RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION SURVEY:
A CASE STUDY OF HIGHWAY RELOCATION IN
LANSING, MICHIGAN

Thesis for the Degree of M. U. P.
MICHEGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

Bruce Carter Brown
196 5

 

, , n x
E g ‘ ‘l‘? l".
.H’ 1 :13, i
9X Ix 2 x ,

Mil/310$

99

 

ABSTRACT

RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION SURVEY:
A CASE STUDY OF HIGHWAY RELOCATION
IN LANSING, MICHIGAN

by Bruce Carter Brown

The American social system has been undergoing extensive
changes during the past two decades. It has been precipitated
by an increase in federally supported programs at the local
level. These programs, aimed at slum clearance or highway
construction, have inevitably touched families traditionally
occupying the lower levels of the economic ladder. Quite
often, they involve families of minority groups, in particular
the Negro. Few cities have profited socially from such
experiences and almost none have offered solutions to resulting
problems.

The City of Lansing, Michigan was presented the unique
opportunity to pioneer needed solutions when an interstate
highway was proposed for the city. The highway, to be known
as Interstate 496, would run east—west through the heart of the
city. Its major purpose was to provide a satisfactory cir-
culation system to service its two major employers--the State
government and the Oldsmobile Division of General Motors. The

location of the facility is such that it completely bisects

Bruce Carter Brown

the city's major Negro concentration displacing over 600
families, about half of which were members of the Negro race.
This was the first relocation project of this magnitude to
face Lansing and the approach it decided to follow would
greatly affect future relocation projects.

The purpose of this thesis, then, is to document the
various activities that have taken place since the project
was announced and recommend solutions for relocating the.
families involved. It covers a four-year period from 1961
to the present. The material for this study was obtained
from newspaper accounts and from the first-hand experience
of directing a major relocation survey. Attempts have also
been made to assess the impact of the survey on the city in
terms of actions taken since its completion. The scope of
the study was limited only by the interpretations of those
reporting its major developments.

Although the relocation survey itself involved families
from both races, the Negro race has been emphasized. This
was done primarily because of the particular set of circum-
stances that surrounded Negro relocation. This thesis is not
intended to favor one side or one group over another, but
merely to report the situation as it occurred.

The major conclusions of the study are the following:

1. A need exists for a nation-wide program for reloca-

ting families displaced by highway construction

Bruce Carter Brown

similar to that presently included in the urban
renewal program.

Any highway construction program involving the
relocation of families or businesses, should
include methods of collecting pertinent data on
those affected to aid in relocation efforts. This
data should be made available to local officials

at least two years in advance of right-of-way
purchase.

Cities in which urban renewal or highway construc-
tion programs are being conducted, should be
required to establish local housing authorities

for insuring an adequate supply of decent housing
units for families being displaced.

The City of Lansing must assume a responsibility for
relocating its families displaced by urban projects,

whether legally bound to do so or not.

Four alternative relocation solutions were suggested as

approaches to present and future relocation tasks. They

included the following:

1.
2.

Assume no community responsibility for relocation.
Dependence upon local resources for providing units
on a temporary basis.

The possibility of a federally-financed public

housing program.

Bruce Carter Brown

4. An imaginative approach involving the relocation
of entire neighborhood units on public or privately
donated land.

RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION SURVEY:
A CASE STUDY OF HIGHWAY RELOCATION
IN LANSING, MICHIGAN

BY

Bruce Carter Brown

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING

School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture
1965

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The successful completion of this thesis is a result of
the cooperation and encouragement of many people. Grateful
appreciation is extended to Professor Charles W. Barr for
his guidance and encouragement throughout the study. Numerous
other persons also are recognized for their assistance and
cooperation:

Mr. Duane Cross - Inspector, Building Department

Dr. Duane Gibson - Director, Institute for Community

Development, Michigan State University

Hr. Richard Letts - Director, Human Relations Committee

Mr. William Mateer - Director, Housing Commission

(Formerly Human Relations Director)
Mrs. Josephine Wharton - Vice Chairman, Human Relations
Committee
Special recognition is gratefully extended to the thirty-two
volunteer interviewers who gave unselfishly of their time and
energies to make the study a success.
Finally, to my wife Lynne, a special expression of

gratitude for her constant encouragement and unending patience.

11

l
, I
1
n
' .
. ‘-
. us.
A ,
t

41

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Thesis .
Background. . . . . . .
I InterSta-tre‘496e e e e e
The Survey Proposed . .
Mechanics of the Survey

THE SURVEY

Introduction. . . .
The Study Area. . .
Survey Responses. .
Housing Conditions.

REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES AFFECTING

Introduction. . . . .

The Existing Housing Market

Lending Institutions. . .
Public Housing. . . . . .

Anticipated Displacement Patte

RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY. O O 0 O O O O O O O O O 0

APPENDIX.

iii

RELOCATION

0
PH

Page

I—‘C\Ull\)l-"

16

17
18

35

41
47

52
56

61

7O
72

LIST OF PLATES

Plate Page

I. The Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

II. Major Negro Concentrations . . . . . . . . . 74

III. Addendum Form--Lansing Board of Realtors . . 75
IV. Statement of Position--Lansing Board of

Realtors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

V. I-496 Questionnaire. . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

iv

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

amass 9;: gas HESIs

As cities have attempted to provide for its citizens
displaced by highway projects, an almost unanimous cry has
arisen for documentation of the experiences of other cities
in facing the ever-frequent relocation problem. The City
of Lansing, Michigan, was presented with a unique opportunity
when its relocation program, centering around a proposed east-
west freeway through the heart of the City, involved the
city's major Negro concentration. It occurred to the author
that involvement in such a relocation survey would provide
opportunities rarely available to planners--main1y: first hand
experience in exploring the magnitude of one of today's
greatest social problems; gaining insight into the "real-
world” experiences of members of the Negro race; understanding
the political structure of a middle-sized Midwestern community;
and, providing the planning profession with basic techniques
for approaching similar situations in other communities.

I The purpose of this thesis, then, is to examine the
characteristics concerned with the social phenomena of relo-
cating a large number of Negro families in a primarily segre-

gated community; provide the basic components of a relocation

survey; and, provide the City of Lansing the data required
to solve its unique displacement problem. Although informa-
tion will be provided on all the families involved, emphasis
will be placed upon examining the plight of the Negroes.

BACKGROUND

The migration of Negroes to the North from the Southern
states began in the early 1900's. It was estimated that nearly
400,000 Negroes moved North during the years 1916, 1917, and
1918.1 With the advent of World War II, however, migration
reached its peak. By 1940, the Negro population of Michigan
had reached 208,345 persons and increased to 440.335 persons
by 1950.2 Virtually all of the increase took place in urban
areas.

In Lansing between 1940 and 1950, the Negro population
tripled from 1,638 in 1940 to 3,290 in 1950. The 1960 Census
of Population indicated that the Negro population of Lansing
again doubled by 1960 reaching a total of 6,745 persons. A
study of Negro migration into Lansing indicated that most of
the migrants were unskilled sharecroppers in their home states
and that most were attracted to Lansing's promise of high
industrial wages.3 The War had induced a shortage of labor

 

1Emmett J. Scott, Ne 0 Mi ration Durin the war,
(Carnegie Endowment for InIernaIionaI Peace, I§2OI.

2U. 3. Bureau of the Census, 1950 Michigan Census of
Population, Pe Ge 22’ Table 53e

3Rose Brunson, Socialization Experiences and Socio-
Economic Characteristics of Urban Ne roes as Related to Use
0? Selected Soufhern Foods and MedIcal RemedIes, TEesIs for

{as PH. D degree n Soc a Science, MIEhigan State University.

 

in most of Lansing's industrial plants. Jobs were advertised
throughout the South promising wages of from $75.00 to 895.00
per week.1
Migrant Negroes, upon reaching Lansing, found an acute
shortage of housing units within their economic resources.
Host settled near the major industrial plants in areas that
had previously been restricted to members of the Negro race.
Often they were forced to live with relatives or friends, or
to double and triple up in housing unsuitable for single
families, because there was little or no housing available
to them. Realtors were guilty of perpetuating the situation
by restricting the housing opportunities to the poorer areas,
particularly in the area north of Oldsmobile. The situation
reached its peak in the mid-1950's. At that time the
restricted area was expanded slightly to the north into
previously single-family neighborhoods. Large old homes were
quickly converted into two and three family units. Negro
families bought available housing at prices frequently
exceeding the actual property value by two or three times.
Families moving into these dwellings would often find them-
selves unable to meet their financial obligation and would
erect partitions for accomodating one or more families, thus
lowering rents for all involved. The effect of this practice,

of course, resulted in an overuse of the prOperty and its

eventual deterioration.

lIbid.

-U
l\

Despite optomistic reports, there has always been, and
presently is, a shortage of housing units for Negroes in
Lansing. A recent interview with the Lansing Building Depart-
ment staff indicated that tenants are frequently uncooperative
with building inspectors fearing retaliation by landlords in
the form of higher rents or eventual eviction. Code enforce-
ment has been most difficult for these reasons plus the fact
that units simply aren't available to absorb families seeking
adequate and healthy dwellings. This situation has been
further compounded by the elimination of several hundred
housing units from the Lansing market during the past decade.
The largest displacement began in 1961 when Oldsmobile
initiated an expansion program. From 1961 to 1965, approxi-
mately 168 units have been purchased and cleared by Oldsmobile
for expansion.1 Although records have not been kept, it is
estimated by local officials that 90% of the families displaced
by Oldsmobile have settled within the immediate area causing
a critical housing shortage and the overuse of existing
facilities. Building Department inspectors noted the existence
of extremely high density development extending from Oldsmobile
northward to Michigan Avenue shortly after the first expansion
program. Virtually all of the increased residential activity
in this area has been the result of doubling and tripling up

of families in previously single family units.

 

1Lansing Housing Committee, HousinggNeedg, June, 1965,
p. 3.

.
k.
. I .
I
" I
.
, ,
.
. .
\J
.
.
\.
I. 1 ,
‘ .

I-e

Several other expansion programs have affected the Negro
housing market to a lesser degree. The construction of the
Pinetree Connector displaced approximately 100 families from
the Urbandale area. Records, again, were not kept to trace
family movements from this displacement, but local officials
feel that the affected families were scattered uniformly
throughout the low cost housing areas of the city. State
Capital expansion code enforcement, the Oakland extension
project, and private demolition have accounted for the dis-

placement of an additional 334 units between 1961 and 1965.1

W

The Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 provided for the
construction of a 41,000 mile Interstate and Defense Highway
System prior to 1972. Of this total, Michigan has been

allocated 1,078 miles.2

The Michigan State Highway Department
conducted an extensive study in cooperation with the United
States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads,

during 1959-60 to determine costs for completing the allocated
Interstate System in Michigan. This study provided for the
development of a "planned corridor" through the City of
Lansing to be named Interstate-496.3 The route was to be an

east-west business loop of Interstate-96 which by-passed the
CitYe

 

1Ibid.

2Michigan State Highway Department, ;:496 Engineering
Re ort, March, 1964.

3Ibid.

In January, 1961, the Michigan State Highway Department
issued an engineering report on the first segment of the
corridor known as the "Pinetree Connector.’ In 1963, route
location studies were completed on the remaining section from
Trowbridge Road interchange to Interstate-96 west of the City.
This facility was proposed to be constructed on an east-west
axis located primarily between the one-way pairs of Main
Street and St. Joseph Street. It will displace 604 families,
one-third of which are Negro. Its location is such that it
completely bisects the largest Negro concentration within the
City of Lansing and eliminates another 600 units from the

City's housing market.

THE SURVEY PROPOSED

Almost immediately after the Highway Department announced
the location of the I-496 facility, action began throughout
the City for assessing the magnitude of the pending relocation
effort. It's a great oversight that the Federal government,
in itsvast and progressive highway building program, has
not held itself responsible for relocating those families
displaced by such a facility. Consequently, in the vast
majority of cases, the local governmental unit is totally
unprepared when such a situation is placed at their doorstep.
This, of course, throws the burden of relocation upon the
individual families themselves who are even more unprepared

but who must remedy the situation as best they can.

\J

'T

U

5_J

Unfortunately, the City of Lansing was totally unpre-
pared for such a sizable relocation program, even though they
had been informed years ago that such a facility was in the
offing. The prospect of relocating over 600 families was
staggering to local officials, particularly when approximately
one-third of the familis involved were members of the Negro
race in need of non-existent low cost housing units. Depart-
ment heads were asked to provide information on the families
involved, which they didn't have or knew how to get. Data on
the number of families involved, their economic resources,
their social characteristics and needs, and family compositions,
was in great demand. Several departments and organizations
considered performing a study to gather the information that
they, themselves, needed to answer quiries.

On May 23, 1963, an cpen forum was held in the City Hall
to discuss the routing of the new facility, the relocation of
families to be displaced, and the dates when property would
be acquired. The meeting was sponsored by the newly-formed
Human Relations Committee and was attended by over 200 persons.1
This was the first public meeting held at which the I-496
facility was discussed at length in terms of its impact upon
the community. Shortly after this meeting, the Lansing
Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People conducted a survey of the Negro families invol-

ved. Although the basic data collected during the study was

 

:State Journal (Lansing), "Plans Laid for 1-496 Route Here."
May 2 , .

“*1

.l-

\J

. a U
\ L
I! 7
. 1
o I V
‘J I
I I
i.) \J u ‘H’
J ' k ‘
—. [ \ :7
I ' v
I I ll U . L
. o q r'
. _ u . O ‘
tbl _ -:
\ v
I I
I
I , .v
‘ e
. Q a} ,
( I k)
\ av
.. ‘ ,- i '
J - g A
I \ ' I

V‘\

.J

Unfortunately, the City of Lansing was totally unpre-
pared for such a sizable relocation program, even though they
had been informed years ago that such a facility was in the
offing. The prospect of relocating over 600 families was
staggering to local officials, particularly when approximately
one-third of the familre involved were members of the Negro
race in need of non-existent low cost housing units. Depart-
ment heads were asked to provide information on the families
involved, which they didn't have or knew how to get. Data on
the number of families involved, their economic resources,
their social characteristics and needs, and family compositions,
was in great demand. Several departments and organizations
considered performing a study to gather the information that
they, themselves, needed to answer quiries.

On May 23, 1963, an cpen forum was held in the City Hall
to discuss the routing of the new facility, the relocation of
families to be displaced, and the dates when property would
be acquired. The meeting was sponsored by the newly-formed
Human Relations Committee and was attended by over 200 persons.
This was the first public meeting held at which the I-496
facility was discussed at length in terms of its impact upon
the community. Shortly after this meeting, the Lansing
Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People conducted a survey of the Negro families invol-

ved. Although the basic data collected during the study was

 

:State Journal (Lansing), "Plans Laid for I-496 Route Here,"
May 2 , ,

5.)

kl

- .
C .
i ‘H
I.
e .
. v
I
. ..
J
r.
x J . O
T
Q
.5 ..U
J ,’
\
-IU {
'II.
Iv \ -i
. Q
C
C . me
e...
.7 _
I . iv a
I u
w . _
l‘
i u
i . w . a
.. y . .
r a
a» - e _
u
. I

'J

7

Unfortunately, the City of Lansing was totally unpre-
pared for such a sizable relocation program, even though they
had been informed years ago that such a facility was in the
offing. The prospect of relocating over 600 families was
staggering to local officials, particularly when approximately
one-third of the familrs involved were members of the Negro
race in need of nonpexistent low cost housing units. Depart-
ment heads were asked to provide information on the families
involved, which they didn't have or knew how to get. Data on
the number of families involved, their economic resources,
their social characteristics and needs, and family compositions,
was in great demand. Several departments and organizations
considered performing a study to gather the information that
they, themselves, needed to answer quiries.

On May 23, 1963, an open forum was held in the City Hall
to discuss the routing of the new facility, the relocation of
families to be displaced, and the dates when property would
be acquired. The meeting was sponsored by the newly-formed
Human Relations Committee and was attended by over 200 persons.
This was the first public meeting held at which the I-496
facility was discussed at length in terms of its impact upon
the community. Shortly after this meeting, the Lansing
Chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People conducted a survey of the Negro families invol-

ved. Although the basic data collected during the study was

 

1State Journal (Lansing), "Plans Laid for I-496 Route Here,"
May 24, I963.

k)

never made available, the study purported the following major
conclusions:

1. Most of the Negro families (39%) were buying their

own home.

2. Mbst of the Negro families (80%) preferred to

relocate in an integrated neighborhood.

3. If it was necessary to move, 75% of the Negro families

indicated a preference to buy rather than rent. Over
50% indicated a preference of buying in the Q10,000
to $20,000 bracket.

Although this study appeared quite revealing, it soon
became apparent that more information was needed for local
officials to make decisions based upon documented fact.
Shortly thereafter, the Human Relations Committee and the
Lansing Planning Board proposed an exhaustive study of the
entire corridor route. A joint meeting was called on June 3,
1964 and a resolution was adopted recommending that the City
appropriate 84,715 to finance the survey. The two agencies
also recommended that the Institute for Community Development
at Michigan State University be contracted to conduct the
study.1

By a vote of 5-3, the City Council referred the matter
to the Committee of the Whole for further study. A five-minute

recess behind closed doors was held in an attempt to rescue

the:request from referral, but a later vote of 4-4 was

 

11bid., "City Funds Sought for 1-496 Study,” June 4, 1964.

I.

r\

r‘l

insufficient to pass the motion. The Council felt a need
for further study of the matter and expressed the desire for
involving other community groups such as financial institutions,
realtors, highway people, etc.--"not just sociologists from
the University."1 I
On June 6, 1964, the Greater Lansing Chamber of Commerce
endorsed the survey of the "vast human problem" and assigned
one of its members, its Executive Director, to meet with the
Human Relations Committee. The powerful Lansing Board of
Realtors also joined the effort by assigning two members to
attend.2
On June 16, 1964, an N.A.A.C.P. official publically
condemned the proposed survey and recommended that "the (Negro)
people refuse to COOperate with any study participated in by
an organization we feel is primarily responsible for segregated
housing in the City.” Although he did not mention them by
name, it was clear that his accusation was directed against
the Lansing Board of Realtors.3
In mid-July, the Human Relations Committee held a series
of meetings with various community representatives in an

attempt to reconcile the objections of the various groups

involved. Discussion of the proposed questionnaire, a rough

lIbid" "Relocation Study Plan Referred", June 9, 1964.

2;bid., "Family Dislocation Problems Connected with I-496
Route Get Chamber Attention", June 11, 1964.

64 31b1d-9 ”NAACP Aide BuCks Relocation Survey", June 16:
19 . ’

LJ

10

draft of which mysteriously was released to several repre-
sentatives, indicated that some of the groups considered it
to be ”too sociological”. Dr. Duane Gibson, Director of the
Institute for Communitleevelopment, argued in vain for a
study that ”went beyond the mere placement of people and
buildings.”. The Chamber of Commerce and the Lansing Board of
Realtors Jointly supported their own questionnaire which, in
their opinion, embodied a ”complete and totally objective
relocation survey, rather than a sociologically-oriented
survey.” Both groups pledged "complete cooperation” of their
members in "helping to solve in a satisfactory manner the
relocation problems of those to be displaced."1

The N. A. A. C. P. officials, apparently still suspicious
of the motives of both groups, refused to c00perate. As a
result, on July 13, 1964, the Lansing City Council unanimously
rejected financial support for the survey on the grounds that
public money could not be expended on a survey which wasn't
in the best interests of all groups to be affected.2 The
Institute for Community DevelOpment promptly withdrew its
personnel from the survey and expressed "deepest regret" that
the preposal had failed to materialize.

Over a year had passed since the survey was first proposed
and no program for collecting the needed data on l-496 residents

was even remotely close to realization. On July 23, 1964, the

 

1A letter written by William J. Porter, Jr., President
of the Lansing Board of Realtors, and submitted at a meeting
of the Human Relations Committee on June 23, 1964.

QState Journal (Lansing), "NAACP Denies It Torpedoed I-496
V
Road Project , July 21, 1964.

fl

11

Human Relations Committee declared its intent to conduct a

survey without the financial support of the City Council. It

also indicated its intention of accepting an offer of aid

from the N. A. A. C. P. in developing a block-by-block study

of the affected area. This proposal also failed to materialize.
On October 8, 1964, the Human Relations Committee accepted

an offer by the writer to carry out the survey on a volunteer

basis. Under this arrangement, groups interested in the

survey would volunteer interviewers to contact 100% of the

families involved in the freeway construction. The writer,

in turn, offered to prepare the questionnaire, train inter-

viewers, coordinate the various survey components, and prepare

a summary report for Human Relations Committee members. On

December 1, 1964, the interviewing began along the proposed

freeway corridor.1

MECHANICS OF THE SURVE;

 

Thirty-two volunteers-~all women--offered to interview
families for the relocation survey. By far the greatest
number represented the League of Women Voters. It was inter-
esting that most of the volunteers from this group resided
outside the City of Lansing, particularly in East Lansing and
Okemos. Other groups offering interviewers were the Negro

Nomengs Business and Professional Club, the B'nai B'rith

 

1Ibid., "NAACP, City Board Promise Survey on Freeway
Corridor", July 24, 1964.
bid., "I-496 Family Check Approved", November 13, 1964.
IBId., ”Plan Start of I-496 Interviewers", November 18,

1964.

r.

12

Foundation, and the Human Relations Committee.

Interviewers were assigned areas on a block basis,
where possible. An attempt was made to average the number of
interviews per interviewer to approximately fifteen. They
were allowed to complete the survey at their own pace and
according to their own time schedule, although December 25 was
the target date for the completion of the interviews. Where
respondents were not at home, most of the volunteers made two
additional attempts before considering the family "not at
home.” Interviewers with contiguous areas were allowed to
interview the respondents together when desired.

specific instructions were given to interviewers at a
meeting held prior to the commencement of the study. At
this meeting, those participating were given the opportunity
to ask questions pertaining to the interview techniques, the
questionnaire itself, or any other aspect of the study. Most
of the questions asked were in regard to anticipated answers
by respondents.

A11 interviewers were given a sheet of instructions at
the meeting. They were reminded of the necessity of stressing
the confidential nature of the information and the purpose of
the survey itself. Emphasis was also placed upon the desir-
ability of completing the questionnaire as fully as possible
in an attempt to accumulate a complete set of data on all
families in the project area. Interviewers were also reminded
of their importance to the success of the study in that the

impression given by this relatively small group of people

13

could make or break the study. Several techniques were sug-

gested as follows:

1.

2.

3.

Be excited about the study. A person answering
questions can easily sense your personal enthusiasm
about the project. A lukewarm interviewer will
receive lukewarm answers to his questions.

Be sure that you're familiar with the questionnaire
and are prepared to answer questions about it.

Give a short, to-the-point introduction of yourself
and the study. Something similar to the following
would be appropriate: "How do you do, I'm John Doe.
I've volunteered an afternoon to help the Lansing
Human Relations Committee in a survey to determine
the housing needs of families being displaced by

the construction of I-496. Would you mind answering
a few questions?"

Attempt to contact every home in your assigned area.
Indcases of apartment buildings, etc., contact every
family or apartment. If the family is not at home,
indicate so on the questionnaire for future follow-
up. Attempt to talk to the home-owner or his wife.
When neither is home, indicate so on the questionnaire
for future follow-up. Be sure to write the house
number and street on EVERY QUESTIONNAIRE whether you
complete the interview or not. (This procedure

allowed a double check on the number of interviews

I.

14

actually attempted, and also allowed for the mixing
of block information during the processing stage).

5. Where the persons involved refuse to cOOperate,
reiterate the purpose of the survey, emphasizing
that it's for their benefit. If they still refuse,
note their reason on the questionnaire, thank them
for their time, and move on. DON'T ARGUE!!!

6. many questions may be considered of the personal
nature and answers refused. In such instances, respect
their right for privacy and move on to the next
question.

The actual interview consisted of the interviewer obtain-
ing the necessary data from the family being interviewed. The
respondent was not allowed to see the questionnaire throughout
the interview. The only exception to this practice occured
when the question concerning income was asked. In many instances,
the respondent as well as the interviewer, felt more comfort-
able by indicating a particular income range on the question-
naire rather than revealing his actual income.

Space was provided on the questionnaire for the respon-
dent's name and address. This information was not considered
of particular value unless the respondent asked for additional
assistance or volunteered the information. The interviewers
names were placed on all completed questionnaires to insure
complete coverage.

A space was also provided on the questionnaire whereby

the interviewer could indicate the race of the respondent.

15

This was considered important in that the relocation cir-
cumstances facing the Negro were apparently quite different
from those facing the white.

The processing of the questionnaires was accomplished
on a category basis by race. A group of possible responses
were determined and actual responses categorized accordingly.
Since the processing was accomplished using manual techniques,
no attempt was made to correlate questions to each other
(i. e. the size of the family as it relates to income as it

relates to existing housing, etc.).

CHAPTER II
THE SURVEY

INTRODUCTION

The survey officially began on December 1, 1964 when
the actual interviewing of families started. It was intended
that 100% of the homes within the corridor would be contacted
by volunteer interviewers and that the interviewing would be
completed by December 25, 1964. It was estimated that
approximately 550 to 600 families were to be affected.

The survey was highly publicized prior to the start of
interviews. The N. A. A. C. P. urged all families in the
Negro sector to cooperate and were kept informed of progress
throughout the survey. Local radio and television stations,
their appetites whetted by the comedy of events that led to
the eventual collapse of previous study efforts, were most
cooperative. Lansing’s only daily newspaper, the State
Journal, ran an article on November 24, 1964, outlining the
major components of the hterview program and the types of
questions to be asked. The following day, the Journal printed
a photograph showing an actual interview being performed by
two of the volunteer interviewers. With all of the advance
publicity, however, it was interesting to note that several

interviewers reported contacting people who weren't aware of

16

.
.\ In
.J
r
r.
ell—
L
d o
a.
e u
_ .
.J
e.»
I
.r.
J
. f
r
I
t
I.‘
J I
.1

\J

\J

\J

u)

L.)

17

the survey or that a highway was even scheduled for construc-
tion in their area.

Due to certain complications brought about primarily by
the holiday season, the interviewing wasn't completed until
January 25, 1965. A total of 432 homes were contacted by the
interviewers. Seventy-five of the families were reported not
at home. Of the 357 families that were contacted, 173 were

white, 149 were Negro, and 35 failed to indicate race.
THE STUDY AREA

The study area, basically, included the territory within
the proposed right-of-way of I-496 as outlined on Highway
Department maps. It was bounded by Clare Street on the west,
the Trowbridge Road interchange on the east, St. Joseph Street
on the north, and Main street on the south. The route of the
proposed freeway veered northward in the area of Holmes Street
and followed the Cheasapeake and Ohio Railroad east to
Trowbridge Road.

The Institute for Community Development attempted to
assess the character of the study area by utilizing 1960

1 Although the figures didn't conform exactly

Census data.
with the area in 1965, they did furnish excellent background

data, as follows:

1U. S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Housin -
1960, Vol. III. City Blocks, Series H 0Z3), No. 2I2, I955.

 

v“

. ' \_. ‘ ‘
u 1 ‘ " ‘
, . L .. { .
i . hi .
' I
. ‘1 1 t |
' I
" ‘ l l
i , 1 ,.
. r ,. ‘ -: I . '
.7 r . x u I! .
I
' . ' 4 a
' r, t L, ‘U r \'
I d ‘s
I _ . ' . , - r
1. < \} I . C U
n , r f
' t ,. .
VJ C *
e ‘
e i «‘ -
I — _ - a. '
a o ‘.a. I “‘O I
e o c u e e
-A ‘-
- I l' A ' .

.gn._ei

18

Number Percent
1) All Housing Units 685 100.0
2) Condition and Plumbing
a) Sound 592 86.4
b) Deterioratins 75 11.0
c) Dilapidated 18 2.6
3) Occupied Housing Units
a) Tenure
Owner occupied 344 53.6
Renter occupied 298 46.4
b) Color
White 417 65.9
Non-white 225 35.0
c) Persons per room
1.00 or less 580 90.3
1.01 or more 62 9.7
d) Average number of rooms
Owner occupied 6.0
Renter occupied 4.0
e) Value and Rent
Average value of owner-
occupied units $9,500
Average contract rent of
renter - occupied $69

SURVEY RESPONSES

The survey questionnaire was divided into three basic

parts: family characteristics; existing dwelling unit

.ey—e

18

Number Percent
1) All Housing Units 685 100.0
2) Condition and Plumbing
a) Sound 592 86.4
b) Deterioratins 75 11.0
c) Dilapidated 18 2.6
3) Occupied Housing Units
a) Tenure
Owner occupied 344 53.6
Renter occupied 298 46.4
b) Color
White 417 65.0
Non-white 225 35.0
0) Persons per room
1.00 or less 580 90.3
1.01 or more 62 9.7
d) Average number of rooms
Owner occupied 6.0
Renter occupied 4.0
e) Value and Rent
Average value of owner-
occupied units $9.500
Average contract rent of
renter - occupied $69

SURVEY’RESPONSES

The survey questionnaire was divided into three basic

parts: family characteristics; existing dwelling unit

l9

characteristics; and, future dwelling unit characteristics.
The summary below indicates responses of both the Negro and
white races. They were processed in this manner because of
the apparent difference in the effort required to relocate

families within the City. The thirty-five interviews where
race was not indicated have been included in the "total"

column.

QUESTION: The number of families residing at this address?

Negro White 22331, Percent

one 106 138 260 72.9
two 24 16 43 12.0
three 5 4 10 22.8
four. 4 o 5 1.4
more than four 3 2 5 1.4
no response __1 _]._3 __3i ___9_._._E_5_

149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Number of unrelated individuals residing at this

address?
113532 m M Percent
one 11 9 21 5.9
two 14 7 22 6.2
three 2 2 4 1.1
four 3 1 5 1.4
more than four 1 8 9 2.5
zero or no response _18 146 226 82.9

 

149 173 357 100.0

i...

2O

UESTION: Number of adults (20 and over) residing at this

address?
I E2532 Egigg 22331 Percent

one 25 34 67 18.8
two 82 93 186 52.1
three 18 16 37 10.4
four 7 6 14 3.9
more than four 4 9 13 3.6
no response _13, _15. _49' _;;&g

149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Number of chilren residing at this address?

Ngggg White 22351 ‘ Percent
none 49 96 156 43.7
one 17 2O 41 11.5
two 25 , 9 37 10.4
three 19 15 35 9.8
feur 8 13 24 5.7
five 9 1 11 3.1
six 3 2 5 1.4
seven 5 1 6 1.7
more than seven 9 1 10 2.8
no response __5_ __15 2 8.9

 

149 173 357 100.0

2O

QUESTION: Number of adults (20 and over) residing at this

address?
33523 E2132_ 2233;. Percent

one 25 34 67 18.8
two 82 93 186 52.1
three 18 16 37 10.4
four 7 6 14 3.9
more than four 4 9 13 3.6
no re sponse _1_3 _12 _4_Q __l;1_,_2_

149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Number of chilren residing at this address?

£2529 fl§i£g_ 2222;. ’Percent
none 49 96 156 43. 7
one 17 2O 41 11.5
two 25 .9 37 10.4
three 19 15 35 9.8
feur 8 13 24 5.7
five 9 1 11 3.1
six 3 2 5 1.4
seven 5 1 6 1.7
more than seven 9 l 10 2.8
no response __2 15 32 8.9

 

149 173 357 100.0

tux

2O

QUESTION: Number of adults (20 and over) residing at this

address?
£3553 H2122. 2232;. Percent

one 25 34 67 18.8
two 82 93 186 52.1
three 18 16 37 10.4
four 7 6 14 3.9
more than four 4 9 13 3.6
no re sponse _1_3 __1_5 __49_ 41:2

149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Number of chilren residing at this address?

£2532 E2122 22331 I Percent
none 49 96 156 43.7
one 17 2O 41 11.5
two 25 9 37 10.4
three 19 15 35 9.8
feur 8 13 24 6.7
five 9 l 11 3.1
six 3 2 5 1.4
seven 5 1 6 1.7
more than seven 9 l 10 2.8
no response __2 15 32 8.9

 

149 173 357 100.0

21

QUESTION: Occupation of Principal Wage Earner?

 

£2532 White 2232; Percent
blue collar 83 62 154 43.1
white collar 24 46 72 20.2
on welfare 8 9 21 5.9
retired 22 28 55 15.4
student 1 4 5 1.4
unemployed 5 6 11 3.1
no response ___6_ __J;§_ 29 10.
149 173 357. 100.0
QUESTION: Sex of Principal Wage Earner?
£2539 Ehihg 22222. Percent
male 91 97 200 56.0
female 20 24 47 13.2
retired or on welfare 27 35 69 19.3
no response _;l _l1’ _4;' _;;‘5
149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Approximate annual income of principal wage earner?

ESEEQ Whihg, 22321. Percent
Less than 31,000 9 21 39 10.9
‘1,000-2,999 19 19 41 11.5
83.000-4,999 21 15 41 11.5
85,000-5,999 26 34 62 17,4
86,000-9,999 25 27 54 15.1
810,000 plus 4 7 2.0
no response _fl§ _§4' ll; _2l;§

149 173 357 100.0

L}

22

As could be expected, approximately one-third of the
respondents failed to answer this question despite attempts
to put him at ease about the answer. A surprising number of
respondents indicated their refusal to answer in an effort to
keep the information from sellers in the housing market from
which they would be purchasing. Most of the families indicating
an annual income of less than 83,000 were recipients of some

form of public welfare.

QUESTION: Approximate income of the entire household?

£3552 Ehéhg_ E2221 Percent

Less than $1,000 14 2O 41 11.5
81.000-4.999 35 29 73 20.4
85,000-5,999 17 28 47 13.2
86,000-9,999 32 29 64 17.9
$10,000 plus 12 8 20 5.6
no re sponse _32 £2 _1_1_2 M

149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Has the family income been supplemented by welfare
(ADC, old age assistance, etc.) payments in the
last year?

Egghg Ehihg 2232; Percent
yes 20 7 31 8.7
no 97 121 229 64.1
no response 2 J2 __9_'L 2 .2

149 173 357 100.0

.\

23

The answers to this question appear to be somewhat
misleading from the interviews. As a double check, the
author contacted the Ingham County Department of Social
Welfare. A study had been completed based upon the files of
caseworkers which indicated the following concerning the

I-496 corridor families:

Families Receiving
Payments in the

 

 

Type of Welfare Service I-496 Corridor
1) Aid to Dependent Children 42
2) Aid to Dependent Children--Unemployed O
3) Aid to the Disabled 13
4) Aid to the Blind 1
5) Old Age Assistance 29
6) Direct Relief 27

QUESTION: Do you own or rent your home (apartment)?

£3539 hhlhg 2212}. Percent
own 77 89 176 49.3
rent 61 68 142 39.8
no response _hh _16. _32 _lg&2

149 173 357 100.0

L}

U

\J

P\

. 24

QUESTION: If you rent, what are your monthly payments?

£3553 Ehihg 1233; Percent

less than $50 4 3 8 2.2
850-74 22 22 50 14.1
875-84 17 15 36 10.1
885-100 20 22 44 12.3
more than 8100 1 3 4 1.1
no response* _85’ ;Q§_ Eli _§th

149 173 357 100.0

*Includes those who did not respond because they own or
are buying.

QUESTION: If you rent, what utilities are included in your

monthly rent?

 

£2552 White 2233; Percent

telephone 6 4 11 2.5
oil 11 17 32 7.3
electricity 28 24 58 13.3
gas 26 3O 56 12.8
none 26 26 57 13.1
no response* _22_ 192 ggg 1.0

100.0

*Inoludes those who did not respond because they own or
are buying.

L

A.)

$4

. 24

QUESTION: If you rent, what are your monthly payments?

£3532 Ehhhg 22321. Percent

less than $50 4 3 8 2.2
$50.74 22 22 50 14.1
875-84 17 15 36 10.1
385-100 20 22 44 12.3
more than 8100 l 3 4 1.1
no response* _§5 $28 gig _§Q&g

149 173 357 100.0

*Includes those who did not respond because they own or
are buying.

QUESTION: If you rent, what utilities are included in your

monthly rent?

 

32522 White 2223; Percent

telephone 6 4 11 2.5
oil 11 17 32 7.3
electricity 28 24 58 13.3
gas 26 3O 56 12.8
none 26 26 57 13.1
no response* _2l. lgg Egg .21a9

100.0

*Includes those who did not respond because they own or
are buying.

25

QUESTION: If you are buying, what are your monthly payments?

£3539 £2122. £2321. Percent

Less than $50 1 2 4 1.1
750-74 12 18 33 9.2
875-84 13 4 17 4.8
$85-100 12 4 17 4.8
8101-150 10 2 12 3.4
more than $150 0 3 3 0.8
paid for 1 4 8 2.2
no response* hgg’ £36 222, _13;Z

149 173 357 100.0

*Includes those who did not respond because they are
renting.

QUESTION: If you are buying, are taxes included in your monthly

payment?
£3532 _. Ehihg 1233; Percent
Yes 27 15 44 12.3
No 32 19 55 15.4
No response* _29_ £32 £58 _1g&3
149 173 357 100.0

*Includes those who did not respond because they are
renting.

QUESTIO : What do you feel the value of your property to be

worth?
12520

less than $1,000 1
81,000-4,999 1
35,000-9.999 3
810,000-19.999 46
320,000-29.999 1
830,000 plus 1
don't know 7
no response _§2

149

 

White 12323

0 4

12 15
3o 79

2 3

4 5

22 30
192 .222
173 357

Percent

0.3
1.1
5.0
22.1
0.8
1.4
8.4

61.3
100.0

*Many families felt that a response to this question
might affect the final appraisal of their prOperty.

QUESTION: How many bedrooms are there in your house?

£3532 £h3hg 33353 Percent
one 4 7 12 3.4
two 22 27 51 14.3
three 37 38 78 21.8
four 23 8 33 9.2
five 11 5 17 4.8
six 0 0 1 0.3
none 0 2 2 0.6
no response ._Jg __§_ 3§3 _£53§

149 173 357 100.0

27

QUESTION: Do you prefer to buy or rent when you relocate?

 

, £2532 £h333' 22353_ Percent
buy 80 77 169 47.3
rent 25 39 70 19.6
don't know 21 34 55 15.7
no response _g3 _g3 _§g _313fl
149 173 357 100.0
QUESTIO : Where would you prefer to relocate?
£2539 White 22333 Percent
city 86 78 178 49.8
suburbs 29 24 58 16.2
country 5 20 25 7.0
don't know 19 26 48 13.5
no response .19. _g§ _fl§. _l335
. 149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: Have you considered any specific area in the Lansing

area for relocation?

 

Ne5ro White Total Percent
yes 67 62 139 38.9
no 65 73 149 41.8
no response _31| _3§ _§2 12,3
149 173 357 100.0

28

UESTION. What areas were listed as being considered for

relocation?
12512 12.1.12 1222.1.
west* 26 10 40
northwest 4 2 7
southwest 6 9 15
south 2 1 4
east 4 12 16
northeast o 2
north 2 4 6
near downtown* 15 18 35

*Most of the families interpreted these areas to mean
locations adjacent to their present homes or within the
immediate vicinity.

.5.

QUESTIO : What price range would you prefer?

N_eg3g £h_13_e_ M Percent

less than 85,000 0 2 3 0.8
83.000-9.999 2 6 12 3,4
810,000-14,999 - 31 19 53 14.9
315,000-19,999 23 19 42 11.8
more than $20,000 3 4 7 1.9
don't know* 28 61 97 27.2
no response* _§g_ ' _§g' 3&3_ _fighg

149 173 357 100.0

*Many families felt the answer to this question would
depend upon the price they are given for their present home.

29

QUESTIO : What down payment do you feel you can afford?

3100-299

8300-499

$500-799

8800-999

more than 81,000
depends on appraisal
don't know

want to pay cash

no response*

Negro

1
l
5
2
20
15
15
6

84
149

White

 

OO\l-‘l-’

15
20

173

Total

11
2
39
39
40
13
ggg
357

Percent

0.6
0.8
3.1
0.6
10.9
10.9
11.2
3.6

58.3
100.0

*Many families felt the answer to this question would
depend upon the price they were given for their present home.

QUESTIO : What do you feel you can afford to pay monthly?

less than 850

350-79

880-99

8100-150

more than $150
depends on appraisal
don't know

no response

Negro

2
11

149

White

17
15
11

18
.192
173

2.9.111

44
43
20

13
29
395
357

Percent

0.6
12.3
12.0

5.7

0.6

3.6

8.1

57.1
100.0

3O

QUESTION: What type of housing would you prefer?

122:2
apartment 15
duplex 9
single family home 102
don't know 4
no response _12_

149

m
27
13
93

3

.21
173

Total

46
24

QUESTION: How many bedrooms would you prefer?

112522

efficiency 1
one 5
two 30
three 56
four 32
more than four 8
no response 1 _;1

149

11.1.32
2
24
48

173

Total

4
32
84

115
41
12

__62_

357

Percent
12.9
6.7
58.3
1.9
.2212
100.0

Percent
1.1
9.0
23.5
32.2
11.5

3.4

19.3
100.0

QUESTIO : What are your feelings about public housing as a
solution to your relocation efforts?

Negro
against 33
for 57

for, with reservation 19

don't know 21
no response 19
149

14112
71
3O
11
25

23
173

Total

107
100
32
48
70
357

Percent
30.0
28.0

9.0
13.4

3O

QUESTION: What type of housing would you prefer?

£9539 £h339 2939; Percent
apartment 15 27 46 12.9
duplex 9 13 24 6.7
single family home 102 93 208 58.3
don't know 4 3 7 1.9
no response _32_ _31’ .12. .2922
149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: How many bedrooms would you prefer?

£9539 £h339 19393 Percent

efficiency 1 2 4 1.1
one 5 24 32 9.0
two 30 48 84 23.5
three 56 51 115 32.2
four 32 8 41 11.5
more than four 8 4 12 3.4
no response 1 _11 _L6 __§_9_ _3943
149 173 357 100.0

QUESTION: What are your feelings about public housing as a
solution to your relocation efforts?

£9539 £9339 19393 Percent
against 33 71 107 30.0
for 57 30 100 28.0
for, with reservation 19 11 32 9.0
don't know 21 25 48 13.4
no response _1_9_ _3_6_ 12 £239

149 173 357 100.0

31

This question was included for two reasons. First, it
was generally concluded by local officials that residents
within the City were unfamiliar with public housing, per so.
This position was somewhat reinforced by the number who failed
to respond to the question. A surprising number of families,
however, were well acquainted with the public housing concept.
Secondly, an attempt was made through this question to assess
the potential acceptance of a public housing program for Lansing.
Most of those families responding favorably to the question

were within the low-income brackets.

QUESTION: What do you feel is the most important factor in

locating your home?

 

£9539 White 29393 Percent
closeness to stores 75 56 146 25.3
closeness to work 45 33 83 14.4
closeness to friends,
relatives 19 11 35 6.0
closeness to church,
school 91 53 156 27.1
other* 9 23 33 5.7
no response W35. 71 393_ 21.
576 100.0

*About 95% of these responses concerned closeness to
public trnasportation facilities.

32

QUESTION: Have you attempted to locate a home?

£9539 £3539. 2939;. Percent
yes 45 38 89 24.9
no 89 104 206 57.7
no response _39| _33 .92. _3139
149 173 357 100.0
through newspapers 9 8 17
through realtors* 15 10 25
on own 16 14 33

*Most who gave this reply expressed their dissatisfaction
with this method.

Families in the Negro area particularly were quite sus-
picious of realtors, in general, and of the Lansing Board of
Realtors specifically. This apparently was brought about by
the public condemnation of the Board by the N. A. A. C. P.
during the early phases of the study. Most families, however,
acknowledged that realtors offered the greatest resources for

locating suitable housing.

QUESTION: Do you feel you need assistance in finding housing?

Negro White Total Percent
yes 75 36 125 35.0
no 54 80 141 39.5
don't know 5 14 19 5.3
no response __15 i3 _Z_2_ 20.2

149 173 357 100.0

33

One question related specifically to the Human Relations
Committee. It asked how the Committee could help them in
relocating. Although the answers didn’t lend themselves to

the tabular form of summary, several conclusions were apparent:

1. Very few of those interviewed were familiar with the
HUman Relations Committee, its functions, and its
duties. This situation lessened to an extent after
interviewers had been in the area for some time.
There is no question that this survey has served the
valuable purpose of explaining the Human Relations
Committee to those who most need it. This was
accomplished by the method acknowledged to be most
effective--the person-to-person interview.

2. Most of those who responded to this question felt
their most immediate need was for a listing, other
than that of the realtors, showing location of lower-
cost housing and its price. The Negro families were
particularly interested in a list which would point
out potential homes available to their race. A
preponderance of responses came from retired persons
interested in low-cost rent but adequate housing.

3. A great majority of those interviewed felt that the
Human Relations Committee, or some other agency,
should inform them of the dates of appraisal and land
acquisition by the State Highway Department. Most

felt they were being given the runearound when they

33

One question related specifically to the Human Relations

Committee. It asked how the Committee could help them in

relocating. Although the answers didn't lend themselves to

the tabular form of summary, several conclusions were apparent:

1.

2.

3.

Very few of those interviewed were familiar with the
Human Relations Committee, its functions, and its
duties. This situation lessened to an extent after
interviewers had been in the area for some time.
There is no question that this survey has served the
valuable purpose of explaining the Human Relations
Committee to those who most need it. This was
accomplished by the method acknowledged to be most
effective--the person-to-person interview.

Most of those who responded to this question felt
their most immediate need was for a listing, other
than that of the realtors, showing location of lower-
cost housing and its price. The Negro families were
particularly interested in a list which would point
out potential homes available to their race. A
preponderance of responses came from retired persons
interested in low-cost rent but adequate housing.

A great majority of those interviewed felt that the
Human Relations Committee, or some other agency,
should inform them of the dates of appraisal and land
acquisition by the State Highway Department. Most

felt they were being given the run-around when they

34

inquired on their own. Many were under the impression
that acquisition was “sometime in the future“. Many
didn't even realize they were in the path of the

freeway.

On January 27, 1965, a meeting was held in the City Hall

to recapitulate the survey. Present were many interviewers and

members of the Human Relations Committee. The purpose of the

meeting was to bring up aspects of the study that weren't

revealed by the questionnaire itself. The following points

were brought up in that meeting:

1.

2.

3.

5.

Most of those interviewed were very happy to find
that someone was interested in their plight.

The majority of the retired persons residing in the
area expressed the desire to rent an apartment rather
than buy another home.

Most of the Negro families felt that the Human
Relations Committee was going to help them relocate.
Many older persons presently renting out a portion
of their home for income purposes expressed concern
about the possibility of duplicating the income-
producing property with the money they expect to
receive for their home.

Many interviewed felt they will be under-paid for
their home and have found inequities when attempting

to find suitable housing at a similar price.

a)

11
x.
.
J
v
4 u
. a .
.
.4
. J ,
—
\
o
O
.
r
F|
L 7 .
(L .
fl . e
. .
v _ 1.
.s 1 J
u . ,
Ir 7'14 I
. (7 .
I
7 a
.
.
1 1

35

6. Many examples were found where residents in the east
side of the I-496 corridor were paying less for good
housing than Negro families in the west side were
paying for inferior housing.

7. There appear to be several instances of exploitation
of families particularly where extremely high rents

were charged for very poor housing.

HOUSING CONDITIONS

Numerous remarks were made by interviewers throughout the
course of the study in reference to poor housing conditions,
particularly in the Negro area. It appeared from a cursory
survey of the study area, that the housing units were old, but
in reasonably good repair. Since the questionnaire didn't
deal with housing conditions directly, and since interviewers
persisted in their condemnations of certain housing units,
the author arranged to visit several of those specifically
referred to in and adjacent to the study area. Two actual
visits into the area were accomplished, one under the direction
of Mr. Duane Cross, inspector for the Building Department, and
the other with Mr. Richard Letts, highly respected Negro
businessman and one the staff of the Lansing Board of Educa-
tion.1 Since both men questioned the advisability of recording
the visits on film, the remarks outlined below are taken from

notes compiled during and after the visit.

 

1Mr. Letts later was named Director of the Human Relations
Committee, a position which he presently holds.

\J

r
‘
.
t I
..
..
,—
'
u
Q
.. '.,
7 \1
f
.
.
.
,
. -.
U
.
o .
...-. . . .
.
I

36

It should be noted that the housing conditions reported
on below, although deplorable by modern standards, are not
the worst within the city. The Negro section in Lansing, by
comparison, is one of the nicer appearing and best maintained
in the State. By and large, the quarrels with Negro housing
in Lansing cannot be contributed in most cases, to condition,
but rather to an acute overcrowding of existing facilities.
Those conditions outlined below are by no means characteristic
of the entire Negro area. The fact that they do exist and that
local officials appear reluctant to remedy the situation, is
justification in the author's mind for bringing them into
full View.

The Negro area in Lansing is zoned almost exclusively
single-family. It was pointed out that actual use violated
the zoning provisions extensively. Two methods were offered
for quickly spotting those units which didn't conform to
existing provisions. The first method concerned the yard
around the unit in question. Yards devoid of vegetation
indicated in 99% of the cases, multiple family occupancy.

It was also possible to readily spot multiple units by exam-
ining the number of telephone lines leading to the structure.
These methods were almost fool-prof, in locating present or
potential deteriorating housing units. Mr. Gross indicated
that building inspectors are allowed to inspect only those
dwellings into which tenants would allow entry. He was

distressed that entry was frequently denied by tenants fearing

37

retaliation by landlords in the form of higher rents to

offset improvements or eventual eviction.

The following are descriptions of poor housing located

in or adjacent to the study area:

1.

2.

1ds Avenue
This house was condemned about two years ago by the
building department. It was previously occupied by

a large family. The house has only one bedroom which
contained a bathtub, hot water heater, and a mattress.
The building was in very poor condition at the time

of condemnation and was infested by insects and rodents.
Presently, it is characterized by the presence of
debris and rotted furniture strewn throughout. The

lock has been forced indicating recent use.

William Street

This house was also condemned about two years ago.

At that time, the tenants complained that cockroaches
were so numerous that bed legs were placed in cans of
water to prevent roaches from infesting the mattress.
When inspectors entered the basement, they found it
flooded with raw sewerage caused by faulty plumbing
fixtures. The lock on this house has also been forced
recently, indicating continued use. The home is

owned by a Detroit minister.

"L

3.

38

West St. Joseph Streeh

This building was originally designed to accomodate
four families. Officials estimate that from 25 to 30
peOple now occupy the building but are unable to
determine exactly. Ten people occupy a four room
apartment on the first floor. A woman on A. D. C.
with three children occupies an upstairs apartment.
This woman related that she had contacted a realtor
in an attempt to find housing. A home was found in
the same area, however, the owner refused to rent and
hadn't decided upon a selling price. She asked the
realtor to contact her when the arrangements could

be completed. She has never heard from him.

This house is characterized by filth and a
general state of dis-repair both inside and out. Play
space is available for the children at the rear of
the building. However, litter and jagged glass strewn
about prohibits its use for this purpose. Rents are
$45 for downstairs units and 865 for units on the

second floor. It is owned by a Negro woman.

§ycamore Street

This building was formerly a single family home which
has been converted to a two-family unit. Only one
unit was visited. From the outside, the home is very
deteriorated. The chimney is pulling away from the

building and would appear to be very hazardous. The

L)

5.

39

yard is completely devoid of any vegetation whatso-
ever. An outside doorwell to the basement is now
completely full of rubbish. The inside of the house
was equally deteriorated. A family of three who
occupy the unit apparently are not concerned with
cleanliness since dirt, cigarette butts, and beer
cans litter the floor. A bathroom has been constructed
from orange crates in a hallway between the kitchen
and the livingroom. It is now inhabited by bugs and
insects and has little or no ventilation. The
mortgage on this property is now owned by a local

banking concern.

West St. Joseph Street

This home was apparently a single family unit origin-
ally but has had several subsequent additions. It now
contains eight apartments on two floors. The entire
building is in a deplorable state of repair with
warped and rotted floors, falling plaster, and broken
windows. Families share a common bathroom facility
containing a sink, a stool, and bathtub. Two of the
apartments have been condemned but mattresses on the
floor and the presence of personal belongings indicate
that they are occupied. The owner was forced to
rewire the entire building several months ago which
brought it up to minimum electrical standards. A
large rubbish pile is located in the backyard although

I.

40

it is not maintained and neighbors frequently complain about

the odors emitted from burning garbage.

CHAPTER III

REVIEW OF ACTIVITIES AFFECTING RELOCATION

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this chapter is to briefly review those
activities that could affect the City's relocation program
concerned with I-496. Any such program should consider the
community's ability to provide adequate housing meeting the
requirements of those being displaced, and the relocatee's
ability to financially meet his particular obligations. The
activitiesbelow are discussed individually although they
are, technically, interrelated components of the Overall
pogram. In addition to the descriptive comments concerning
the background cf each activity, various aspects of each will

be evaluated in the following pages.

THE E£ESTING HQUSING MARKET

Any efforts to assess the magnitude of the I-496 relocation
effort must be based upon the housing units presently avail-
able to families being displaced. This section deals with the
housing situation in the Lansing area as it existed in the
early months of 1965. The information belowvas submitted

with the survey described in chapter two to the Human Relations

41

42

Committee. It was intended merely to present a general over-
view of the housing market at that time.

The housing market consists basically of two types of
housing-~renta1 and salable. It generally is composed of
limits from four sources: Federal Housing Administration
mortgage foreclosures; Veterans Administration mortgage
foreclosures; the private market offered by individual home-
owners; and, the market under the control of realtors, either

independent or members of associations.

1. Eederal Housinngdministration
As of February 1, 1965, seventeen homes were
available in the Lansing area through FHA fore-
closures. Of this total, nine were within the City
of Lansing; one was in Mason; two in Holt; and, five
in Potterville. They ranged in price from $6,900
to 815,750. All had only one bedroom. Those avail-

able within the City of Lansing were as follows:

 

Address Price

537 Clifford 8 9,800
2404 Fielding Dr. 6,900
2916 Jenison 13,500
1425 Hillcrest 10,500
4811 Lyncott Dr. 15,400
3304 Ronald 12,500
1333 Roosevelt 8,300
724 Spokane 14.950
4319 Wainwright 15,750

2. Veterans Administration
The VA listed thirty-seven homes for sale on the

open market within the City of Lansing in January, 1965.

I".

Q
ks; -a
.
.
. .

3.

43

Of this total, 30 homes, or 82% were located in

the Southwest area. They ranged in price from

88,500 to 818,500 with the average being $13,100.

An additional 15 homes were listed in the Lansing
area with one each in Delhi Township, DeWitt Village,
and Haslett; four in Holt; and eight in Mason. These
ranged in price from a low of $5,600 (DeWitt) to a
high of 812,900 (Delhi Township). The average price
of these homes was $10,000.

grivate Market

Several housing units are available on the
private market through the owners themselves. An
attempt to assess the extent of this market was
accomplished by following newspaper ads listed in
the State Journal from December 1, 1964 to December 15,
1964.

During that period, 171 units were available
through this source. Of that total, 23 were homes
for sale; 58 were homes for rent; and, 90 were
apartments for rent. The majority of these units
were within the price range of most of the I-496
relocatees. Most of the houses had three or more
bedrooms while the apartments usually were one-
bedroom units.

Two factors would tend to limit the accessability
of this market to the I-496 families. First, since

3.

43

Of this total, 30 homes, or 82% were located in

the Southwest area. They ranged in price from

88,500 to 818,500 with the average being $13,100.

An additional 15 homes were listed in the Lansing
area with one each in Delhi Township, DeWitt Village,
and Haslett; four in Holt; and eight in Mason. These
ranged in price from a low of $5,600 (DeWitt) to a
high of $12,900 (Delhi Township). The average price
of these homes was 810,000.

Private Market

Several housing units are available on the
private market through the owners themselves. An
attempt to assess the extent of this market was
accomplished by following newspaper ads listed in
the State Journal from December 1, 1964 to December 15,
1964.

During that period, 171 units were available
through this source. Of that total, 23 were homes
for sale; 58 were homes for rent; and, 90 were
apartments for rent. The majority of these units
were within the price range of most of the I-496
relocatees. Most of the houses had three or more
bedrooms while the apartments usually were one-
bedroom units.

Two factors would tend to limit the accessability
of this market to the I-496 families. First, since

AV

44

are offered by private individuals, they cannot be
considered available on the open market. Although
some units were available on this basis, the majority
of the private market interviewed either preferred
not to rent or sell to minority groups or had not been
faced with the situation. The majority of those in
this latter group preferred not to comment further on
their feelings. The second factor to be considered
relates specifically to the retired families to be
relocated. Most of the units were not in a central
location--a factor generally acknowledged to be im-
portant to retired families.

LansingLBoard of Realtors

Approximately 90% of the single family units
sold by realtors in the Lansing area are handled by
the Lansing Board of Realtors. The data contained in
this section was obtained directly from the Board
files.

The Board Of Realtors averages approximately
1,200 individual listings annually. On the basis of
a statement of policy adopted by the Board on April
25, 1962, the listings of the Board of Realtors are
on the open market automatically and are avilable to
those having the financial capacity to purchase. A
copy of this statement is included in the appendix of
this thesis. An addendum may be signed by the property

in which he limits specifically those to whom the

.. 1
O,

45

property may be shown or sold. It is interesting to
note, at this point, that the realtors operate under
a State agency which has the power to revoke the
license, or any realtor who initiates discriminatory
action with his client. In this respect, the adden-
dum mentioned above and which is occasionally used by
the owner to prevent the purchase by members of min-
ority races, just be initiated by the property owner
himself and at his own suggestion. Use of the
addendum, however, has been bitterly criticized by
both the Human Relations Committee and the Housing
Commission. Housing to which the addendum is attached
is not advertised as such and prospective buyers are
unaware of its existence until they request to examine
the home in question. Court tests on the use of the
addendum are very likely in the near future. A copy
of this addendum form is included in the appendix of
this thesis.

As of February 24, 1965, the Lansing Board of
Realtors listed 278 homes for sale in the City of
Lansing; 39 for sale in East Lansing; and, 13 in the
Western portion of Lansing Township. The City of
Lansing has been further refined into four quadrants
for analysis purposes. A summary of the total survey

follows:

I
Q -
‘ ,
‘ r
t ' ' '
_ ‘J
r 7’
v.
.
I I
K: \4
, 7 .
- . ‘ . g. y
I l- ' ‘
l a '
. \J
_ .
J .
v .
.
O O V
- r
O 7
a ,n I)
.4 ~‘\
e " U

_\

46

 

 

 

Units
2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms with owners
Location or less or more addendums
Lansing NE 11 29 2
Lansing SE 24 24 6
Lansing NW 14 50 ll
Lansing SW 27 99 6
East Lansing 3 35 2
Lansing TWp. 5 8 0

A cost analysis of these units includes three price

ranges as outlined below:

$5,000 to $10,000 to 320,000 and

 

 

 

Location 9,999 l9.999_ over
Lansing NE 21 10 9
Lansing SE 17 29 2
Lansing NW 8 36 2O
Lansing SW 24 71 31
East Lansing 1 13 25
Lansing TWp. 4 6 3

The rental units listed in this section include both
homes and apartments. The inventory was completed by the use
of several information sources and is estimated to include
approximately seventy-five percent of the rental market.

A summary of the inventory follows:

47

 

 

2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms
Location or less or more
Lansing NE 209 O
Lansing NW 2 25
Lansing SE 198 4
Lansing SW 41 32
East Lansing 58 5
Lansing Twp. 25 30

A cost analysis of these units includes three price

ranges as outlined below:

 

 

 

Location Under 85Q/mo. 350 to filOQ/mo. Over $100/mo.
Lansing NE 0 9 200
Lansing NW 0 2 25
Lansing SE 0 88 114
Lansing SW 0 47 26
East Lansing 10 45 8
Lansing TWp. 0 O 55

LENDING INSTITUTIONS

The ability of an individual to borrow money for the
purpose of purchasing a home is vital to a relocation effort
of this magnitude. Families being displaced by I0496 must
find homes individually. In most cases, a loan will be
necessary to accomplish this task. This section will deal

1.}

48

with the various mortgage lenders presently operating in
the Lansing area.1

There are four major mortgage lenders in the Lansing
area: mortgage companies, insurance companies, savings and
loan associations, and commercial banks. The study referred
to above inventoried three savings and loan associations,
seven insurance companies, ten mortgage companies, seven
commercial banks, and four other institutions (Federal Housing
Administration, Veterans Administration, Federal Land Bank,
and Farmers Home Administration).

Mortgage companies, like other loan institutions,
generally use other peoples money for loan purposes. Their
primary function is to act as a "go between" for persons who
desire to borrow money and institutions who wish to loan
money. Finders fees, paid by-the lender, is their primary
source of money, although they may also loan on an interest
basis. Final approval on each loan is made by a loan committee
consisting of the officers of the mortgage company in question.
Maximum and estimated loan to value ratio2 and the borrowers

mortgage costs on conventional, F. H. A., and V. A. loans by

mortgage companies is outlined below:

 

1This section is based entirely upon a report entitled,
"Appraisal Practices Among Mortgage Lenders in the Lansing Area",
by Terrell Ray Oetzel (A thesis for the Degree of Master of
Science, Michigan State University). All tables in this section
are directly from that report.

2The term "loan to value" refers to the maximum loan
possible as it relates to the total value of the prOperty.

\__/

49

 

Type of Loan

Maximum Loan
to Value Ratio

Estimated Loan
to Value Ratio

Cost of Mortgage
to the borrowerb

 

Mean Mode Mean Mode Low Avg. High
Conventional 77.2% 75.0% 72.2% 75.2% #68 884 $112
FHA 97.0%a 97.0%9 96.7% 97.0% toad 884d 3112d
VA 100.0%c 100.0%° 96.7% 100.0% 868d $84d $112d

 

Maximum for first $15,000 of appraised value.

b Does not include title insurance which costs 33/31,000 of the
loan.

Maximum of 815,000 property.

In addition, 1 percent of the mortgage note is usually char-
ged as a processing fee.

Insurance companies accumulate large amounts of money
from policy-holders. Most make this money available for
residential purposes through either their own mortgage loan
department or through mortgage companies. In the Lansing
area, all insurance companies surveyed make either regular or
insured conventional loans through their own loan departments.
Final approval of loans is made by a regional or home office.
Maximum and estimated loan to value ratios and borrower's

mortgage costs on conventional, F. H. A., and V. A. loans by

insurance companies in the Lansing area are below:

Maximum Loan
to Value Ratio

Estimated Loan Cost of Mortgage
to Value Ratio to the Borrower

Type of Loan

 

Mean MEde Mean M6de Low—Avg. High—
Conventional 66.0% 66.7% 62.0% 70.0% 3137 (plus #3
&75.0% per 81000 for
title insurance)
FHA 97.0%a 97.0%a 97.0% 97.0% --- 3137
VA 100.0%b 100.0%b 100.0% 100.0% --- 3137c

 

50

a Maximum for first $15,000 of appraised value.

Maximum of 315,000 property.

° Does not include the 83.00 per 31,000 for title insurance or
the 1 percent of the mortgage note which is charged as a
processing fee.

Savings and loan institutions operate much like insurance
companies. All loans are regular or insured conventional loans
and are predominantly for residential purposes. Presently no
F. H. A. or V. A. loans are made through savings and loan
institutions primarily because their own insurance plans are
sufficient. All such loans undergo final approval by the
board of directors or a committee appointed by the chairman of
the board. Maximum and estimated loan to value ratios and
borrower's mortgage costs on conventional, F. H. A., and V. A.

loans in the Lansing area by savings and loan institutions are

as follows:

 

Type of Loan Maximum Loan Estimated Loan Cost of Mertgage
to Value Ratio to Value Ratio to the Borrower

Mean .Mode Mean Mode Low Avg. High
Conventional 75.0% 75.0% 70.0% 70.0%
Regular b
MGIC 90.0% 90.0% 85.0% 85.0% $74.22 $76.86 $79.50
FHAa - - - -
VAa - .. .. ..

a No FHA or VA loans are made by savings and loan associations
in the Lansing area.

b Plus two percent of the mortgage debt for insurance.

51

Banks also loan money on commercial and residential
properties. By far the greatest number make only conventional
loans although some make FHA and VA loans. All loans are
approved by a loan committee of the officers of the individual
bank. Maximum and estimated loan to value ratio and borrower's
mortgage costs on conventional, FHA, and VA loans for banks in

the Lansing area are as follows:

 

Type of Loan Maximum Loan Estimated Loan Cost of Mortgage
to Value Ratio to Value Ratio to the Borrower

 

Mean Mode Mean Mode Low Avg. High
Conventional 73.0% 75.0% 67.0% 66.7% $65 $85.80 $112
FHA a a a a

VA a a a a

 

a Not sufficient data.

The Federal Housing Administration is not a lending instit-
ution but insures loans mortgaged by an approved FHA lender.
Two home plans are eligible for mortgages insured under FHA:
one insures mortgages up to $25,000 on individual homes, the
other insures amounts up to $9,000 on homes in outlying areas.
The first plan allows up to 97% of the appraised value on the
first 815,000 to be loaned. On the next 85,000, 95% of the
value may be loaned, with 75% allowed on the remaining 85,000.
The percentage to be loaned is calculated from the market value
of the property which is estimated by an FHA appraiser. A

buyer who finances his home under this plan is expected to pay

(O

I.

52

the down payment, closing costs, and pre-paid items, in cash
or the equivalent of cash.

The Veterans Administration operates very much like the
FHA. The maximum amount available through a VA loan is
815,000, with the average at about 310,000. A VA loan is
available only to the veteran and costs about $106 plus one

percent of the loan amount.

PUBLIC HOUSING

The survey described in chapter two was submitted to the
Human Relations Committee on March 11, 1965. After review by
the Committee, it was reproduced and made available to the
general public. Rumors had persisted as the study progressed
that Lansing experienced an acute shortage of low-cost housing
units, the existence of which would be vital to the relocation
effort. Within the study area were many families with low
incomes, many retirees, and the majority of the City's welfare
cases. It became apparent that the City would soon experience
a great demand for low cost housing units which it could not
supply.

- Mayor Bowerman, in a reply from the Human Relations
Committee to appoint a committee to study the need for public
housing for low-income and elderly families, acknowledged the
need for such housing but expressed belief that "private
enterprise will provide it". Bowerman said the City "might"
have to get into public housing, but added that local real

estate officials had been studying the issue for "some time"

t.

and were convinced that they could meet the need.

’The issue remained at pretty much a standstill until
February 17, 1965, when a newly-formed group named the
"Citizens Committee on Low Cost Housing" appeared at the City
Council meeting and demanded that the City take "immediate action
to meet Lansing's low-cost housing needs." Petitions contain-
ing 1,248 signatures were presented requesting that the Mayor
and Council establish an ”independent housing authority by
March 15". The purpose of the authority, they continued, should
be three fold:1

1.. Study available solutions to the problem of providing
an adequate supply of low-cost housing in the Lansing
area.

2. Make specific recommendations regarding site, finan-
cing, construction, management, and type of housing.

3. Present its findings and specific recommendations to
the mayor and council within 30 days after its estab-

lishment.

The reaction from City officials was immediate anddhrect.
Mayor Bowerman's comment was, "I think this is good. My
feeling is this is one approach". Councilman Malcolm Milka
told the group he would "personally pledge himself to aid them
in their problem”. Councilman Glen Dean said he is "more aware
of their problem than anyone else in the city" and declared
that "the Council is ready to attack the problem?. Councilwoman

Lucille Belen concurred that "something must be done".2

 

152339 Journal (Lansing), "Low Cost Housing Demanded in
City", February 17, 1965.

9-...

54

On February 25, a meeting was called by Councilman Malcolm
Milks to discuss the low cost housing issue and work out a
definite course of action. Invited to the meeting were Ray-
mond Guernsey, Planning Director; Russell Fink, Planning
Board Chairman; William Mateer, Human Relations Director; Hugo
Lundbery, Human Relations Committee Chairman; Winston Folkers,
Redevelopment Director; Everett Eschbach, Urban Redevelopment
Board Chairman; Glen Hilley, Lansing Board of Realtors Pres-
ident; Thayer Winegardner, Chairman of the Board of Realtors
Committee on City and Governmental Affairs; Mrs. Jacqueline
Warr, Citizens Committee on Low Cost Housing; Cullen Dubose,
NAACP Housing Committee Chairman; Rev. Kenneth Faiver, Cristo
Rey Catholic Church; Mrs. Carolyn Walker, Citizens Committee
on Low Cost Housing; and Stuart Dunnings, NAACP President.1

As a result of this meeting, a resolution was proposed to
the City Council on February 29, 1965 for an ordinance estab-
lishing a twelve-man City Housing Committee. The measure,
co-sponsored by Councilmen Glen Dean and Malcolm Milks, resul-
ted in the appointment of a fiveemember Housing Committee.

On March 18, 1965, Thayer Winegardner from the Lansing
Board of Realtors, told the Community Services Council that
the Board would "probably support some type of public housing
program if the program had the proper controls.”2

Two weeks later, the State Journal ran a series of five

articles on the low-cost housing problem in Lansing. The

 

1Ibid.. "Meet May Lay Groundwork for Low Cost Rental
Housing", February 23, 1965.

2Ibid., "Low Cost Housing Needs Outlined", March 19, 1965.

— f
l 9
p
\
t 'n.;
- }
t u
‘I
.7
“(- .
. C
1 . ,
t
F O
' f
t 7 '
7
I 'J
' I' l
" Q
J l-
I
. K
r (‘7 y. I
C
' ’ l
eel ‘ -
, .
U
‘-.’ , . ’ .3
A
‘0
e I " ’
‘ I
e '
.‘e v I
. .

II

a
\
n .
.
.
\
1
u
o
- I
4
.
’ E
f
P I
.
1 1
' i
n \l
l
.1
r‘ v .
I
1
.. ' \.J
, s
1
' L.
I . -
g a «a!
\
' l ‘ t (J

55

intent of the series was to publicize the low-cost housing
issue, examine methods used by other Michigan cities to solve
its low-cost housing problems, and promote citizen interest
in this controversial aspect of City government.

On April 15, 1965, Hugo Lundberg, Chairman of the Human
Relations Committee blasted the Council for its lack of action
concerning low-cost housing. The Council's Housing Committee,
in Lundberg's opinion, had been virtually ineffective. "All
we have been getting is the brushoff and no one is facing the
problem", declared Lundberg.l He urged the Council to appoint
a legally-constituted Housing Commission to take immediate
action.

A new City Administration was voted into office in April
with Max Murninghan replacing Mayor Bowerman. One of Mayor
Murninghan's early actions as chief executive was to propose
enlargement of the Housing Committee to ten members. He also
indicated his intent to ask the Council for funds for a Housing
Committee staff, including a full-time director and secretary.

In late April, the State Journal again ran a five-part
series of articles on low-cost housing urging the City Govern-
ment to meet its responsibilities in this area. Shortly
later, the Lansing Labor Council denounced Mayor Murningham
and the City Council for "doing nothing" about low-cost
housing in Lansing. John Horuska, regional representative to

the U. A. W., stated that "something has got to be done to

 

1Ibid., "New Plea Scheduled on Housing", April 15, 1965.

56

help those people who are going to be displaced when the high-
way goes through the west side of town". He claimed "it is
time someone besides the realtors govern this town".

One week later, the City Council ordered an ordinance
creating a Housing Authority to provide public housing for
Lansing's hard core poor, elderly, and handicapped. The
State Journal, in an editorial on June 13, 1965, supported
federally-financed public housing for the City and urged action
as rapidly as possible. On July 1, 1965, Mr. William Mateer,
formerly director of the Human Relations Committee, was
appointed the City's first full-time housing director. The
ordinance creating five-member Housing Commission to provide
public housing in Lansing was unanimously adopted by the City
Council on August 3, 1965.

ANTICIPATED DISPLACEMENT PATTERNS

The survey described in chapter two indicated that most
of the families involved were reluctant to break neighborhood
social, economic, and religious ties, and intended to relocate
in the same area. Since the white families involved are
apparently facing no difficulty in their relocation efforts,
this section will deal with the anticipated displacement
patterns of the Negro families affected by the project.

The concentration of Negro families in and near the
proposed I-496 route is characterized by families with a wide-

range of economic resources. In years past, the choice of

 

lIbid., "Mayor, Council Ripped by Labor”, June 3, 1965.

57

housing units available to these families has been restricted
and movement out of the area has been painstakingly difficult.
Nevertheless, small pockets of Negro concentrations have
appeared throughout the City as is illustrated on plate 2 .
With the advent of 1-496, the issue has become one of finding
homes for 200 Negro families in a previously unofficially
segregated community.

The 1960 Census1 listed 1,780 non-white families in the
City of Lansing. Of this total, 1,480 were located in census
tracts 15, 16, and l8--the area to be affected by the I-496
route. The remaining 300 families were included in three
smaller concentrations referred to as the Case-Ballard Street
area, the Maple Street area, and the Urbandale area. The
Case-Ballard Street area is located in the northeastern portion
of the City on the fringe of an extensive industrial sector.
Besides Negro families, the area is also predominantly
Spanish. Most of the homes are in poor condition and will
probably eventually be removed. This area contains about
120 Negro families. The Maple Street area is located in the
northwest section of the City and contains about 60 Negro
families. It was opened to Negro families in the early 1950's
and is characterized by attractive, well-kept homes. The
Urbandale area was approximately three-quarters removed with
the construction of the Pinetree Connector freeway. Most of
the homes were in very poor condition and very unhealthy.
Although several Negro families have remained in the area, most

were scattered throughout the City.

 

1U. S. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Census of Housing, 1960,
Series HC (3), 1961.

 

\r

58

There appears to be three solutions to the 1-496 dis-

placement problem. Although the final solution will probably

be a combination of the three, they are discussed separately

for analysis purposes:

1.

2.

Probably the greatest number of families will choose
to relocate within the same immediate area. This is
an understandable choice since families with

similar cultural and social characteristics have,
throughout history, elected to settle within close
proximity to each other. This practice has been
especially prevalent in the United States particularly
among ethnic groups. The NAACP, and others including
the author, are fearful of this solution for two
reasons. First, it is feared that the ghetto con-
ditions characterizing the area will be perpetuated
by restricting families from buying outside the area
if they so deisred. Secondly, available housing
units are critically short in the area because of
Oldsmobile expansion, State building expansion, etc.
Any additional movements into the area would precipi-
tate a doubling and tripling up of families in struc-
tures already deteriorating and generally unsafe.

The second solution would involve opening of new
areas for Negros in other parts of the City. This,
of course, should be based upon the premise that the
Negro families are interested in remaining a unit or

sub-community. This, in actuality has been taking

1x

\_1

Q

3.

59

place in the Churchill Downs subdivision in the
southwest part of the City. Over the past several
years, Negro families have been moving into homes
with foreclosed FHA mortgages. There has been some
question in the minds of local officials, however,
whether this movement has genuinely satisfied the
Negro requirements or whether another ghetto is
being formed. Presently, over thirty-five families
have been integrated into the area. It's an inter-
esting peculiarity that the realtor responsible for
this movement is a Negro from Pontiac, Mr. Arthur
Brown. Only time will indicate whether Mr. Brown

is truely a champion of his people's rights or whether
he has sacrificed his race for his own gain.

Finally, a solution which seems most remote, is total
integration of the families throughout the City. The
N. A. A. c. P. agrees that the likelihood of this
happening to offset I-496 displacements is nearly

out of the question. It is, however, striving for
the right of Negro families to buy where they desire,
whether it be integrated or segregated, provided they
have the economic resources to do so. Such a program
presently would have to be preceeded by an extensive
educational program. In the words of Everett
Trebilcock, Counsel to the Michigan Real Estate Asso-
ciation: "I am quite convinced that if, through the

temporizing influence of the church, school, and men

-\

L!

‘

k

U

3.

59

place in the Churchill Downs subdivision in the
southwest part of the City. Over the past several
years, Negro families have been moving into homes
with foreclosed FHA mortgages. There has been some
question in the minds of local officials, however,
whether this movement has genuinely satisfied the
Negro requirements or whether another ghetto is
being formed. Presently, over thirty-five families
have been integrated into the area. It's an inter-
esting peculiarity that the realtor responsible for
this movement is a Negro from Pontiac, Mr. Arthur
Brown. Only time will indicate whether Mr. Brown

is truely a champion of his people's rights or whether
he has sacrificed his race for his own gain.

Finally, a solution which seems most remote, is total
integration of the families throughout the City. The
N. A. A. c. P. egress that the likelihood of this
happening to offset I-496 displacements is nearly

out of the question. It is, however, striving for
the right of Negro families to buy where they deSire,
whether it be integrated or segregated, provided they
have the economic resources to do so. Such a program
presently would have to be preceeded by an extensive
educational program. In the words of Everett
Trebilcock, Counsel to the Michigan Real Estate Asso-
ciation: "I am quite convinced that if, through the

temporizing influence of the church, school, and men

\J

60

of good will, the poignant preference of our white
people to live among their own can be changed to an
attitude of indifference, and, if the conduct and
behavioral patterns of minority residents can be shown
to be exemplory or at least unexceptional, the problem

of biracial living will be largely resolved."l

 

1Everett R. Trebilcock, Some Observations on Open Occu-
r Housing, an address delivered to the annual seminar of

 

l Es ate Board Administration, May 5, 1964.

CHAPTER IV

RECOMMENDATIONS

INTRODUCTION

The foregoing relocation study and subsequent events

affecting relocation have, in the author's opinion, presented

substantial evidence to support three obvious conclusions.

Stated in the form of recommendations, they are:

l.

2.

New legislation must be adopted at the Federal level,
or at least at the State level, to aid families

in their relocation efforts.

A city housing authority must be established to
insure the availability of adequate housing units

for relocation purposes.

The City of Lansing, particularly its administrative
and legislative officials, must assume full respon-
sibility for an action program designed to carry out
a city-wide program for relocating families displaced
by freeway construction, urban renewal, industrial
expansion, or other public or private programs. Such
a program must include the welfare of the families
involved by leaving intact, whenever possible, long
established and desirable social, cultural, religious,

and economic ties.

62

LEGISLATION

Section 305 of the Housing Act of 1956, amended the
Housing Act of 1949, by adding a section which provided that
urban renewal projects may include the making of relocation
payments of property occupants, subject to rules and regula-
tions prescribed by the Housing and Home Finance Agency.
Under this provision, a site occupant is eligible for
relocation payments only if this displacement is:

1. From real property within the urban renewal area, or

2. Made necessary by either: aquisition of such property

by the local governmental unit or other public body
for urban renewal; code enforcement undertaken in
connection with the urban renewal project; or, a
program of voluntary rehabilitation of buildings in

accordance with the urban renewal plans.

The information gathered during the relocation survey
outlined above indicated conclusively that residents displaced
by urban renewal are not unique in their need for financial
assistance to implement moving programs. Certainly families
who suffer financial hardships resulting from relocation for
any public purpose, should be allowed the same considerations
afforded urban renewal relocatees. New legislation, whether
it be initiated at the State or Federal level, is required to
provide financial grants to families caught up in public

initiated improvement projects.

62
LEGISLATION

Section 305 of the Housing Act of 1956, amended the
Housing Act of 1949, by adding a section which provided that
urban renewal projects may include the making of relocation
payments of property occupants, subject to rules and regula-
tions prescribed by the Housing and Home Finance Agency.
Under this provision, a site occupant is eligible for
relocation payments only if this displacement is:

1. From real property within the urban renewal area, or

2. Made necessary by either: aquisition of such property

by the local governmental unit or other public body
for urban renewal; code enforcement undertaken in
connection with the urban renewal project; or, a
program of voluntary rehabilitation of buildings in

accordance with the urban renewal plans.

The information gathered during the relocation survey
outlined above indicated conclusively that residents displaced
by urban renewal are not unique in their need for financial
assistance to implement moving programs. Certainly families
who suffer financial hardships resulting from relocation for
any public purpose, should be allowed the same considerations
afforded urban renewal relocatees. New legislation, whether
it be initiated at the State or Federal level, is required to
provide financial grants to families caught up in public

initiated improvement projects.

63
CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY

The above relocation survey also illustrated the need
for a city housing authority to maintain up-to-date information
on the existing housing market, as well as, assuming the
responsibility for insuring a balanced housing market in
which adequate housing is provided for families in all income
levels. Such an authority should operate under a ten-man
board representing community interests relating to housing,
insofar as possible. Representation on the board should
include persons actively engaged in the following interests:
banking, civic groups, commerce, education, industry, law,
minority groups (such as the NAACP), real estate, rergious
organizations, and savings and loan associations. City and
State officials such as the building inspector, human rela-
tions director, planning director, urban renewal director,
and highway department personnel, should be allowed ex-officio,
non-voting positions on the board. As an authority, this
agency would have taxing powers specifically for housing
purposes and could hire a technical staff to implement is
program.

The relocation survey indicated an acute lack of low-
cost housing available in the Lansing area. In an effort to
meet this initial need, the proposed housing authority could
pursue one of three courses of action. The first, of course,
is to rely upon the existing housing market and provide

rent subsidies to offset the amount a family can afford as

64

it compares to the existing rent situation. A second
alternative might involve the construction of low-cost rental
units either in one location or in smaller projects through-
out the City.v Since Federal money is available at low interest
rates, this possibility rates consideration. The construction
ofisolated units for sale might provide a long-range solution
to deteriorated housing units in spot location throughout the
City and help maintain a stable housing market.

It would appear that, due to the lateness of the hour,
the first two solutions offer the most promise to I-496
residents. An estimated one-year period would be required
to implement the second solution which may rule out is
applicability to this project. The machinery for such a
proposal would probably be too long in getting set up to
apply to the I-496 situation. It is recommended therefore,
that a housing authority be established for Lansing and that
its initial efforts be concentrated in providing rent sub-
sidies to families needing financial assistance as a result

of displacement by I-496.
RELOCATION ALTERNATIVES

Those close to the I-496 situation feel that a solution
to the relocation problem is a practical impossibility at this
time. They feel and rightly so that action within the present
framework of political, financial, and social systems could

not be initiated in time to serve those families being displaced

65

by 1-496. This may be well and true, but the City of Lansing
despite its real or imagined limitations is still faced with
the prospect of finding homes for over 600 families in this
project alone. Legally, the City is under no obligation but
morally and ethically, if it purports to serve all of its
citizens, it must come to grips with this problem immediately
because it certainly isn't the last time that Lansing will
ever face a relocation task similar to this. The action
program designed to meet the relocation needs of I-496 should
be long-range and comprehensive enough to apply to any future
relocation task, whether it result from highway construction,
code enforcement, or urban renewal. It must set the stage
upon which similar future programs can be based. In this
light, what are the alternatives open to the City of Lansing
to meet this obligation? The writer contends that there are
four:

The first, of course, is for the City government to treat
the problem as though it didn't exist. This solution would
be a tragic chapter in the history in the City of Lansing,
but one which is now apparently being written. It is predi-
cated on the assumption that minority groups in Lansing are
able to operate within a completely open housing market--that
they are able to buy suitable housing within their income
brackets. It also assumes an inexhaustable supply of housing
units for low-income families regardless of their race. Both

assumptions are emphatically false. Past expansion by

66

Oldsmobile and code enforcement has been coupled with a

sharp increase in housing densities in and immediately
adjacent to the existing Negro area. Doubling and tripling

up of families into single family units has been the practice,.
not the exception, in the western one-half of the I-496

area. Kingsley Court, located in close proximity to the
corridor, is estimated to have the highest residential

density in the entire Lansing metropolitan area. This situa-
tion hasn't resulted from a natural inclination on the part

of these families to live like sardines. Quite simply, it

has resulted from two phenomena: the overwhelming influence
of one interest group in city politics and policies; and

a desire on the part of the families involved to keep intact
social, cultural, and religious ties. To allow this situation
to continue without attempting a solution would be tragic.

A second approach would solve the problems of I-496 but
would tend to be a token measure. Basically, it would require
the cooperation of local agencies, groups, and individuals in
initiating a crash program for constructing low-cost housing
units. The realtors themselves would be the obvious group
to take the lead in such an effort as they would tend to profit
the most. Such a program, in fact, has been under study by
the Lansing Board of Realtors for some time. Its advantage
over a federally-financed program is the lack of red tape
necessary to implement its proposals. Conceivably, such a
project could be initiated, designed, and completed well witin

the time limits to meet the I-496 requirements.

67

The third solution could not fulfill the I-496 needs,
but could be the basis for future relocation projects
throughout the City. Federally-financed public housing units
could be constructed for low-income families. Designed,
built, owned, and operated by local housing authorities,
these units averaged a monthly rent in 19601 of $39.00
including heat, electricity, gas, and other utilities. Federal
loans to local housing authorities for public housing can
include up to 90% of the cost of a development and are
repayable at low interest rates. Public housing units can
take the form of single family dwellings, duplexes, garden
apartments, or high apartment complexes. Private enterprise
actually profits from such ventures in that it provides
architects and engineers to design the developments, local
contractors to build them, and private business to furnish
them. It is estimated, however, that six months to one year
is required from the submission of the project application
to the beginning of actual construction. Such a program,
obviously, cannot be completed in time to have an appreciable
impact on the 1-496 situation.

The last approach, and certainly the most desirable,
could be consummated in time to meet the I-496 deadline. It
is based upon local initiative, local expertise, and the
sincere desire of local officials and citizens to utilize

the Lansing situation to prove to the rest of the Nation its

 

1Public Housing Administration, Low Rent Public Housipg,

 

1961.

68

capacity to meet the needs of its people in a truely unusual
and unique manner. It is predicated upon the premise that
relocation is a fact of urban life and must not be allowed
to adversely effect the social, cultural, religious, and
economic objectives of the urban dweller involved. It also
assumes that housing, like other capital goods, is a replacement
item and that the community is willing to make the financial
sacrifices necessary for progressive solutions to housing
shortages. Finally, this approach is based upon the maturity
of the community in approaching matters involving racial questions.
With this preface, and reiterating the natural desire of
these and other families to relocate in close proximity to
families sharing their common interests, ethnic heritage,
financial opportunities, and cultural pursuits, the author
proposes the relocation of entire neighborhood units keeping
intact, as much as possible, those ties which resulted in
its formation in the first place. Unique and imaginative
neighborhood units could be constructed on large public or
private parcels under the guidance of a local housing authority.-
Projects are envisioned to include primarily single family
units for sale along with rental units andapartments. The
focus of the neighborhood would be its center for recreational,
educational, and civic Opportunities. Limited commercial
activity would also be an integral.part of the design but
provided by private enterprise. Dilapidated units throughout
the community could be acquired and razed with the property

reverting to a land fund for future relocation projects. An

68

capacity to meet the needs of its peOple in a truely unusual
and unique manner. It is predicated upon the premise that
relocation is a fact of urban life and must not be allowed
to adversely effect the social, cultural, religious, and
economic objectives of the urban dweller involved. It also
assumes that housing, like other capital goods, is a replacement
item and that the community is willing to make the financial
sacrifices necessary for progressive solutions to housing
shortages. Finally, this approach is based upon the maturity
of the community in approaching matters involving racial questions.
With this preface, and reiterating the natural desire of
these and other families to relocate in close proximity to
families sharing their common interests, ethnic heritage,
financial opportunities, and cultural pursuits, the author
proposes the relocation of entire neighborhood units keeping
intact, as much as possible, those ties which resulted in
its formation in the first place. Unique and imaginative
neighborhood units could be constructed on large public or
private parcels under the guidance of a local housing authority.‘
Projects are envisioned to include primarily single family
units for sale along with rental units andapartments. The
focus of the neighborhood would be its center for recreational,
educational, and civic Opportunities. Limited commercial
activity would also be an integral part of thedesign but
provided by private enterprise. Dilapidated units throughout
the community could be acquired and razed with the property

reverting to a land fund for future relocation projects. An

69

educational program would preceed occupancy to inform tenants
and owners of their responsibilities in meeting minimum
community maintenance standards controlled by ordinance.

This approach, of course, requires imagination, money,
and desire to solve the reoccurring problem of urban reloca-
tion. The future of Lansing's desirability as an urban
community, however, is going to require all three components
if it is to progress forward. It cannot and should not be
satisfied with mediocre and irresponsible solutions to the needs
of its citizenry. The approach outlined above is imaginative
to be sure but certainly attainable. By implementing it, or
a similar approach, Lansing could become a leader in coping
with the complex urban community and its resultant problems.
Its contributions to its citizenry, the Nation, and the World
could be immeasurable. The time to begin, however, is now while
the opportunity is available. Failure to do so could result
in its reduction to a mediocre community at best and more
than likely, one comprised of crash programs designed to solve-

yesterdays problems.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, Relocation:
Unequal Treatment of People and Businesses Displaced
by Governments. washlngton, D. C.: January, 1965}

 

Greenleigh and Associates, Home Interview Study of Low-Income
Households in Detroit, Michigan. New York: February,
1965.

 

Housing and Home Finance Agency, Equal Opportunity in Housing,
Washington, D. C.: June, 1964.

ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS

American Academy of Political and Social Science, "The Negro
Protest," The Annals, Vol. 357 (January, 1965).

Conser, Eugene. "Human Rights and the Realtor," Realtors
Headlines, (1965).

Friedenleeig, Daniel M. "Slum Clearance Is A Hoax," Look
Magazine, (August, 1965, p. 12).

Reynolds, Harry W., Jr. "What Do We Know About Out Experiences
with Relocation," Journal of Intergroup Relations.

REPORTS

Hess, Rudolph. Relocation of PeOple and Homes. California
Division of Highways, Sacramento, CaIifornia.

Housing Committee, HousingiNeeds. Lansing, Michigan, June,
1965.

Institute for Community Development. Proposal for a Study of
Residential Dislocation by Highway Development in
Lansing. Michigan State University, East Lansing,
Michigan.

 

7O

71

Lansing Area League of Women Voters. Equality of Opportunity
in Housing, Interim Report, NOVember, 1964.

Michigan State Highway Department, Public Roads and Private
Progerty, Right of Way Division, Lansing, Michigan,

Michigan State Highway Department, 1-496 Engineering Report.
Route Location Division, Office of Planning, Lansing,
Michigan, 1964.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL

Schaller, Lyle E. "Conflicts and Frustrations in Urban
Renewal," An address delivered at the Twenty-Third
National Meeting of the Operations Research Society
of America, May 28, 1963.

Trebilcock, Everett R. "Some Observations on Open Occupancy,"
An address delivered at the 1964 Annual Seminar of
Real Estate Board Administration, Chicago, Illinois,
May 5, 1964,

APPENDIX

72

      

  
  

 

 

 

   

NIL

{—

t!» '5 LVA

 

flats 23:2. :3.

. — c «r . I i
- . 7" if. .'='.'r_. ‘ '
o '1 3&E‘ga’g. Age‘ilfi v
‘ 09. . ‘
:Dl {£5 ' ‘

AL “AL .1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_J

 

 

 

 

 

 

——'

CAPH’AL

  
  

 

 

 

Ll

 

 

 

N

‘ “".fi .' - A. .
..
| I ' . I
. . .A _ .
t ,
‘ ‘i 0'

    
   
 

  
 

Wm». cub Po

 

  

 
 

5. Plate 2 - Major Negro Concentrations

 

 

Plate 3 - Addendum Form

ADDENDUM TO UNIFORM SALES
AGENCY CONTRACT

 

I/we being aware that the provisions of the annexed
sales agency contract contain no limitations on your authority
respecting the race, religion or nationality of any purchaser
to be found by you, and it being my/our decision and desire
to limit your authority in the foregoing regard and to modify
the annexed contract accordingly, I/we hereby direct that you
refrain from showing my/our property to, negotiating with, or

taking offers to purchase from

 

 

 

and I/we hereby limit your agency authority, accordingly.

Date

 

L.S.

 

L.S.

 

 

Accepted by Realtor

 

By salesman

(FORWARD HARD COPY TO BOARD OFFICE)

0.....- __.__ ..__ _._

75

PLATE 4 - Statement of Position

A STATEMENT OF POSITION OF LANSING BOARD OF REALTORS AND ITS MEMBERS RESPECTING THE RIGHTS,
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BOARD AND ITS MEMBERS IN REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS INVOLV-
ING OR AFFECTING MINORITY RACIAL, RELIGIOUS OR NATIONAL GROUPS.

Preliminary Considerations

Members of the Lansing Board of Realtors have accorded thoughtful consideration to the many problems which have
arisen incidental to the efforts of minority racial, religious and ethnic groups for better housing accommodations in the
residential real estate market. Since real estate brokers are the primary market media, it has seemed appropriate for
members of the Lansing Board of Realtors to assess the problems encountered for the purpose of suggesting principles
and methods of operation for the guidance of its members in meeting the problems in question. By so doing, it is hoped
that a fuller understanding will exist between members of the Lansing Board of Realtors as to what the role of the
broker ought to be and that a better understanding will be promoted between Lansing realtors and the public with respect
to the problems under consideration.

The Lansing Board of Realtors and its members recognize that the aspirations of minority groups for better private
housing accommodations is both legitimate and understandable. It is basic to a fair understanding of the problems
involved that all concerned realize that certain of our peoples are not yet prepared to accept all racial, creedal and
ethnic groups as social intimates or as neighbors living in close proximity. This social phenomenon overwhelmingly accounts
for the tensions and conflicts arising in the market for private residential housing when buyers who are members of a
minority group seek to obtain residential accommodations from reluctant or unwilling sellers. This situation has given
rise in recent years to attempts by proponents of open occupancy housing to expand the availability of private housing
in favor of minority groups by using various methods of legal coercion upon real estate brokers and upon private owners
of real estate who exhibit relutonce to deal on on open occupancy basis in transactions affecting their properties. The
subject of open occupancy housing has tended to become increasingly controversial and, in the heat of controversy, the
role of the real estate broker with its attending rights and responsibilities has been distorted and obscured. Believing
therefore that it is in the interest of all concerned to understand the position of the Lansing Board of Realtors and its
members as to the role of the broker and his rights and responsibilities with specific reference to the controversial sub-
ject of open occupancy housing, the following statement of position and principles has been adopted.

STATEMENT OF POSITION AND PRINCIPLES

I. The Lansing Board of Realtors and its members recognize that there is an unmistakable trend toward the comingling
of racial, credol and ethnic groups in residential neighborhoods; that the foregoing trend is natural and inevitable; that
it should not be viewed as a sinister social development when it occurs spontaneously in a free market; and that all
concerned would do well to accept the existence of this trend preliminary to the formulation of an opinion or position
on the problems at hand.

2. Being agents and not principals, realtors, individually and collectively, in performing their agency functions, have no
right or responsibility to determine the racial, creedal or ethnic composition of any area or neighborhood.

3. Unless required by the terms of his contract or express instructions from his client, no realtor should assume to deter-
mine the suitability or eligibility of any prospective mortgagor, tenant or purchaser, and the realtor, unless otherwise
directed or instructed by his client, should invariably submit to the client all offers mode by any prospect in connection
with the transaction at hand.

4. If, under the terms of the listing agreement or other contract existing between the realtor and his client, the realtor
is chargeable with determining the suitability of any offer or prospect, he should be free to make such decision to the
same extent as could be done by the client himself, subject only to the limitation that such decisions should be made in
good faith and in the best interests of the client to whom the realtor owes his primary duty.

5. When called upon by his client to advise or recommend regarding the suitability or eligibility of any offer or prospect,
a realtor should be free to communicate to his client his opinion thereon, inclusive of any factors which the realtor believes
to be germane to the formulation of an infoyned decision by his client.

5. The property owner whom the realtor represents should have the right to specify in the contract of agency the terms
and conditions thereof and, correspondingly, the realtor should have the right and duty to represent such owner by faith-
fully observing the terms and conditions of such agency free from penalty or sanction for so doing.

7. As to the receipt and handling of an offer in the typical broker-client relationship, wherein the decision to deal or not
to deal rests with the client, the realtor may properly regard his responsibility to be discharged when he shall have trans-
mitted such offer to his client for decision.

76

8. Upon acceptance by the realtar's client of any offer, the relator should exert his best efforts to conclude the trans-
action irrespective of the race, creed or nationality of the offeror.

9. Each realtor should feel completely free to enter into a broker-client relationship with persons of any race, creed or
ethnic group in accordance with what he conceives to be in his best interests.

IO. Realtors may properly oppose any attempt by force of low to withdraw from property owners the right to freely deter-
mine with wham they will deal with respect to their property, irrespective of the reason therefor, and any law or regula-
tion whcih would operate to prevent a real estate broker from representing any property owner or faithfully abiding the terms
and conditions of any agency stipulated by the property owner.

II. In the event that o Realtor’s counsel is sought by a client with respect to property situated in an area or neighborhood
which is undergoing or which is about to undergo transition in terms of occupancy by members of racial, creedal or ethnic
groups, the Realtor should take particular care to render objective advise and to urge upon the client that the latter
decide with respect to the disposition of his property without undue haste and only after sober reflection.

12. Realtors should lend their support to the efforts of government, church and civic groups designed to promote better
understanding and relationships between the various racial, religious and ethnic groups comprising our society to the end
that through the offices of men of good will, government and the church, mutuality of acceptance between these groups
may be augmented and ultimately obtained.

I3. Realtors should endeavor to inform the public that enhanced opportunity for the acquisition of private housing by
minority groups must of necessity depend upon the attitudes of private property owners and not upon real estate brokers,
who are the marketing media; that the right of property owners to freely determine with whom they will deal is a right
fundamental in the American tradition; that the real estate broker cannot fairly be utilized in his agency function as a
means for accomplishing the withdrawal of the right of free decision from the property owner; that the broker fully per-
forms his legal and social responsibilities when he faithfully engages to find a purchaser acceptable to his principal; and
that real estate brokers should not be expected to inhibit or promote open occupancy housing, this being a matter to be
resolved between prospective buyers and sellers of private residential real property and not by real estate brokers func-
tioning as the marketing intermediary.

Adopted April 25, I962 LANSING BOARD OF REALTORS
Lansing, Michigan

ADDRESS
L496 Questionnaire LRACE: Negro Wh rte OtherJ

 

 

 

I. FAMILY CHARACTERLSTICS
. A. Number of families residing at this-address?

 

. Number of unrelated individuals residing at this address?

 

B
C. Number of adults (2] and older) residing at this address?
D

. Number of children residing at this address and their ages:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

l. h. 7. IO.
2. 5. 8. ll.
30 6e 90 '2-

 

 

 

 

E. Principal wage earner employed at

 

I. Is the principal wage earner _____male or,_____ female? If female,______single?
2. Occupation of principal wage earner? . Ll
3. Approximate annual income:
a. Without income e. $5,000 to $5.999
b. Less than $l,000 f. $6,000 to $9,999
c. $1,000 to $2,999 9. $10,000 plus
d. $3,000 to $9.999

F. Appnoxlmate annual income for entire household 3

 

G. How many times has the principal wage earner changed jobs in the last five yrs?

H. Has the family income-been supplemented by welfare payments in the last year?

2, EXISTING DWELLING UNIT CHARACTERISTICS 7

A. Do you own or rent your home? own rent

 

B. If you rent:
I. What are your monthly payments?
2. What utilities are included in the rent?
______ Telephone ______ Electricity Gas
Oil ______ None

 

C. If you are buying your home:
I. Are you now making payments? yes no

2. How much are your monthly payments?

 

3. Are taxes included in your payment? - yes no

 

A. What do you consider the value of your property to be? S

5. How many rooms are there in your house? Bedrooms?

 

D. Do you prefer to buy or rent a home? buy rent don't know

78

is FUTURE DWELLING UNIT CHARACTERISTICS

A. In general, where would you prefer to relocate:

B.

H.

I.
J.

city suburbs country don't know

 

 

 

Have you considered any specific area within the City of Lansing and its suburbs?

yes no ‘ where?

 

 

. What price range would you prefer?

I. s total
2. How much do you feel that you could afford as a downpayment?$

3. How much do you feel that you could afford monthly? $

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What type of housing would you prefer:
Older _!£!,
l. Apartment
2. Duplex or two-family home
3. Single-family home
How many bedrooms would you prefer:
efficiency one ______ two
three ._____ four _____ more than four (specify)
What are your feelings about public housing as a solution to your relocation
efforts?
What do you feel about the importance of the following factors in locating yOUr
new home: i -
very fairly not
._lmportant important imgortgnt
l. Closeness to stores
2. Closeness to work
3. Closeness to friends and relatives
h. Closeness to church, schools, etc.
5. Other (specify)
Have you or your family attempted to locate another home? How?

 

 

How could the Human Relations Committee assist you in relocating?

Do you feel that you need assistance in finding housing? _____yes no

 

-Name

 

Address

 

Phone

 

 

 

 

Interviewer

 

HICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES

| 23|||3 | ||||3

| 5|||3|||| II

30071