of course, but this should get you started. |
Hpgrmln
Member
Username: Hpgrmln
Post Number: 387
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 7:41 pm: | |
Wait, Danny thinks Inkster will become the slums??
When WASN'T it??? Its already been the slums as long as I can remember.
And I think south Warren is already there. A huge number of houses there are condemned and many are being torn down, leaving vacant lots in their wake.Primarily between Van Dyke and Sherwood, and south of 9. |
56packman
Member
Username: 56packman
Post Number: 2122
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 8:30 pm: | |
Houses are made of (framed in) wood, spf to be more specific. This lumber is now harvested from genetically engineered trees (look at the growth rings) and is rarely kiln dried any more. That costs money, and Pulte and their brethren figured out a long time ago that people who don't want "used houses" (I have heard that term spoken) don't know good from bad, they just know new. The lumber companies count on the bundle-bands to keep the lumber from twisting. If you don't use a whole bundle in one day the remaining pieces are propeller stock.
The 18 year-olds slamming these technological wonders don't know square and plumb from Adam, and as others have pointed out, OSB is a shitty excuse for building sheathing and roof sheathing.
You could not afford to have a 1920s-1950's quality home built today, the materials would be prohibitively expensive. The new home buyer today is happy to settle for plastic "Motel 6" bath surrounds where hand-laid ceramic tile once was common, Hardwood floors are added at great additional cost when they were expected before, pressed wood six-panel doors painted white are in (the whole "rental property look" is in right now--older homes with beautiful natural finish cabinets are painted white on the realtor's advice).
Ever try to drywall some of this new construction? the old-timers used to call this poor quality of build a "funhouse". No thanks |
Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge
Post Number: 1167
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 8:58 pm: | |
It breaks my heart to see them tear down a 100 year old farmhouse to build McMansions (after they also cut down all the trees, fill the wetlands, grade the earth until it is perfectly flat and then call the resulting mess "Oak River Hills" or some other such nonsense).
I once tried to move an 1800s farmhouse in Brighton that was fully renovated. I could have had the house for $1. All I needed was a lot. It would have cost an additional $15K for the move and approximately $30K for the basement. No one would sell me a lot although there were lots for sale right across the street. They were subdivision lots and they would not permit me to move "old junk" into their bright and shiny new developments. Of course now they are probably facing foreclosure.
The house was torn down for a golf course. It was one of the oldest houses in that area and a real beauty, especially on the inside with great workmanship. That was a few years ago and it still makes me physically sick to think of it... |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 481
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 9:14 pm: | |
I'm not surprised by the shoddiness of some of these McMansions. What's shocking to me is that for the price that people pay for homes in places like Novi, they'll accept substandard materials, construction and workmanship. I've seen some real horrors of shoddy work in homes in that price range. If I'm buying an Aveo, I'm not expecting anything more than a car that runs most of the time. But if I'm buying a Cadillac, I expect something better than an Aveo, not just a bigger Aveo with a few extra bells and whistles.
(Message edited by Novine on March 28, 2008) |
Eastsidedame
Member
Username: Eastsidedame
Post Number: 197
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2008 - 11:15 pm: | |
There's something so wonderful about older homes. My aunt lived in a duplex on Lakewood in 1959-62. It took me going to Europe to appreciate the craftsmanship and quality of those houses. You can see the growth of Detroit architecturally, like rings on a tree stump. My own neighborhood in far NE Detroit is a mid-century marvel...with lots of glass blocks and Neutra-inspired lines and flow.
The people who built the great residential architecture in our city are long gone...and took their old-world skills with them.
It's too bad there is no place to learn those crafts and skills today. Detroit would be an excellent place for a school...it's not like there's a lack of buildings that need it. |
Sean_of_detroit
Member
Username: Sean_of_detroit
Post Number: 40
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 1:12 am: | |
Johnnny5 Said:
"In the neighborhood my parent's grew up in (off of 10 Mile Rd and Hoover in Warren) most of the houses were built between 1950 and 1965 and the same house designs are repeated throughout the entire neighborhood. When I was a kid and visiting my grandparent's neighbors you never had to ask where the bathroom was, every house was virtually identical."
Yeah, and you'd think that would make them easier to rob and brake-in to. Isn't that the whole argument with the winding streets and coul-de-sacs, they're supposed to reduce crime by having a confusing layout, and having only one entrance and exit point (I think the ones with the fake guard booths are kind of funny). The counter to this argument is that it reduces the amount of eyes on the street (pedestrians and traffic). I'm not sure which is true, any statistics/maps for areas like Livonia that have both side by side? |
Hpgrmln
Member
Username: Hpgrmln
Post Number: 388
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 3:42 am: | |
Nainrouge-I thought I was the only one that felt that way.
I hate going through Birmingham and Rochester now, seeing all these new houses where old ones used to be.
I have a basic starter home, built in the late-30's. When I bought it, I said "You know, if this was Birmingham, this house already would have been torn down."
Actually, I think most of the best-looking, coolest houses there already are gone, replaced by new custom homes. |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 7242
Registered: 02-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 7:19 am: | |
Royal Oak TWP. is the first suburb in the Metro-Detroit area that became a slum before Pontiac and Highland Park.
That's something that L.B. Patterson want to look at, but avoids it and look the community as a myth. It doesn't exist in his mind. He will think of R.O.T. as part of Ghetto of Detroit. |
Hpgrmln
Member
Username: Hpgrmln
Post Number: 389
Registered: 06-2007
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 4:59 pm: | |
"There is a row of three new homes – not sure when they were built, but I'd guess within the last five years – on Ardmore at Hilton in Ferndale that I really admire. In fact, they're probably the most handsome homes on the block"
Thats what I WISH Birmingham would do. They demolish a bungalow on a 45x115 lot and put up a big house more suitable for a 65x135 lot. It looks AWFUL. Go down any of those streets south of Lincoln and west of Woodward. Many of the old houses weren't in great shape, and had little architectural significance, BUT they fit onto their small lots and the streets looked orderly. Now, they have all these oversized houses all crammed in, with the occasional small houses sandwiched in between. Theyre trying to change the face of an already very established neighborhood.
And I also hate it when a suburb wants a wide lot split. You'll have a house on an 80' wide lot. A builder buys it, tears it down, and the city lets them put 2 houses there. There are streets in Troy where the houses had large lots, and lately, builders have bought land, and split it into 4 or 5 lots with houses real close together, in neighborhoods that used to have a much smaller density.
When builders start altering the density of neighborhoods, I think it often becomes a disaster because now the original appeal of the neighborhood is compromised. If I want to have suburban conveinances but want a quiet setting, I'd buy a house on a wide lot in a treed area. I absolutely would not want someone coming in and building 4 houses side by side on 40' wide lots. And currently living in a small house, I dont want a huge house going up next door blocking the sunlight and towering over my house. As much as Im for property owners rights, I think over-density in already-established neighborhoods can really spiral downward into a less aestetically-pleasing, awkward-looking mess. |
Nainrouge
Member
Username: Nainrouge
Post Number: 1185
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2008 - 5:07 pm: | |
quote:It's too bad there is no place to learn those crafts and skills today. Detroit would be an excellent place for a school...it's not like there's a lack of buildings that need it.
There is a school for wrought iron work in Detroit. Can't find the link right now but maybe someone here has it. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.