  Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1674 Registered: 02-2007 |
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070709/M ETRO/707090335/1003 "Kilpatrick seeks approval for his plan to tear down Tigers' former ballpark, build condos." Personally, I was hoping for it to be redeveloped. Let's hope they don't demolish it, then the site may just become a big fat lot on the outskirts of downtown. I hope a developer will step up to the plate. (Message edited by Urbanize on July 11, 2007) | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1675 Registered: 02-2007 |
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070710/M ETRO01/707100366/1006 | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 575 Registered: 07-2006 |
quote: How exactly do you use a major league ballpark if you don't have a major league team to put in it? It's real easy to say 'keep it an use it' but it's a lot harder to actually get something in there that can justify the cost of keeping up an aging 50,000+ capacity facility. Little league games certainly can't do it, and neither will minor league baseball. Some have suggested pro soccer, but keep in mind that the MLS' soccer-specific stadiums only hold about 20,000 - Tiger Stadium would still be way too big, and any conversion to soccer would most likely result in a large amount of demolition as well. I loved the stadium, and hate to see it go as much as the next person, but enough is enough. One way or the other, most of the place must be demolished, and it needs to start soon. just so long as it doesn't end up a walmart. unfortunately the last time i said that about a location, a week later the 'Coming soon: Wal-mart Supercenter' signs were up... | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1678 Registered: 02-2007 |
If a developer doesn't step up, a Target with a mini shopping center or something is possible. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9545 Registered: 10-2003 |
Aaron Burton's opinion counts for nothing in my opinion. It is nice if you choose to drive past it every once in awhile. It is not nice if it is a blight in your neighborhood. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 576 Registered: 07-2006 |
I agree with that too, jt1, and wanted to say something about a guy from South Lyon telling corktown what to do (I bet he doesn't have a huge abandoned stadium in his backyard), but figured it wasn't my place to say something, since i live 60 miles away myself. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 9586 Registered: 12-2003 |
No problem if they demolish only the portions that are NOT in dispute with what I understand is the prevailing plan to keep at least the corner structure with the basic near-home-plate seating, the diamond, and dugouts...then open up the outfield for development. Leave enough room for sandlot or better ball playing, and make sure the windows on the condos are tempered safety glass. I pass by it all the time, and perhaps because of the fond memories it does not seem blight at all. Blight cannot be avoided across the street at Slows...and from any of the freeways in that area, and up from everyone's backyards. That damn train station. If they are going to keep IT for movie locations, then Tiger Stadium can stay, too. Heh. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 9587 Registered: 12-2003 |
you beat me to mention of MCS, Scottr! damn my slow editing... | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9547 Registered: 10-2003 |
Using one blighted sight to justify keeping another one is a poor argument. I agree about the train station and think that Manny Maroun should get fined every month for the MCS. The difference is that the city owns Tiger Stadium and would be on the hook for basic maintenance, potential lawsuits from the dumbasses that break in, etc. | ||
Nyct Member Username: Nyct Post Number: 61 Registered: 01-2007 |
they HAVE to leave something! kwame's plan sounds eerily similar to what they did to ebbet's field in brooklyn when the dodgers left. driving by now, you'd never know that it was the old site of ebbets field unless you've been there ... or if you looked at the sign of in front of the monstrosities and put two and two together "ebbets field houses" NYCHA. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 9589 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jt, You've GOT to know by now with me that was sarcasm...problem is, once they tear it down completely, well, we'll have nothing left! (yeah, I know, what an acute sense of the obvious I have this morning!) Why can't they save just the portion the history buffs acquiesced to...and blend the future maintenance into the development of the site?! Then...get all of those empty lots in that neighborhood developed. They've already proven that area can be economically sustained and grown, at least until they shut everyone down to pull up the ONLY decent long-term road surface in the town (save that Euro cement portion of I-375). | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 1164 Registered: 07-2004 |
Metro Times' News Hits column asks if the city has been a fair ref on the stadium: Field of schemes by News Hits staff 7/11/2007 On Monday, as the Detroit City Council held a public hearing on the issue of tearing down Tiger Stadium, News Hits had the unsettling feeling of being caught in one of those nightmares where you run and run and run but get absolutely nowhere. There really is something truly surreal about this whole debate. What mystifies us the most is the repeated claim by city officials that the stadium needs to be demolished because there have been no credible offers to redevelop the ball field in the years since the Tigers moved to their new playground at Comerica Park. The way we see it, the truth is that the powers that be never gave would-be developers an honest chance to reuse the historic stadium. As we first reported nearly four years ago, several credible developers have expressed an interest in doing something at The Corner, but the city has effectively found ways to make sure nothing happened. Full article at http://www.metrotimes.com/edit orial/story.asp?id=10804 |
