Quote
Gibberish deleted. I got a complaint about this post. Please learn to use the quote properly and read the forum rules about using CAPs. Its annoying to the real forumers here.
Quote
I simply asked where he gets his info., especially since in one of his posts he says he can't remember where he gets some of it.
As for hate toward Ilitch, there are a lot of people that "hate" him for what he is doing with his property, not just Allan. You appear to single him out. This all stems from all the property he owns that he has no intention of doing anything with. I understand his reason for doing so (see my earlier post), but that time has past and the preservation community would like to know why he doesn't try to get rid of some, if not all of them.
Economically speaking, holding on to a vacant property and doing nothing but paying property taxes on them, doesn't make sense when they could get money from selling them and they're hurt the property value by owning so much in one area. Maybe he's holding out for the market value to rise, but when there is so much property to do develop on, I doubt this will happen any time soon. Plus, since most of his property is bunched together, he is really hurting the property values of his properties by leaving an entire area undeveloped or turned into parking lots. I'm not an economist, but would think that if he sold some of this property to developers, this would only make his property value go up because the area is no long a vast field of abandonded buildings and parking lots.
Freman Hendrix, when hopefully he gets elected, is going to try and change the city's policy of having to selling their properties for market value to one where they get what they can and turn the property around. The reason for this is that vacant land does them no good and generates no income. If you sell it to a developer for $1 and they build something on it, they will generate property taxes, therefore generating a steady source of revenue (the sale is a one time only source of income). This is long term financial planning as opposed to short term.
The property for one Kennedy Square, for example, was sold to the developer for $1 (note, this is an exeception to the current city policy). Another thing that happens from this is that it helps to rid the city of blight.
Now I realize that you need developers and the demand for all this to work, but currently this is starting to exist in Detroit. The Madison-Lennox did have a developer wanting to do something with the building. In fact, I believe one of the criteria for demolishing a historic structure is that you have to try and sell the property to a developer for 12 months, which didn't happen here. It was an illegal demolishion, whether it be Ilitch Holdings, or the city that is responsible, we'll find out soon enough.
Edited by ebaldy, 21 June 2005 - 11:36 AM.













