[QUOTE=Michi;5274929]
Quote:
Originally Posted by C.Lan
Great shots! Love this:
I have heard Detroit called "the urbexer's dream" because there are so many buildings like these. And, yes:
QUOTE]
That is the Michigan Central (train) Station. The billionnaire owner also owns the Ambassador Bridge to Canada. After many years of fighting with the US & Canadian govts to build his own 2nd, private span against the public will of the two countries, all of a sudden, out of the blue, billionnaire slumlord wants to rehabilitate the MCS...well, at least spend a ton of money putting lipstick on this pig. Sweet political move? You be the judge.
Meanwhile, the hard working middle class of this part of the city is busy revitalizing the commercial strip & homes of the neighborhood. They are even "adopting" Roosevelt Park out in front of the MCS and putting some major TLC into it, all while the billionnaire slumlord just sat there all this time. Will we take it?...sure! As a blackmail? Nope!
|
Thank you for filling this in. I always wonder about buildings that I see in pictures on these forums, because so often a picture just conceals the backstory on it (and the commentary doesn't exactly fill it in, for the most part). And that is an interesting story about the Michigan Central station; "lipstick on a pig" makes me think of Sarah Palin and the election year.
That's an interesting story about the revitalization in certain neighborhoods... I'm familiar enough with Detroit to know that citizens there never respond well to "blackmail" (even, to the point, of being overly proud and suspicious of anything they might see as blackmail, enough to create lasting rifts in neighborhoods). A bit like Chicago, although there they have a very different issue with blackmail from landlords; in that residents are so picky about housing that they'll put up uncomplainingly about "blackmail", including sometimes expending much too much energy rehabbing their properties without any contract of ownership, under constant reminders that rents may go up next year or they might be evicted. Although this only lasts up to a point. If the demands get too tough--which usually happens, and usually when the tenant has put up with a difficult situation uncomplainingly until the total removal of the landlord means that structural, electrical, and overall sustainability issues have gotten so overwhelming that it just seems like negligence--residents will go "Chicago style" and lock the landlord out of their apartment altogether, and rehab the interior with a generator.
(Best case scenario is when the landlord realizes his demands were too high and, for sake of the tenants and the overall structure, does something to fix it. Worst case scenario is he ditches the property and changes neighborhoods, which landlords of Chicago have been known to do when their demands were not met. The situation is always unclear and valuable.)
It's nice to think of a situation where hardworking residents instead go out and put in a lot of time and care in revitalizing the neighborhood on their own; residents of Detroit likely do this because of their love for Detroit. It would be great if blackmail hadn't been part of it, so that residents of the city, landlords, and overall government were able to make this a best-case rather than unnecessarily difficult and often incredibly painful scenario. It's always the mystery to me with Detroit: if the mayor actually did care about his residents, why has he seemingly spent all of his time lately putting in a casino economy instead of addressing issues with the people who want to live there? It makes you wonder about that Bloomberg proposal about sending over immigrants; it wouldn't have to be so dire if Detroit tried to make people who just wanted to live there, have a way to stay.