Entrepreneurship-Led Regeneration in Detroit, Michigan

A Division III Project | By Margo Dalal

Committee | G. Arboleda, Chair | M. Breitbart, Member

Hampshire College | Spring 2015

Contents

List of Figures

Acknowledgements

Preface

Introduction

Chapter One | Entrepreneurship and Redevelopment in Detroit Entrepreneurship in Detroit The Origins of Urban Entrepreneurialism The Role of Private Business in Revitalization and Economic Development Entrepreneurship and the Creative Class in Detroit The Capacity of the Entrepreneur in Social and Community Development Conclusion Chapter Two | Practice Space: Detroits Newest Business Incubator The Program of Practice Space The Closure of Practice Space

Conclusion | Rethinking Entrepreneurship in Detroit Challenges in Access and Opportunity Notable Alternatives Future Research Questions

Bibliography

3

4

5

6

13

1416232628

13

30

3743

48505254

57

3List of Figures

Figure 1: Two of four billboards financed by Katoi in New York City.

Figure 2: The Polka Dot House on Heidelberg Street.

Figure 3: A sign on Brightmoor Farm Way.

Figure 4: The Greater Downtown of Detroit in relation to the rest of the city, and the neighborhoods that makeup Greater Downtown.

Figure 5: M-8 expressway, known as Davison Avenue, in Detroit.

Figure 6: Occupied Housing Density, Population by Block Group, and the M1-Rail Streetcar.

Figure 7: DDOT Bus Service Reductions, 2012, Detroit, Hamtramck, and Highland Park.

Figure 8: Residential locations of todays three major classes.

Figure 9: 2014 Tax Distress Map. Yellow =Tax-Distressed, Orange = Subject to Foreclosure, Red = Foreclosed.

Figure 10: Above: Sample of .5 mile radius around Practice Space. Left: Number of households per block in North Corktown.

Figure 11: The building of Practice Space in North Corktown.

Figure 12: The entrance to Practice Space.

Figure 13: Interior view of Practice Space.

Figure 14: Pop-up art gallery event at Practice Space.

Figure 15: Workspaces inside Practice Space.

Figure 16: An exceprt from the Offworld concept book.

Figure 17: Yusef Shakur in front of the Restoring the Neighbor Back to the Hood house.

7

8

8

10

16

19

20

24

28

31

32

33

34

35

36

41

42

4Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my incredibly supportive family, Sandra, Rustam, Sydney and Nina. Thank you for supporting me throughout all of my adventures and always being there when I needed a break.

I am sincerely grateful for the guidance and insight of my committee, Gabriel Arboleda and Myrna Breitbart, who took my work seriously and consistently pushed me to further myself.

I am deeply thankful for having such amazing and inspiring friends. In Detroit, Alana Schwartz, Paul Schreiber, Paul Young, Michelle Oberholtzer, Erika Lindenfelser, Danny Fenster, Jeff Nolish, Lyse Cook, Don Behm, Cam Watson, Elsa, Tucker, Austin Kroning, and the folks at Dangeriously Delicious Pies, who consistently point me in new directions. To my dear friends in Amherst, Jake Ehrlich, Mai-Sunniva Templeton, and Al Stoney, who are my voices of reason. To my dear friends elsewhere, Lisa Schamess, Hendrix Berry, Lucia Sekoff, Julie Pedtke, Alice Chai, Max Holdhusen, and Eric Friedensohn, who are always with me in spirit.

Thank you to Karen Koehler, Andrew Byler, Mark Schwartz, Peter Hammer, Virginia Stanard, Dan Pitera, Shea Howell, Yusef Shakur, Shannon Cason, Phillip Lauri, whose support and advice was greatly appreciated.

Last but arguably most important, to the lattes and outlets at Northampton Coffee, Bread Euphoria, Esselon Cafe, and Raos.

5Preface

It is with great esteem that I present my Division III thesis. This is the product of many experiences, emotions, and people-none of which I would be the same without.

I moved to Detroit on a whim, which really felt more like a strong pull. The first time I entered Detroit was with my mom and sister on a dark August day. The image of Detroit stayed with me when I began school in New York City, and soon I realized that I needed to go back. Four months later I was living in North Corktown.

I had so many profound experiences that led me to stay in Detroit and to concentrate on it for my thesis. So often, when asked what my thesis is on, I say Detroit. In many ways it is true, because for most of the time my thesis has been looking at Detroit as a whole- I can see how everything is connected and intertwined. It is a complex web whose contents I care deeply about.

There are a few experiences in particular in which I often embody when I write about anything related to Detroit. The first is living at 5424 Porter Street. My little house on Porter Street was at first the most stressful living situation I could imagine, even though I lived alone. After several months passed I came to know my neighbors and much of the stress lifted. I hope that someday I will be as happy as during the hours each day standing in my garden; my every step followed by young Paul and the rest of the neighborhood kids. When I left Detroit it was their faces I missed the most, and whom I have thought about every single day since.

The second was when I began interviewing residents who have been affected by foreclosure in Detroit. I met Arquesha, June, and Marlene, whose houses were wrongfully foreclosed on. I spent entire days with them in their homes where I listened to how it has affected their lives. In my research on foreclosure I learned about how incompetent and incapable the municipal government of Detroit is, and listened to the untold stories of how thousands of innocent residents are suffering with few options for ease. When I went to the Show Cause Hearing in January, the unorganized presentation of how to avoid foreclosure was surreal and unnerving. I could barely watch as a lucky bystander, much less be there out of necessity.

I constantly think of these moments and question my place and role in Detroit. Even from a distance I watch the city change rapidly change and wonder if everyone will be okay. I think it is rare to feel this strongly about a place, about a city. I love Detroit like no other. Detroit is where everyone says hello to me, who sits as a stranger for hours outside of Avalon Bakery. Detroit is where I know my neighbors and my bartender, where I eat Detroit dirt and try to pay it forward. Detroit has taught me lessons I have yet to turn into words.

This is just a tiny portion of what I have learned in the two years I have been thinking about Detroit, and I hope that the urgency of the topics discussed encourage you to think deeper the next time you read about or visit Detroit; not everything is as what is seems.

6Introduction

DETROIT HUSTLES HARDER. HAVE YOU HEARD THAT? ITS LIKE OUR SLOGAN. YOU

CANT BE AFRAID OF FAILURE HERE. A LOT OF US DONT HAVE A LOT TO LOSE.

-Margarita Barry, Founder, I Am Young America

In February of 2015, four billboard advertisements were installed in New York City,

two in Manhattan and two in Brooklyn. The billboards displayed phases such as, Detroit:

Now Hiring, or, Detroit: Be Left Alone. Three owners of Katoi, a soon-to-open restaurant in

Corktown, Detroit, who also own businesses in New York, financed the billboards. The idea

really is to spread the word about Detroit as far as we can. We love the idea of Detroit being

appealing to talented people from New York or anywhere, one owner said (Aguilar, 2015).

The encouragement of migration to Detroit comes at a time when the city is eager to draw in entrepreneurs and encourage economic growth as part of an effort of revitalization. Katoi is

one of many businesses to open in Detroit in the past year. Many of these entrepreneurs are

recent residents of the city, moving from the metro area or from out of the state. In the spring of

2014, the owners of The Friendly Toast that had locations in Portsmouth, New Hampshire and

Cambridge, Massachusetts, sold their establishments and opened Zenith in Detroits famous Fisher Building in New Center. Another well-known establishment, the Galapagos Arts Space in

Brooklyn, announced its move to Detroit in the winter of 2014.

In this paper I define an entrepreneur as someone who identifies a need or demand

and attempts to fill it by starting a private enterprise. I define entrepreneurship as a private

enterprise that assumes financial risk by managing an enterprise. In order to support these

emerging enterprises in Detroit, many business incubators, a different type of business model

that often has financial support from institutions and foundations to provide resources for

entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship is a strategy that the city of Detroit has employed as part of

the current era of revitalization and economic redevelopment. The current era of redevelopment

7was catalyzed when in the summer of 2013, Detroit made international headlines when it

became the largest municipality in the United States to declare Chapter 9 bankruptcy. With

support from the federal and state governments, along with a hired emergency manager, the city began a plan to address the debt estimated at over $18 billion (New York Times, 2013). It was hardly a surprise as Detroit has struggled to regain its economic footing following the outsourcing of the automobile manufacturing and the fl ight of the white middle class to the

suburbs that began in the 1950s. The 2008 Great Recession certainly would have been a fi nal

blow to Detroits decline (Demos, 2013). Revitalization and economic redevelopment attempts by the federal, state, and municipal government might have stalled the outcome through urban renewal initiatives throughout the 20th century, but ultimately none were able to spare Detroit from fi nancial crisis.

Evidence of a desperate need for citywide revitalization is apparent throughout the city. Statistics from 2014 show that over 80,000 buildings were estimated to be vacant, (Loveland Technologies, 2014), 40 percent of streetlights did not work, 40 percent of city busses were broken, and the average income of $23,000 was one of the lowest in the nation (Detroit Free Press, 2014). While these statistics are unfortunately true, these numbers alone paint an incomplete picture of Detroit. Detroit boasts a strong cultural legacy that continues to contribute to the citys

identity. Detroits musical legacy has infl uenced almost every genre, and currently has a strong

contemporary music scene. Detroit also has a world-class arts museum, the Detroit Institute of

Art, whose collection is valued at close to $8.5 billion (Kennedy, 2014). There are also numerous

F1: Two of four billboards nanced by Katoi in New York City (Business Insider, 2015).

8annual festivals in the city such as Dally in the Alley, which will celebrate its 38th anniversary in 2015. While not specifically arts based, Slow Roll is another example of community gathering in

Detroit. Slow Roll began in 2010, and with over 4,000 weekly riders, has grown to be Michigans

largest weekly bike ride (Slow Roll Detroit, 2015). These are but a few examples of the cultural richness that currently exist in the city.

In addition to the citys well-known cultural institutions, tucked into the citys grid are

dozens of examples of informal entrepreneurial practices that respond to spatial and economic conditions in the city. The lack of government oversight that has existed for decades has created

unique urban conditions. The abandoned properties that arent maintained by caring neighbors

have retreated to prairie land, or in many cases have become the sites of experimental art or places of community gathering. One of the most famous cases is the Heidelberg Project on

Detroits East Side. In the 1980s, artist Tyree Guyton created his own strategy to combat urban

blight by turning his residential street into an open-air art space. Today the Heidelberg Project is

an international tourist destination, an educational platform, an artist residency, and above all, a community space that responds to the urban conditions of Detroit (Heidelberg Project, 2015).

Another example is within the neighborhood of Brightmoor, where in 2006, neighbors joined together to create Neighbors Building Brightmoor, which organized volunteers to clean up the neighborhood and create pocket parks and urban farms. A drive through Brightmoor

will reveal the Brightmoor Farm Way, a path of small gardens each with its own sign.

F2: The Polka Dot House on Heidelberg Street (Project for Public Placemaking, 2013).F3: A sign on Brightmoor Farm Way (Whatsup Detroit, 2013).

9Murals cover many of the boarded houses in an attempt to mask blight and create a sense of

community identity. These are just two of the dozens of examples of urban practices that have

emerged in Detroit that often function under the radar, but have been successful in fostering a sense of place and community. In fact, a book on this topic was published in 2012 titled The

Unreal Estate Guide to Detroit by Andrew Hershner. Hershner illustrates numerous instances

of urban placemaking in Detroit that have occurred during the recent economic crisis. These

informal urban phenomenons have attracted a new young creative population, dubbed by Richard Florida, senior editor of The Atlantic as the creative class, which is intrigued by the spatial and economic conditions of Detroit (Florida, 2002).

The entrepreneurial endeavors are happening both formally and informally. The city

government and corporate executives have also worked to attract newcomers. The topic of new

business growth in Detroit has been significant part of the larger conversation of revitalization

in Detroit. Entrepreneurship is a strategy for Detroits revitalization, as demonstrated by

government projects, corporate executives, and local organizations. At the municipal level,

programs such as Motor City Match encourage small business growth within the Greater Downtown by offering grants and matching business owners with commercial properties

(Motor City Match, 2015).Private corporations also play a significant role in the citys economic redevelopment.

On the subject of entrepreneurship in Detroit, Josh Linker, a founding partner at Detroit

Venture Partners stated, These opportunities are found not in awakening the big giants, but in

launching new companies. (Putnam, 2015) Detroit Venture Partners is just one of the private

corporations that have offered grants and resources to entrepreneurs in Detroit. Another

significant contributor to economic redevelopment in Detroit is Dan Gilbert. As of 2013, Gilbert

owned over 2.9 million square feet of real estate in Downtown (Staes, 2013), and launched

Bedrock Real Estate Services and Opportunity Detroit, an organization that provides online

resources for living, working, and playing in Detroit (Opportunity Detroit, 2015). In addition to the more famous names associated with Detroits revitalization, the city

boasts many businesses and organizations that aim to assist emerging businesses. Detroit is

home to Tech Town, of one of the worlds largest business incubators, in addition to many other smaller incubators that focus on specific types of businesses, such as, food and retail. There are

10

also incubators that focus on starting minority owned businesses and businesses in underserved neighborhoods (Tech Town, 2015, Food Lab, 2015, ProsperUS, 2015).

Entrepreneurship is one of many strategies that contribute to the current era of revitalization and economic development in Detroit. In the wake of decades of economic decline

and government corruption, many residents, private corporations, and non-profit foundations

have partnered together to address city problems (Detroit Future City, 2012). While the emphasis on entrepreneurship is used as a driver of economic development in the current era of revitalization, there are potential problems with the scope of these efforts. Like historical urban

renewal and economic redevelopment initiatives that focused of private business development in the past, the current redevelopment initiatives focus on business growth primarily in the Greater Downtown. Outside of the scope of efforts led by private executives is the part of

Detroit that does not lie within the Greater Downtown (Segal, 2013).

The concentration of these initiatives within the Greater Downtown since the 1950s,

exacerbated the divide between this district and the roughly 132 square miles that is the rest of

the city. In 2013, Richard Florida highlighted Detroit in the series titled Class Divided Cities.

F4: The Greater Downtown of Detroit in relation to the rest of the city, and the neighborhoods that makeup Greater Downtown (Abir et al., 2013).

11

Florida examines the presence of the creative class in Detroit and highlights how some of

Detroits neighborhoods have transformed into vibrant corridors, such as Midtown, Corktown,

and West Village (Florida, 2013). The influx has created tension between the newcomers and

native Detroiters, who are skeptical of gentrification and displacement, and are weary of new

businesses overshadowing those who have existed for years (Stamm, 2014). This has been

exemplified in the case of Galapagos Arts Center that recently announced its relocation to

Detroit. A recent Brooklyn Daily article titled, Instant gentrification or long-term stabilization?

highlighted some of the debate. One local artist was particularly outraged, saying the move co-

opted Detroit as a brand and overshadowed the struggling arts scene of Highland Park, located

within Detroit (Stamm, 2014).

In this research project, I analyze the current era of Detroits revitalization and economic redevelopment, specifically the role that entrepreneurship plays as a significant strategy for

economic growth. While the municipal government and corporate executives incentivize

business growth within the Greater Downtown, other business incubators use entrepreneurship to address social and economic issues in neighborhoods outside of these districts. For example,

Tech Town has a program called SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) that focuses

on developing businesses in historically underserved neighborhoods. Food Lab Detroit

supports entrepreneurs with their food businesses, and provides them access to commercial kitchens. Hatch and Detroit Soup both utilize community wide voting to determine which

business to award grants. These organizations respond to social and economic conditions

in Detroit, and also aim to address them through their practices. In these cases, the role of

the entrepreneur becomes not only one that creates a new business, but one that provides opportunities for others to participate.

In 2013, a new incubator opened in Detroit called Practice Space. Similar to other

business incubators in the city, Practice Space intended to serve a niche market of entrepreneurs

specifically ones that wanted to start retail businesses outside of Downtown and Midtown.

Practice Space is an example of entrepreneurship unique to Detroit and of an incubator that

aimed to assist businesses in their conceptual planning phase. While Practice Space never

claimed to address social and economic issues in Detroit through their practices, they made an intentional move in choosing to function outside of the Greater Downtown.

12

In this paper, I argue that in the current era of Detroits regeneration, entrepreneurship is used as a strategy for economic development within the Greater Downtown, and is also seen as a strategy for revitalization in the neighborhoods. However, this new growth also raises

concerns that include how these businesses will integrate and benefit existing neighborhoods,

and who has access to business development resources. Since entrepreneurship is a key strategy

in Detroits revitalization, entrepreneurs and business incubators must consider the social and economic impact they pose to the existing community.

This paper is comprised of two parts. In the first part, I analyze entrepreneurship as a

redevelopment strategy in Detroit. I describe how urban entrepreneurialism that emerged in the

1980s was actualized in Detroit. Then, I contextualize the role of private business in Detroits

redevelopment efforts. Finally, I discuss the potential benefits of entrepreneurship in terms of

social and community development. In the second part, I analyze Practice Space, which unlike

other similar incubators, was a for-profit enterprise.

In addition to utilizing dozens of scholarly articles and news articles, much of my understanding about the role that entrepreneurship plays in Detroits revitalization comes from participant observation while I lived in Detroit and worked at Practice Space. My fieldwork for

this project also included interviews with residents, activists, professors, planners, architects, and journalists. While they are not directly noted in this paper, their insights contributed to my

understanding of the complexities of revitalization in Detroit.

13

Chapter One | Entrepreneurship and Redevelopment in Detroit

Precisely because physical devastation on such a huge scale boggles the mind, it also frees the imaginationto perceive reality anew; to see vacant lots not as eye sores, but as empty spaces inviting the viewer to fill them in with other forms, other structures that presage a new kind of city which all embody and nurture new life-affirming values in sharp contrast to the values of materialism, individualism and competition that have brought us to this denouement.

Grace Lee Boggs, The Next American Revolution, 2012

Entrepreneurship in Detroit Between 2000 and 2010, 50 percent of the jobs lost in the Unites States were lost in

Michigan, and at the same time, Detroit lost 25 percent of its population (Michigan Turnaround Plan, 2014, Salter, 2013). The Great Recession of 2008 pushed Detroit into an even deeper hole of blight and economic loss. Just after the Great Recession, a coalition of ten local and national

foundations committed to investing $100 million over an eight-year period with the ambition

to return Detroit to its position as a global economic leader (New Economy Initiative, 2015). This investment project was to be overseen by the New Economy Initiative. However, a

year into the project, President and CEO of The Hudson-Webber Foundation, one of donors,

admitted, We didnt know what to do to transform the economy, and directed the grants

towards entrepreneurs (Salter, 2013). As of 2012, the initiative has added almost 7,000 jobs

to the region, and helped start over 400 companies (New Economy Initiative, 2015). The New Economy Initiatives mission is to transform the region by building a network of support for

entrepreneurs.

The New Economy Initiatives projects are just one example of how entrepreneurship is currently used as a tool by foundations, the city government, and by communities to combat loss of population and business. Entrepreneurship is occurring at the municipal level in Detroit,

where the citys government facilitates the largest revitalization and economic redevelopment efforts. This is achieved with public money but primarily funded by corporate executives, who

14

develop large-scale projects in the Greater Downtown. The second level of entrepreneurship is

at the small business level. At this level, support from corporations, institutions and foundations

have contributed to generating programs and resources for emerging business owners seeking

assistance for different businesses at different stages of development. The third level is at the

grassroots level, where informal organizations have formed to create community resiliency through art, social and economic activism, and community participation. While there are non-

profits, organizations, and collectives, there are also informal groups that run community spaces

such as gardens, art spaces, or music venues.

At the grassroots level, the entrepreneurial spirit has become a tool for survival, creating access to resources like food, through community gardens, or addressing blight, through public

art installations. Famous projects such as the Heidelberg Project or D-Town farms illustrate

the communitys reaction to Detroit decline, and the spirit of entrepreneurship to create needed positive change in their communities. This community activism, examples of which

are abundant and exist across the city, is a significant reason why the small business level of

entrepreneurship has increased in the past 15 years. While small businesses are opening rapidly

in Detroit, these new businesses are primarily concentrated in a few specific neighborhoods

in the city, including Corktown, Eastern Market, West Village, and Woodbridge, in addition

to the Greater Downtown. These neighborhoods are popular for young people who move to

Detroit because of their growing retail and restaurant scenes. At the municipal level, economic

redevelopment is concentrated in the primary business districts, a roughly 7.2 square-mile

section of the city covering Downtown, Midtown, and New Center.

While these three levels coexist in Detroit, it is unknown what their relationship will be

like in the future. There is concern about whether existing residents outside of the scope of city-

driven revitalization will reap any benefits, or if they will be included in future developments.

The Origins of Urban Entrepreneurialism Private investment driven urban revitalization emerged as a new form of urban government in the 1970s and 1980s as U.S. American cities witnessed decentralization,

deindustrialization, and population flight to the suburbs. In his paper titled From

Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late

15

Capitalism, Harvey defines this new type of governance as urban entrepreneurialism

(Harvey, 1989, p. 4). Urban entrepreneurialism was appealing to municipal governments as

a driver of economic development. The public-private partnership focused on investment

and development as speculative rather than planned rationally by the government, shifting the risk from the public sector to the private sector. Rather than the government directly

implementing redevelopment, as seen in welfare programs, the government instead acted as a facilitator of capitalist development. David Harvey, who coined the term urban

entrepreneurialism explained the rationale behind this shift. He wrote, the activity of that

public-private partnership is entrepreneurial precisely because it is speculative in execution and design and therefore dogged by all the difficulties and dangers which attach to speculative

as opposed to rationally planned and coordinated development, (Harvey, 1989, 7). This shift

in policy transferred formerly public programs established by the federal government and implemented by the state and local government into the private sector. For example, the federal

public housing program established in the 1930s that funded housing for low-income citizens

gradually began in the 1970s to become a voucher system in the 1990s. The voucher system was

introduced for low-income citizens to use in the formal private housing market. Public housing

was seen in the public eye as unsuccessful and outdated in terms of the new approaches to urbanism that were emerging (Gotez, 2012, 453).

This shift in policy allowed for urban entrepreneurialism to occur at a variety of spatial scales, and Harvey encourages the examination of entrepreneurialism at each them, the local

neighborhood and community, central city and suburb, metropolitan region, region, nation state, and the like, (Harvey, 1989, 6). By examining entrepreneurialism at a variety of scales,

Harvey claims one can better understand who is being entrepreneurial, and about what,

(Harvey, 1989, 6). The role of the entrepreneur in urban entrepreneurism is not only for revenue

generation and personal gain, but is also seen, especially by municipal governments, as a mechanism for urban revitalization and economic development at all spatial scales. Urban

entrepreneurism is thought to encourage local consumption, generate energy and contribute to a positive image of the city, factors which are seen as necessary to grow an economy. However,

urban entrepreneurism still remains in a capitalist framework, one that still places profit before

people, continuing to harden the socio-economic divide among citizens, both physically and

16

conceptually.

In Detroit entrepreneurialism is occurring at three primary levels: the municipal level, the small business level, and the grassroots level. In this context, it is important to understand

who is entrepreneurial at these different levels, who is not, and where these enterprises are

emerging and where they are not.

The Role of Private Business in Revitalization and Economic Development Detroits complex history includes eras of revitalization and economic development initiatives designed to catalyze economic growth, which I have determined are part of three key

eras of revitalization in Detroits history. These eras exemplify how revitalization and economic

development initiatives have repeated in strategy with the federal, state, and municipal levels driving these efforts.

The first attempt to spatially recentralize the city was during the 1950s when express

highways were constructed to connect the growing suburban communities to the city center.

These six-lane highways were sunken into the ground and physically fragmented communities.

This was also a tactic used for urban renewal, as these highways were strategically laid out to remove entire neighborhoods and business districts that were primarily Black neighborhoods

(Sugrue, 1996). The second attempt of revitalization and economic redevelopment were the

strategies implemented by Detroits first Black mayor Coleman Young and Detroit Economic

Growth Corporation that continued a trajectory of development that been established before them by focusing on downtown centric development that aimed to attract businesses rather than people by creating an improved and appealing business and entertainment districts. After

F5: M-8 expressway, known as Davison Avenue, in Detroit. (Michigan Highways, 1997).

17

decades of overcrowded living conditions and factories dotting the citys landscape, Detroit faced a new list of spatial problems, primarily concerning issues of blight. In the 1970s, Young

established an era of revitalization and economic redevelopment that further exacerbated the economic divide between the Greater Downtown and the rest of the city.

The third period of revitalization and economic redevelopment is currently underway.

Shortly after decades of overcrowded living conditions and factories dotting the citys landscape, Detroit faced a new list of spatial problems, primarily concerning issues of blight.

Spatial fragmentation, along with economic and social polarization continues to be exacerbated.

While neighborhoods struggle to remain intact, municipally led development remains in the Greater Downtown. Since 2006, over $6 billion has been invested into the Greater Downtown

Detroit area, where only 5 percent of residents lived there as of 2010 (Ali, et al., 2013). In 2014,

two large-scale development projects have emerged in Detroit, just over a year after Detroit filed for Title 9 Bankruptcy (Gallagher, 2014). Both are intended to trigger economic growth,

and assist in a better connection between Downtown, Midtown, and New Center business districts. While intended to encourage new businesses and residents to relocate to the city, these

projects closely mimic past redevelopment efforts in Detroit that have not been successful to

revive economic growth. These two major development projects in Detroits downtown districts

continue the historic trends of developing transportation and entertainment districts to attract nonresidents and to improve the image of the city.

The first of these projects, the M1-Rail system broke ground in the summer of 2014.

In early 2010, the Federal Government awarded Detroit $25 million through a Transportation

Investment Generating Economic Recovery Grant (M1-Rail, 2014). Originally planned as a nine-mile long proposal, the agreed upon three-mile long track will run on Woodward Avenue

between Jefferson Avenue and West Grand Boulevard. Expected to be operational in 2016, the

light rail system will connect downtown to New Center, where the Amtrak Station is located.

This is the third attempt to provide transportation in and around the Greater Downtown comprised of Downtown, Midtown, and New Center. Largely funded by private investors,

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood noted, No other city in America has had their

business community come together and raise $100 million dollars, (Huffington Post, 2013). In

addition, $6.5 million will be given for a regional network of rapid buses. LaHood added, If

18

they pass the referendum and create this opportunity for the people of this region, . . . you will

have a state-of-the-art regional transportation authority right here in your region, (Huffington

Post, 2013). David Harvey states that, when the physical and social landscape of urbanization

is shaped according to distinctively capitalist criteria, constraints are put on the future paths of capitalist development, (Harvey, 1989, 3). This statement implies that current processes

under capitalism shapes future processes, and therefore, the process of city making is both

product and condition of ongoing social processes of transformation in the most recent phase of capitalist development, (Harvey, 1989, 3). In Detroit, this observation manifests in corporate-

led, city backed redevelopment projects, such as the M-1 Rail system, and the future Red Wings

Stadium. Both of these projects are within the 7.2 square miles of the Greater Downtown.

In the 1970s, Coleman Young, considered the most impactful man in Detroits revitalization,

established an era of revitalization and economic redevelopment that further exacerbated the economic divide between the Greater Downtown and the rest of the city (Thomas, 2013). The

development strategies implemented by Young and the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation

continued a trajectory of development that had been established before them. This urbanization

relied solely on capitalist economic development for growth, rather than direct action to mend social and economic hardships.

The M-1 Rail and the second project, the new stadium, are mainly intended to bolster

the citys image. They create few jobs, are primarily intended to be used by outsiders of the

city, and are widely critiqued in terms of successful urban regeneration (McCarthy, 2002).

Opponents instead call for a focus on local business growth, investment in neighborhoods, and job growth for existing residents. Many people call for a more holistic approach in planning

for Detroits future. Decades ago, in 1993, activist Jimmy Boggs published a 10 Point Program

for Detroit, stating a list of categories that were crucial for Detroits redevelopment. The main

point was that communities were the number one priority, and with that he encouraged the creation of neighborhood businesses. Neighborhood businesses, comprised of basic needs

and services, he believed, would create positive models of enterprise and social responsibility, therefore contributing to a positive image of the city (Boggs, 1993). More than two decades

later, proponents of Boggs vision are numerous. They includ non-profit organizations such

19

as New Economy Initiative and Doing Development Differently in Detroit that are committed

to fair and equitable economic development at the community level, and other retail business

incubators, such as Revolve Detroit and Hatch Detroit.

While millions of private and public funds are going toward the creation of the M1-

Rail system, transit dependent riders have recently experienced reductions of bus routes all across the city. Reductions of bus routes affected all riders in the city and some were

eliminated completely (Data Driven Detroit, 2012). Downtown development efforts focused on transportation do not begin to meet the needs of Detroit residents who suffer from a lack of city

resources.

F6: Occupied Housing Density, Population by Block Group, and the M1-Rail Streetcar (Hill [a], 2014)

20

Express highways, the People Mover, and now the M1-Rail, have all been targeted

to serve outsiders. Detroit residents are on the periphery, figuratively and literally. Despite

proposals for the original nine mile light-rail system connecting the suburbs to the city, or a rapid bus system which was endorsed by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood,

Governor Rick Snyder and former Mayor David Bing, the final outcome was a 3.3 mile system

to offer access directly to and around the Greater Downtown (Huffington Post, 2013). While

options of the original planned rapid bus routes and expanded M1-Rail could better support

the transportation needs of residents who live outside the city center, financial support for these

plans are minute compared to the M1-Rail, and are not confirmed. It took dozens of attempts to

secure the M1-Rail project, which has support from private sector and public leaders. Expansion

of the rail system to provide public transportation for the rest of the city seems unlikely since

the system offers no incentive for private developers who see little economic gain outside of the

F7: DDOT Bus Service Reductions, 2012, Detroit, Hamtramck, and Highland Park (Hill [b], 2013).

21

greater downtown.

In addition to the M1-Rail system, a second development project began in September

2014. The Red Wings stadium will be rebuilt between downtown and midtown Detroit, a

45-block stretch that is almost completely vacant (Gallagher, 2014). For years, the Illich family,

business tycoons and owners of the Red Wings, have acquired properties in the district, an

undertaking that cost over $50 million. The new stadium, and the business district planned to

accompany it, is set to open in 2017. The $650 million project, of which $285 million is public

investment, will include retail, office and residential spaces, which will be divided into several

new neighborhoods. The goal is to build a district that will solve the current isolated spatial

layout of Downtown and Midtown, just as the freeway pedestrian overpasses attempted to connect the two districts that were bisected by the freeway. In an interview with Mike

Illich for the Michigan Live newspaper in the fall of 2014, Illich stated that the new district

stitches together surrounding assets into charming, walkable, livable neighborhoods,

(Gallagher, 2014). The current Red Wings Stadium, Joe Lewis Arena, is located on the east side

of downtown on the waterfront. The move of the stadium to just over a mile north is backed by

Michigans governor, Rick Snyder, Detroits mayor Mike Duggan and the City Council President

Pro-Tem George Cushingberry Jr., according to Gallagher. It is seen as a symbol of a new era of

development and economic growth in downtown Detroit. (Gallagher, 2014)

This is not the first time a sports stadium has been moved to the downtown area. In

fact, in the last 40 years, it is the third time that the Red Wings have moved stadiums, and the

fourth time that a sports stadium has been moved with the intention of sparking new economic

growth. According to author John McCarthy, the stadium project is a pro-growth approach

to urban regeneration, an approach that often sees urban renewal needs as opportunistic for the private sector. This approach stems from techniques from the 1970s and 1980s, geared to

strengthening the image of the city in order to attract private businesses. In addition, McCarthy

states, entertainment and sports-based schemes may increase problems of social injustice and

exclusion. These tactics have resulted in uneven benefits, and have never been successfully

proven to benefit the surrounding communities (McCarthy, 2002, 110).

After decades of exclusive housing policies that were discriminatory toward the citys Black residents and after entire neighborhoods were demolished in the name of urban renewal,

22

newer policies have been implemented that also contribute to displacement on a massive scale, and this still primarily affects the citys Black Residents. While Mayor Mike Duggan

announced that Detroit shed $7 billion in debt in 2014, in the same year 120,000 water accounts

were scheduled to be shut-off due to payment debt, and 62,000 homes, of which 37,000 that

are estimated occupied, have been issued foreclosure notices for 2015 because of tax property

delinquency (Detroit Water Brigade, 2015, Loveland Technologies, 2015). The residents of Detroit, many of whom have suffered the consequences of the citys decline, were given no such

dissolvent of their debts. While water shut-offs and foreclosure are foreseeable consequences

for delinquent payment, there is a much larger issue at stake. It is difficult to resist making a

connection between the sudden increase of this enforcement by the municipal government, and the tactics used during Coleman Youngs mayoral term. Young used eminent domain to remove

thousands of residents in the name of corporate development, specifically to build a new

General Motors plant (Fenster, 2015).

Although there have been attempts for small scale business growth across the city, most the Detroits revitalization efforts have been concentrated in the 7.2 square miles of the

Greater Downtown. Historically, this has been to spatially recentralize the citys center in

the name of public image. However, this has exacerbated the divide between Downtown,

Midtown, and the rest of the city. Despite numerous historical accounts that identify previous

redevelopment strategies as exclusive and oppressive to the most of the citys residents, current redevelopment strategies continue to fail to acknowledge the needs and voices from existing

residents, especially those who live outside the roughly seven square miles that make up the

greater downtown business districts. For example, there is an unprecedented attempt by former

State Representative Rashida Tlaib to implement mandatory Community Benefits Agreements

(CBAs) that would create policies to benefit the existing community in large-scale projects.

There has also been significant pushback, including a bill introduced by State Representative

Earl Poleski in December of 2014 to ban any usage of community benefits agreements, or for city

implemented minimum wage increases (Felton, 2014).

CBAs are seen as a mechanism for policy change that will make it mandatory for

development projects, or urban growth in general, to more responsibly consider the existing community. Madeline Janis, founder of LAANE, an organization that addresses community

23

issues in Los Angeles, stated the urgency for community benefits. This movementin which

communities exercise their power to come together and develop a common agenda, and progressive city governments create policies that link development to community needs

is rapidly becoming an important force in addressing the needs of the marginalized and the underrepresented, (Janis, 2008). CBAs are especially important in Detroit during the

construction of redevelopment projects.

Private corporate power has always dominated Detroits development, leaving the municipal government dependent on corporations for economic redevelopment. In Detroit,

the negotiation of public and private redevelopment initiatives grew increasingly symbiotic as the city looked to corporations for high scale jobs and tax revenues. Multinational corporations

and real estate developers look to the city for bargains and incentives for growth. After city

governance shifted from dependence of public welfare to increased dependence of business and privatization public services, the role of the entrepreneur became even more important in the current iteration of revitalization and economic development.

Entrepreneurship and the Creative Class in Detroit The city of Detroit has a long history of innovation and creativity, the birthplace of the American automobile industry, Motown and Pewabic Pottery, among other iconic American institutions. In the citys recent bout of revival, the role of the creative entrepreneur has become

crucial in generating enthusiasm for the city.

According to the Creative Industries of Michigan, Wayne County, where Detroit is located, is considered one of the top three counties for creative workplaces, home to 15,380 out

of 74,049 creative positions in the state (Creative Industries Report, 2014). This claim is justified, and is likely to become truer, as stories of entrepreneurial opportunity in Detroit spread. Of

these entrepreneurs who are drawn to Detroit, those defined as the creative class, are the most

prevalent. According to Richard Florida, the creative class is defined as anyone who is involved

with science and engineering, architecture and design, education, art, music, entertainment, and creative professionals in business, law, and health care related fields (Florida, 2002).

24

In the past decades, numerous businesses have opened. These include retail and food establishments that occupy once empty storefronts, flexible spaces for the creative class, and

businesses that exist to assist emerging entrepreneurs with programs, workshops, and co-

working space. Online news source Model Media recently identified 10 essential networks for

Detroit creative professionals and recently published 101 Resources for Creatives, a free resource

guide including Detroit-centric networks and events, resources, local and online inspiration

and education, and online career opportunity services. The appeal for aspiring entrepreneurs

is justified, as resources for these future business owners is abundant in Detroit. Of these

resources, business incubators emerged in Detroit to better foster the start-up culture. Business

incubators provide resources dedicated to nurturing small businesses at the beginning stages of development. Of these incubators, Tech Town founded in 1999 and sponsored by General

Motors and Henry Ford Health System, has two categories of programs: technology based and

F8: Residential locations of todays three major classes (Florida, 2013).

25

place-based. The six technology-based programs cater to people at various levels of business

development of a technology-based business. The place-based programs include a Retail Boot

Camp, and SWOT, an economic development acceleration program for historically underserved neighborhoods and communities in Detroit.

While Tech Town is the largest incubator in Detroit there are many other incubators and programs designed to encourage small businesses. Many of these organizations focus on

specific types of business or entrepreneurs. For example, ProsperUS Detroit works with low-

income immigrant and minority neighborhoods and aims to increase the capacity of community entrepreneurs and partners (ProsperUS, 2014). Food Lab Detroit focuses on supporting Detroits growing food movement. Programs and events that Food Lab Detroit runs include

community conversations, business development programs, providing commercial kitchen

access, opportunities to sell food, and assistance to improve the food business license and policy in the city. Revolve Detroit, sponsored by Detroit Economic Growth Corporation focuses

on retail establishments on main street storefronts. Other organizations such as Hatch Detroit

and Detroit Soup utilize community participation and voting to determine winners of a cash prize. In addition, group of organizations including Bizdom, D:Hive, Detroit Economic Growth

Corporation, InsYght, and Tech Town, established a directory tool called BizGrid to help any

entrepreneur at any stage of business development. The directory is available online and in

print, and is organized based on need. An annual feature in Detroit is the entrepreneurship

week that features free public events for business growth planning, sales and marketing,

networking, and neighborhood sustainability.

In Detroit, foundations, corporations, nonprofits, and universities, among others,

recognize the need for small business development as crucial for redevelopment and economic stability and growth (Newberger, 2012). These business incubators and resources that assist

start-ups and existing businesses are illustrative of the growing emphasis of entrepreneurship in Detroit, and the increasing role that entrepreneurship has in the citys development. However,

this limit of scope is illustrative of David Harveys critique on urban entrepreneurship.

According to Harvey, there are distributive consequences of urban entrepreneurialism. In the

public-private partnership, subsidies are given to corporations and consumers at the expense of local collective consumption of the working class and poor, (Harvey, 1989, 12). This, Harvey

26

explains, produces an underclass. In addition, urban entrepreneurship has an emphasis on

small firms, and is therefore more focused on economic development rather than employment

(Harvey, 1989). Harvey states that not only will urban entrepreneurialism create a limited

number of jobs, urban entrepreneurialism consequently contributes to increasing disparities in

wealth and income as well as to that increase in urban impoverishment which has been noted even in those cities that have exhibited strong growth, (Harvey 1989, 12). To prevent further

social and economic disparities in Detroit, development efforts need to address simultaneously

economic redevelopment in the Greater Downtown and provide opportunities for long-time residents to use entrepreneurship as a tool for revitalization in their neighborhoods and communities.

The Capacity of the Entrepreneur in Social and Community Development When I spoke with Shea Howell, a founding member of The Boggs Center To Nurture

Community Leadership and of Detroit Summer, she advised me to consider my use of the

word entrepreneur and recommended using the term small business owner as well.

Howell expressed concern that the term entrepreneur, which she saw as a loaded term that

meant the success of one at the expense of many. Instead, she emphasized the idea of small,

local businesses that were started by residents and supported residents (Howell, 2015). While

both categories of businesses have the capacity to be innovative, I realized that one distinction between an entrepreneur and a small business owner is of intentionality and scope.

Inherently, an entrepreneur seeks to generate capital and grow their venture. Alternatively, a

small business owner inherently seeks to remain just that, small, and local to a given geographic

space.

Within the conversation about what distinguishes different types of businesses from

one another, it is important to mention the role of social entrepreneurship and its prevalence in Detroit. One of the known examples of social enterprises in Detroit is The Empowerment Plan,

which manufactures coats that double as sleeping bags that are donated to homeless people or sold to other organizations. The company hires female employees living in shelters, and

provides them with training and a no-strings $1,500 microloan. Another example is Rebel Nell,

a company that employs women hired from shelters to make graffiti-inspired jewelry. Another

27

is Fresh Corner Cafe, which makes healthy and affordable lunch items and sells them in places

in the city where access to fresh food is limited (Mondry, 2014). Although their presence is not as

strong as the emergence of traditional business in Detroit, it is likely that social enterprises will

soon gain more recognition for having a business model with double or triple bottom lines.

Just as the economic impacts of urban entrepreneurship should be considered, so too

should the social impacts. In Detroit, the influx of people moving to Detroit from outside the

city limits has created tension between natives and newcomers. For example, while these new

establishments become the headlines of local and national news sources, highlighted minimally are the businesses that have existed in Detroit prior to this influx of new business. These

businesses, many of which have Black ownership, are left out of the entrepreneurship coverage

of the city. On a deeper level the influx of newcomers begins to raise questions about who has

access to starting and owning a business, who has access to the new business in the city, and where those businesses are located. In addition, many new businesses created by newcomers

claim to contribute to the existing community, raising the question of how existing communities

actually benefit from these new businesses.

Social preservation is increasingly a priority in Detroit. While the city has recently been

marketed as a hotspot for creativity, it is also facing displacement of existing residents on a

massive scale. In 2014, 62,000 homes were foreclosed on due to unpaid property taxes. As part

of Detroits tax auctions, foreclosed land becomes bundled together and auctioned off, often

to national and international parties (Loveland Technologies, 2014). In Detroit there is a heavy emphasis on the concept of social preservation, especially since many neighborhoods have been eradicated entirely, and many are in danger of disappearing. A social preservationist is defined

as someone who is aware of their role in gentrification, and works to preserve the existing

community and minimize the risks of gentrification, (Brown-Saracino, 2010, xi). Architectural

preservation is wildly popular among professionals and amateurs in Detroit, especially since there is a plethora of inexpensive historic homes. Yet while thousands of houses are bought up,

little is done to preserve the people of a given locale. As it is recognized that a houses style or

neighborhood is monetarily worthy, how do we acknowledge the people who remain there?

In addition, it is important to explore the role of the entrepreneur in social preservation, and understand how entrepreneurship can benefit or harm social preservation. The role of

28

the individual entrepreneur has often been claimed by others to contribute to saving the

city, which critics are quick to point out is untrue. While it is not necessary for all emerging

businesses to list social preservation or community development as a goal of their business, it is important to understand how these businesses, specifically ones that exist in neighborhoods

and occupy storefronts, impact the existing community. It is also important to understand who

is allowed to be an entrepreneur; who has access to resources and who does not.

Conclusion The divide between Downtown Detroit and the rest of the city has continued to increase through multiple eras of redevelopment, and has economic and social implications. In the

current era, entrepreneurship has the capacity to stimulate economic growth at the corporate level, but it also has the capacity to foster community engagement and local economic growth in the neighborhoods outside of Downtown. In terms of economic development, if implemented

F9: 2014 Tax Distress Map. Yellow =Tax-Distressed, Orange = Subject to Foreclosure, Red = Foreclosed (Loveland Technologies, 2014).

29

correctly, small business development has the capacity to act as a middle ground; a level of economic development that community, corporate, and municipal levels can get behind. Small

businesses can remain at the level with local support and engagement, and contribute to a better image of the city that is desired at the community, corporate, and municipal levels. It is

important to recognize that many small businesses, although small in scope, have thrived in Detroit throughout the citys economic decline.

Harvey discusses the potential problems and benefits of urban entrepreneurship, we

must also consider the potential social problems and benefits of urban entrepreneurship.

Absent from the municipal-led redevelopment plans are concerns for existing neighborhoods and communities, many of which have remained resilient and endured during harsh economic decline. As Detroit welcomes newcomers of the creative class, and the many businesses that

will develop, concerns regarding how the city is framed historically, how newcomers enter and work in the city, who has access to entrepreneurship resources, and where these businesses are

emerging, are all important factors to gauge the impact that entrepreneurship will have on the existing community. We must consider the impact of these new businesses and establishments

on the existing communities. While many neighborhoods in Detroit lack the population needed

to sustain these businesses, it is important that in working to revitalize the city, efforts are made

to benefit both new and existing people and businesses.

Using Practice Space as a case study, I aim to explore the dynamic between native Detroiters and newcomers, specifically within the realm of entrepreneurship among the creative

class. I will analyze Practice Space through two main lenses. First, I will consider Practice

Space as a business, in a large conversation of entrepreneurism as a tool for redevelopment. I

will analyze the intentions of Practice Space and their initial assumptions. I will also analyze

how Practice Space was advertised as a business incubator, who their target audience was, and who had access, to their services. The second lens will analyze Practice Space in terms of

community engagement. Practice Space was not only a part of the growing business incubator

sector in Detroit; it was also a business that claimed to address community development at the neighborhood level by working exclusively with place-based retail businesses. I will analyze

how Practice Space defined community, what communities it did and did not engage with, and

the problems of newcomers opening a space without properly considering community impact.

30

Chapter Two | Practice Space: Detroits Newest Business Incubator

We are a city moving through the fire of transformation.

We are afire. There is no place I would rather be.

-Anna Clark, Editor, A Detroit Anthology, 2014

In an interview with Xconomy Magazine in 2013, Justin Mast, the founder and program director of Practice Space alluded to when he first conceived of the idea to start a business

incubator in Detroit. Mast noted, I had the observation that, in Detroit, we have all this

underutilized space and all these entrepreneurs, and programs helping people with investment, but theres a gap between the raw materials and taking projects to completion, (Detroit Free Press, 2013). Eager to combine his professional interests of architecture and entrepreneurship, Mast, and co-founder Austin Kroning, envisioned a new type of business incubator that

worked with entrepreneurs who intended to open place-based businesses, ones they defined

as having a location, workforce, customers and business rooted in Detroit, (Detroit Free Press, 2013). Practice Space was an example of entrepreneurship in Detroit, specifically of enterprises that responded to spatial and economic conditions specific to Detroit. Although

Practice Space considered itself to be a conventional business, since it had a for-profit model, the

business advertised itself as a new type of model- one that specifically targeted creative young

professionals, referred to as residents to participate in projects led by emerging entrepreneurs.

Practice Space was both a vocational training program and a business incubator. The

business was for-profit and attempted to simultaneously address multiple trends in the city.

Practice Space sought to assist emerging business owners in their business planning and conceptual design planning. In addition, Practice Space was an exploratory platform for young

professionals to work with real clients, and to become familiar with Detroits design and

entrepreneurship scenes. I joined Practice Space as a resident in January of 2014, and worked

there until August of the same year. My understanding of the business primarily derives from

my experience and observations, along with news articles written about Practice Space.

31

Working at Practice Space gave me insight into the scope of entrepreneurship in Detroit-

how small and well connected the scene is, and how difficult it can be to start a business in

Detroit, although with the help of these incubators that is slowly changing. In this section I will

analyze Practice Space as an example of entrepreneurship in Detroit, and also as an example of a business that was a for-profit incubator. Practice Space had a unique business model, one

that proved to be complicated once actualized. As a resident, I experienced how the structure of

Practice Space affected the quality of the services and program. I will elaborate on how Practice

Space came to be, and on how the program was structured. Then I will analyze Practice Space as

an enterprise and as a business incubator, and identify some of their shortfalls in terms of their vision and goals for the business.

Practice Space was located at 2801 14th Street, on the corner of Perry Street, in North Corktown. As of 2010, North Corktown is comprised of 1,213 properties owned by 422 owners,

as of 2013. The neighborhood is primarily residential and consists of older homes, some dating back to the late 19th century, and brick row houses, along with a series of newer houses built in

2007. Within a half-mile radius of Practice Space, there are roughly 2,800 residents, who are 10

percent Latino, 25.5 percent White, and 60 percent Black. Approximately 39.2 percent are living

below poverty. Approximately 76.2 percent of homes are occupied, where 53 percent of units are

rented (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). North Corktown lies between Grand River Avenue and I-75, sandwiched between

I-96 and John C. Lodge Freeway, with 14th Street and Rosa Parks Boulevard running through.

While the neighborhood has high traffic on these main corridors, the neighborhood is relatively

F10: Above: Sample of .5 mile radius around Practice Space.Left: Number of households per block in North Corktown.

(Data Driven Detroit, 2014)

32

quiet, and there are many empty lots with entire blocks abandoned to fields of grassland.

While the largest occupant of the neighborhood is the Motor City Casino, the identity of the neighborhood is better attributed to the many smaller businesses and community organizations.

These include, but are not limited to, a hostel established in 2006, Brother Nature Farm, Hope

Takes Root Community Garden, Corktown Studios art space, Nancy Whiskeys bar, several

pocket parks (small parks on empty lots), several churches, a vintage clothing store, a

collective apartment complex, and a soon-to-open cider mill. North Corktown does not have

a supermarket or a convenience store, but there is a liquor store near by. North Corktown is

home to a diverse population, both in terms of race and age, but also in terms of duration of occupancy. While the same families have occupied some of the houses for almost a century,

many residents have lived in the neighborhood for less than ten years.

Practice Space had a convenient location in Detroit- just on the edge of Corktown, where

rent and traffic are low, but close enough to the main blocks of Michigan Avenue. Corktown

is strengthening its reputation as a desired location for creative young people looking to live

in an urban area. It is successfully selling itself as an area that offers the opportunity to be a

business owner, renovate an architecturally inspiring building, or engage with the growing arts and restaurants scene. In the past few months, several new establishments have opened in

Corktown including Ditto Ditto bookshop, Rosa Parks Boys art gallery and skate shop, Gold

Cash Gold restaurant, Rubbed Deli, and El Dorado vintage. Corktown is one of the oldest

F11: The building of Practice Space in North Corktown (Martin, H., Chua, C., Foreman, L., 2013).

33

existing neighborhoods in Detroit, and currently one of the most up-and coming. In a recent

study by Governing Data, Corktown was also one of seven tracts in Detroit to show evidence of

gentrification, where since 2000 the tract has gained 109 residents, and the median home value

is up 26 percent. In addition, Corktown is currently experiencing a surge in retail businesses,

with the recent announcement of a plan for the redevelopment of the historic Tigers Stadium at the corner of Michigan Avenue and Trumbull Avenue (Governing Data, 2015). This district is ripe with opportunities for Practice Space to work with business owners who could potentially need

design or business development assistance.

In the year leading up the opening of Practice Space in 2013, the two founding members

worked in the city while planning for their experimental new business endeavor. Mast and

Kroning allocated $30,000 of their personal money towards rehabbing the building, and

planned for an $110,000 operating budget, a combination of personal funds and a loan, for the

first functioning year. The 3,800 square foot auto-body shop became the home of Practice Space,

and was retrofitted with plywood to create an office style interior without compromising the

original character of the auto-body shop.

While Practice Space was not explicitly concerned with social preservation in Detroit, they were interested in the adaptive reuse of buildings in the city. Mast believed that these

F12: The entrance to Practice Space (Practice Space, 2013).

34

buildings are telling a story about Detroit and you dont want to erase the time and the place from the space, (Detroit Free Press, 2013). Practice Space leased the auto-body shop, originally built in 1922, from Jerry Esther, a retired automobile engineer. The shop had a heavy steel door

that covered the entrance into a small lobby-like room that was used as a small caf and break-

room. Inside the main space, there was a small-elevated lounge area with a couch and a few

chairs that also housed a small-curated collection of books on Detroit and on architecture. At

one end, a floor-to-ceiling garage door could open into a grassy courtyard. At the other end,

the space opened into a large room. At the center was another raised platform that had three

rows of decks, that was surrounded by a work bar with stools. On the left there was a large

conference table and a flat-screen television that was mounted to a large panel to pin up work

on. On the right, a third platform was divided into three small rooms, each equipped with their

own television and dry-erase boards. The space preserved many of the elements of the original

auto-body shop, such as the lift, the price signs, the clocks, hoses, lockers, and giant garage

doors. Since the space was leased, the adaptive re-use had to be temporary. This problem was

solved by constructing plywood platforms for all of the new elements, which literally added a second layer of architecture.

F13: Interior view of Practice Space (Practice Space, 2013).

35

The modern yet grungy design of the space was very attractive, especially to someone like myself who was studying architecture. The space felt worn, but also new and spacious.

The building was always open to the public, and we often had visitors who popped in out of curiosity. While the space had no windows and was made with cinder block, the openness of

the garage doors made the space feel very transparent in form, and we could easily interact with people who walked by. Since adaptive reuse in increasingly popular in Detroit, as architects and

designers create new ways to transform spaces, Practice Space became a popular building to rent out for evening and weekend events. These events included pop-up art galleries, business

launches, community cocktail hours, and university weekend retreats. As part of the attempt to

get more people to visit the space, as residents we were also required to host a monthly mixer in

the space and invite anyone we wanted to.

In an interview with Dwell Magazine in 2014, Mast stated, Theres so much underutilized space, so much industrial space, and so many people looking to start new

things. Detroit should be the best place for architecture right now, (Dwell, 2014). The mentality of adaptive reuse of existing buildings as an approach to urban design that is growing in popularity in Detroit, which approach proved beneficial to Practice Space, as the reuse of their

building, from an auto-body shop repurposed into a business incubator, and the program, aligned with the current discourse in the City. Practice Space utilized this trend of reuse and

F14: Pop-up art gallery event at Practice Space (Untitled Detroit, 2014).

36

revitalization as the focus of their branding and identity and gained significant recognition for

their innovative spatial redesign.

Not only did Practice Space gain recognition from journalists, it also caught the attention of everyone who passed by the building. In the 3,800 square-foot building, a sculpture-

like faade of an algorithmic pattern of geometric metal makes a bold statement on a major

thoroughfare. The design was intended to replace the glass windows and prevent burglary, but

also to call attention to the building and announce its reuse. In an article in Dwell from 2014,

the space was described as a small town mechanics shop crosses with a Gehry sketch, (Dwell, 2014). Inside, remnants of the auto body shop remain, including the car-lift that now serves

as a large moveable console table. The interior workspaces were constructed as a second layer

made almost exclusively from plywood, steel tubing, and polycarbonate panels. The space was

designed to be very open, with casual seating, individual desks, and small rooms for meetings.

Mast also refers to the growing tales of Detroit, thought to hold the key to new opportunities and

possibilities in the fields of architecture and entrepreneurship. Mast believed that Detroit held

the potential for him to combine his passions of architecture and entrepreneurship. In Silicon

Valley, where you see an interesting marriage between entrepreneurship and tech-I think the

same opportunity exists in Detroit for architects, (Xconomy, 2013). Although the professions of architecture and design have been well established in Detroit, Mast alludes to a new wave architecture and design scene. One example of this is what Andrew Hershner defines in his book

F15: Workspaces inside Practice Space (Martin, H., Chua, C., Foreman, L., 2013).

37

The Unreal Estate Guide to Detroit, as extreme housework. Referring to abandoned houses

spread across the city, Hershner says, extreme housework will transform one of these houses

into something else, but something that satisfies no need for comfort or shelter. The need is for

something different: what estranges the days, what beguiles the city, what renders architecture

unfamiliar to itself, (Hershner, 2012). Although Practice Space did not work on projects that

were experimental in form, they embodied the architectural energy, especially in adaptive reuse of buildings, in Detroit.

The Program of Practice SpaceMast and Kroning, along with Donny Hart who assisted with finance, officially opened

for its first term September of 2013. The program was divided into three parts. According to

Practice Space these programs were defined as follows:

Incubator- a revolving four-month program where Detroit-based business projects get a chance to build a foundation for growth.

Residency- a yearlong vocational training where a team of innovators explore new ways of working and broaden their experience collaborating on real projects.

Offsite- a home base for a new generation of practitioners to share resources and build a body of local knowledge.

The tuition for the incubator was between $2,000 and $3,000 per business owner for the four-

month term. Each project that Practice Space accepted into the program had to meet the

following criteria that were developed by the directors:The project must be dynamic, and socially relevant to issues in Detroit such as education,

food, transportation, or crime.

The project must be place-based, which meant the location, workforce, and customers had to

be based in Detroit. Ideally in locations outside of Downtown and Midtown Detroit.

The project should also aim to leverage space or building, and intend to make an impact on

the surrounding area and community.

The project leaders must have already taken significant steps of action, as Practice Space was

38

not interested in projects that were just ideas, but rather where investment had already been made on behalf of the projects.

The residency targeted young professionals, who were diverse in professional backgrounds

but who had interest in working and learning about Detroit. Practice Space distributed a media

kit to regional colleges and universities, and encouraged the existing residents to share the

program with former classmates. These were primarily recent college graduates or, like myself,

were still enrolled in college. Originally, residents enrolled with a yearlong commitment, which

meant they would participate in three consecutive four-month long terms. However, after the

second term this policy was dropped because residents found it difficult to commit and pay for

the program, which had tuition of $6,000 for the three combined terms.

I joined as a resident at Practice Space in January of 2014, and stayed for two terms, until the

end of August. I first learned of Practice Space when I was visiting Detroit for a weekend a few

months prior, and picked up a flyer in the University of Michigan Detroit Center. The postcard

called for residents who identified as interested in architecture, business, and Detroit. I was

instantly impressed with their sleek website, their elegant promotional material, and especially

interested in the program, which paralleled my academic interests at Hampshire College.

Although I was not a college graduate, Practice was excited to have me, and even set me up with a place to live close by. When I first joined Practice Space I was one of five residents. Three

were recent graduates from the University of Michigan. I was the newest resident of Detroit,

all the other participants at Practice Space were from Michigan, save for one resident who was from Massachusetts.

In addition to the directors who worked daily at Practice Space, there was also a

team of well-established professionals to advise the future clients of Practice Space. These

advisors included Christian Unverzagt, an architect and professor at Taubman; Brandon Weiner, a lawyer for creative professionals; Virginia Stanard, an architect and Director of the

Masters of Community Development at The University of Detroit Mercy; Ryan Cooley, a real estate developer; and Brian Hurttienne, an architect and director of The Villages Community

Development Corporation. These advisors would meet with us weekly as part of the Friday

presentations that marked the end of each phase. During these presentations we displayed the

39

work and research we had done, and would receive constructive feedback to help us move

forward. These advisors would also meet with us upon request during the week to help us

prepare for the presentations.

While at Practice Space I was eager to make use of all of the components of the

residency, in addition to working on the projects. The residency required the project teams to

meet four times a week for three-hour sessions in the mornings. We had weekly visits from

local professionals who shared their work with us and helped us on specific elements of our

projects. These guests included Michael Forsynth, business development manager at Detroit

Economic Growth Corporation; Larry DMongo, owner of the well-known Caf DMongos;

Amy Chesterson, a landscape architect and urban planner at Hamilton Anderson; and Emilie

Evans, a preservation specialist at Michigan Historic Preservation Network. These visits

allowed the residents to meet established professionals in Detroit, and learn about other projects that were occurring in the city. In addition, we often talked about current issues in the city. It

was illuminating to hear opinions of various redevelopment strategies from a wide range of professionals.

While the workspace program was a separate entity, the incubator and residency program

worked in tandem on the business projects. The emerging business owners, who were referred

to as project leaders, each had a team of residents that worked on their project for the

duration of the term. During this process, it was emphasized that both project leaders and

residents would be simultaneously designing and storytelling, documenting each phase of the project, crafting a narrative of the process and development, which would be developed into a concept book. The concept book was to convey the projects development and vision. These

concept books were tangible objects that could be used to communicate the project to interested

parties, including community members, potential stakeholders or investors, or interested

patrons. The content for the concept book was created throughout the term.

Each term was divided into five phases, which are defined as follows:

Mobilize- Each team hosts an event to introduce the project and space to the local community. During this phase, the team familiarizes themselves with each other, the

space, and the neighborhood, along with any additional collaborators.

Understand- Each team consolidates what was known about the project and its context, by

40

analyzing the background and history of the project and the location, documenting the

existing space with architectural plans, mapping the surrounding area and its assets, and studying any relevant precedents.

Design- Each team develops studies of the current conditions of the given space, and produces concepts for future remodeling and activity. This includes conceptual floor

plans, schematic designing, and planning and development of the programmatic components.

Deepen- Each team furthers each section of the business plan, including customer segments, revenue streams, building regulations, and branding materials.

Present- Each team finalized the business plan and produces a concept book. The concept book consisted of the executive summary and overview, sections on products and

services, market analysis, strategy and implementation, management, financial

summaries, and appendixes of financial and architectural details.

As a resident of Practice Space, I worked on two of the five projects of Practice Space

since they opened the fall of 2013. In the first term, from January until May, I worked with

project leader Don Behm on his project called Offworld. Offworld was a planned video arcade

and bar that would also moonlight as an art gallery and a workspace to restore games. Behm

intended to create a space for gamers of all levels and all ages, and a space where people could both play these games and learn about the culture, through art, music, and creation. Behm did

not have a set location for Offworld, and needed a space that could house all of this, and be

flexible enough to hold these programs. During the term, we selected three potential buildings

that were on the market in Detroit. After we explored the possibilities of each building and

location, we settled on a building on Michigan Avenue in Corktown, which was already an

existing bar. The building and the businesss liquor license were both for sale. We created a

schematic design for this space and business plan for Offworld. During the term we hosted

two game nights that were open to the public that helped gain momentum for Offworld before

the business officially opened. Three months after Behm left Practice Space, he leased a room

in the renovated St. Vincent School building in Corktown, and currently runs monthly game

nights. These monthly games nights allowed Offworld to grow, while Behm prepared to find

41

a permanent location for Offworld. The events generated enough revenue for Behm to break

even, which was ideal for him. While the concept book developed during Practice Space did not

directly contribute to Behm opening in Corktown, working at Practice Space did help him carve

out time in his schedule to work on strengthening the concept, branding, designing the website,

and learning about what is needed to open a business.

During the second term, from May until August of 2014, I worked on a project called

Restoring the Neighbor Back to the Hood. Yusef Shakur, who was a local community activist

and former owner of The Urban Network Bookstore, created the project. The Urban Network

Bookstore was very successful. It was part caf, part performance space, part recording

studio, part workshop space, and part hangout zone for anyone who wanted to be there in the

neighborhood. The Urban Network offered people in the community a place to go, since in

that part of Detroit there were few communal places other than churches or schools. Soon after

The Urban Network had to close, Yusef Shakur was gifted a house close by that he aimed to

renovate and turn into Restoring the Neighbor Back to the Hood. Restoring the Neighbor Back

to the Hood was going to serve as a community center in a neighborhood that did not have

such a space. The house was located on Ferry Park Street, a few blocks south of West Grand

F16: An exceprt from the Offworld concept book (Practice Space, 2014).

42

Boulevard, between 16th and Stanton Streets. Yusef, who was a native of the neighborhood,

was determined to help create improvements in his community. Originally called Northwest

Goldberg, the local residents referred to the area as Zone 8. Zone 8 was a especially

impoverished area of Detroit that had few places for community to congregate other than churches or schools. The neighborhood was a few miles away from the Greater Downtown,

isolated from any redevelopment efforts in the city.

Restoring the Neighbor Back to the Hood was an example of an organization in Detroit

that was trying to address social and economic needs in the community, through free events, training programs, and by just being an open and public space. This neighborhood illustrated

how disinvestment affected neighborhoods in Detroit. Shakur often spoke of how many

prominent Black businesses once lined the streets, and famous activists like Martin Luther

King Jr. and Malcolm X spoke at local churches there. Shakur is what I referred to earlier as a

social preservationist. Driven with personal reasons, Yusef Shakur is determined to restore,

literally, neighbors in his community and create safe spaces where they can engage. He is also

determined to help train community residents and help them get access to resources and jobs.

His motive is far from monetary. In fact, he believes, with good reason, that money will find him

and the house will find a way to be accessible to everyone. Shakur is still working on restoring

the house with dedicated team of volunteers that work on the house often, and hopes to finish

the restoration by late summer of 2015.

F17: Yusef Shakur in front of the Restoring the Neighbor Back to the Hood house (Practice Space, 2014).

43

The Closure of Practice SpaceWorking on these projects gave me a deeper insight to how businesses form and operate

in Detroit, especially since these businesses were very different from one another. Each of these

projects is well known in Detroit, and continues to grow in following. Behm and Yusef had very

different goals, since Behm wanted to start a small bar and Shakur wanted to directly improve

his community. Although Practice Space was able to take each of these projects on, there were

issues with how the curriculum of Practice Space intersected with the goals of the business owners. The directors of Practice Space realized that the program relied too heavily on the

tuition of residents and project leaders that created an exclusive and tense work environment.

To address this they paused the incubator program during the fourth term for a period of strategic planning. Although they considered transitioning