  Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6711 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.136.149.133 |
DETROIT -- Michael Higgins was once the boy wonder of downtown Detroit real estate. At age 21, the Grosse Pointe native began buying landmark Detroit buildings and intended to restore them into chic living quarters and upscale shops. He was heralded as a leader of a new wave of entrepreneurs who would revive the city's decaying core. Thirty years later, Higgins is a still is a symbol -- but not of rebirth, city officials and downtown boosters claim. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060831/B IZ03/608310367 | ||
Gumby Member Username: Gumby Post Number: 1364 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 68.60.143.186 |
Man Jeff you are slipping. https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/81092.html?1157002406 He beat you by 5 hours. lol | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4924 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Michael Higgins is a snobby scam artist!!! For years he owe up to thousands of dollars in city back taxes, but he manages to get away from the weak city officials. The Ghettoman had told his street prophets to stay away from but one of his lofts and condos and other retails that he is proposing. He one of the slumlords who continue to exploit Detroit's historial structures. (Message edited by danny on August 31, 2006) | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2086 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 68.248.15.89 |
Interesting story...decent coverage by the News for once. But damnit the Broderick was designed by Louis and Paul Kamper, NOT Albert Kahn. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1914 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 134.215.223.211 |
I've heard direct from one of the horses' mouths that the Broderick deal is truly going forward and will result in a complete rehab of the building. This person, unlike Higgins, has the ability to actually complete the project. Right now they're getting all the paperwork and numbers in order. Construction will probably start sometime in 2007. The Leland will be going all residential, great just what downtown needs, another flop house with the biggest flop himself living there! | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6712 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
Apologies for the double-post. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 109 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 64.25.200.14 |
Did anyone else notice that the map of his properties has the Broderick on the wrong side of Woodward? | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4928 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Bvos, Higgins is a snob!!! He's still has to pay off the back taxes before he could get started on the next paperwork. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1915 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 134.215.223.211 |
That's part of the deal, to pay off the taxes. With the Broderick and Farwell building deals, Higgins is actually in the passenger seat. The minority partners are the ones doing all the work since Higgins has finally figured out that he doesn't have a clue on how to go about restoring these buildings. I'm very optimistic that the Farwell and Broderick will be fully renovated in the next couple years with construction starting on both buildings in 2007. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4932 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.229 |
Bvos That snobby Higgins had to know what's going on with the Farwell, Brodrick and other buildings in Detroit. For his minorite investors may give him the development slip. Leaving him with the bill from the creditors. | ||
Hagglerock Member Username: Hagglerock Post Number: 310 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 12.214.243.66 |
Andyguard, I noticed that too. Crazy that Mr Higgins claims to live in the Leland House. I wonder if it's true. Anyone ever see him at the bars around town? | ||
Rrl Member Username: Rrl Post Number: 597 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 71.213.230.209 |
I wonder if Louis Aguilar will ever make attempts to write a similar article about the forum's next favorite whipping boy, the Macedonian Parking Cartel? They are just as guilty for letting many vacant buildings rot, and let's face it, maybe more so, as they have the financial clout and where-with-all to make more happen. MadisonLenox-atcha? | ||
Wmuchris Member Username: Wmuchris Post Number: 393 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 141.217.44.112 |
The article also claimed that the Leland was still A Ramada hotel. Not true, but a good article nonetheless. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 125 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
Rule number one, don't believe everything you read. Did anyone read Jack Lessenberry's editorial in last week's and this week's Metrotimes? The Detroit News article is full of errors. Bustling downtown? I would not use those words. Sure on certain days, but not everyday. The paper can really put a spin on things. The Broderick will happen, then the Farwell. Do you have a 100 Million to complete them both? The George Jackson wants the Broderick completed and the CBD needs it. How can you attract companies like Quicken Loans without it. Illitch has the money and experience with developing buildings so where is the article about the Detroit Life building, United Artist etc.? The Kales along with Merchants Row was the start that showed people want to live downtown. Broderick will be next along with the Farwell. If seen as successful, Illitch will follow suite with the Detroit Life and hopefully more will follow. Stayed tuned. | ||
Dougw Member Username: Dougw Post Number: 1297 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 136.2.1.101 |
Good article all around about an issue that is rarely reported on. (even if the map isn't exactly right) Reasonbly balanced, even. The article doesn't say that the Leland is still a Ramada, it indicates that Higgins & Ramada cut ties in February. (Unless the web version of the article has been changed.) | ||
Gambling_man Member Username: Gambling_man Post Number: 844 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 199.178.193.5 |
I've seen Higgins hanging at the City Club and Labyrinth. Do those count as bars? | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1625 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 68.61.197.206 |
Doug, it's shown on the map that way. (Message edited by llyn on August 31, 2006) | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1626 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 68.61.197.206 |
These two quotes are an interesting comparison when isolated: "The city doesn't understand how tough it is to turn things around," Higgins said, standing in the former Embers restaurant, which operated until 2002 on the ground floor of the Broderick. The other 33 floors have been empty for 20 years. "Sometimes when you are dealing with the city, they sit there and tell you, 'Why don't you step aside, sell this to someone who can handle the deal?'" Higgins said. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1797 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 69.209.137.86 |
Sounds like the city was trying telling Higgins he was biting more than he could chew and needed to step aside. Sounds like a reasonable request since he hadn't done anything with his buildings and owed the city back taxes and fines. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1798 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 69.209.137.86 |
Sounds like the city was trying telling Higgins he was biting more than he could chew and needed to step aside. Sounds like a reasonable request since he hadn't done anything with his buildings and owed the city back taxes and fines. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1918 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 134.215.223.211 |
The minority partners on the Broderick and Farwell deals are the ones putting together the renovation projects. They're really just going to Higgins for his signature when needed. Higgins is still 80-90% owner of his buildings and would still be on the hook in the unlikely event that the partners pulled out. The partners/investors on the projects are very, very motivated. They see these projects as a way to change downtown as well as boost their own image and portfolio at the same time. The partners specialize in medium-sized difficult historic rehabs as well as working with difficult/cheap building owners. One partner on Higgins two projects will also be the contractor for the Book Building/Tower rehab. The paperwork and research is moving forward at a fast clip for that building as well. | ||
Messykitty Member Username: Messykitty Post Number: 122 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 24.21.198.33 |
There is a $180 million renovation of the Farwell going on? When did that happen? | ||
Evelyn Member Username: Evelyn Post Number: 21 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 70.227.83.30 |
To the best of my knowlege, Higgins does NOT live in the Leland. I l believe he lives on the riverfront, off of Jefferson. I would love to see the Broderick fixed up... but judging on how well he has taken care off the Leland, I can't imagine that project coming together. To convert that place into livable housing will take time and money, two things Higgins hasn't bothered to invest in the Leland. | ||
Ha_asfan Member Username: Ha_asfan Post Number: 15 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 69.14.17.198 |
Mr. Higgins and his ilke hold great responsibility for the deterioration of [Detroit] buildings, the city and the region. What a shame his type is allowed to dip their greedy fingers back into the honey pot. He was a rotten landlord at the Kean and, as far as I know, noone has yet discovered how to change the cat's stripes. | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 67 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
"The Farwell building...[h]as been empty since 1984..." "[B]ut because he stepped in and bought the building, IT WAS SAVED FROM DEMOLITION." Regardless of how greasy this man may be, give him some credit for saving (to a degree) a piece of Detroit's architectural history. | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 68 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
Royce, I guess you thought your point was so valid, you had to inundate us with it twice. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 4307 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.177.81.18 |
Firefly, that's like praising Ilitch for saving the Fox. That's nice and all, and credit needs to be given when something good is done, but taking a step foward and two steps back every time you do something doesn't make a successful and beloved developer, it makes you one-trick slumlord. | ||
Dan Member Username: Dan Post Number: 1265 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.47.193.144 |
I am optimistic about this. If he can pull it off, my hat will be off to him. | ||
Firefly Member Username: Firefly Post Number: 69 Registered: 06-2006 Posted From: 198.30.81.2 |
Lmichigan, I am not praising him at all. Bottom line, at least the building is still standing. You have to look at the bright side--in spite of how dingy, grungy, and dilapidated it may be at the present time. Is it best that the building still stand (and be viable for restoration) or for reminders of "what it was" to be in Lowell's collection of demolished buildings? Sometimes, you have to take the good with the bad. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 127 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
In the case of 1556, Broderick and Farwell, I think he deserves some credit. How can anyone pay taxes on a building that does not generate money? Could you keep up your house without a job? His intentions are good. None the less, the city would have torn these down by now if someone had not owned them and fought for them and paid taxes on them for the past 20 years. See the link to to the PDF. www.cityscapedetroit.org/caseS tudies/CostOfDemolition.pdf The negative attention is due to how how public these building are. A viable plan is in place and I would estimate that over a million dollars has been spent on the Broderick project already. This will happen. Lets focus on hundreds of abandoned houses and buildings that don't have plans to be renovated. | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6730 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
How can anyone pay taxes on a building that does not generate money? Could you keep up your house without a job? Here's a little accounting tip: I wouldn't have purchased my house in the first place if I couldn't afford the taxes and upkeep. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 128 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
I am sure all the critics on this board will be the first in line to view the completion of these buildings once they are complete. I hope to see everyone there. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 738 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 65.42.23.2 |
itsjeff.. man I was thinking the same thing. I wish more than anything that the city inspectors would get some balls and enforce the city codes and ordinances. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7813 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
What if you bought your home, thought you could afford the mortgage just to find that the repairs are much more than anticipated and you can't get the financing for the repairs? | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6731 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
Oh, then I'd definitely hold onto the property for 15 years, promising repairs but not actually do them, all while watching my home turn into more and more of an eyesore. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7815 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Fair point, I was just playing devil's advocate. Now what if the same scenario presented itself and you could not get the money to cover your outstanding debt by selling your home? I think Higgins is a slumlord but don't know the whole financial situation so I am considering situations that may have brought him to this situation. More than likely it was greed and a ridiculous asking price but there may have been other factors at play. | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6733 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
Now what if the same scenario presented itself and you could not get the money to cover your outstanding debt by selling your home? Then I really had no business getting into real estate to begin with. I'd take my lumps and that's that. I wouldn't continue to buy property after property after property and watch the same dismal results repeat themselves for 20 years. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 7816 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.19 |
Very good point. I wasn't considering how much he owned at one point and how much he still owns. | ||
Crew Member Username: Crew Post Number: 1022 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 146.9.52.17 |
some people just like to collect things....it can be an addiction. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 129 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
This same thing has happened to many property owners downtown. Not until recently have rents started to increase. With the rent increases repairs can be made. I know there is a lot of work going on with renovations and upgrades, specifically in midtown due to higher cash flow from rents. It is simple economics and the economics of Detroit could be a 2 year course on its own. FYI, the Farwell and Broderick had tenants when the buildings were purchased. If these buildings were turned over to the city due to foreclosure or whatever reason years ago just as many other buildings before them, the chances are likely they would not exist at this time. It is too bad those buildings didn’t survive. Just look at Lowell’s list on this site. I look forward to these buildings coming back to life. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 130 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
I am addicted to collecting beanie babies. | ||
Toolbox Member Username: Toolbox Post Number: 976 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.184.29.148 |
You don't, he owes tax money.
| ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 131 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.130 |
Exactly, my point is made. But, with regards to 1556, Broderick and Farwell the amount owed is not that bad for buildings that size. Taxes have been made on these over the past 20 years up until recently obviously, otherwise the amounts owed would be extremely high, mor elike half a million or more. It looks like taxes for 2004 thru 2006 are still owed. Someone has been paying them for the past 20 years. That is pretty good for buildings that not have barely generated a dime in the past 20 years. |
