  French777 Member Username: French777 Post Number: 624 Registered: 10-2006 |
http://www.modeldmedia.com/dev elopmentnews/leeplaza17208.asp x Very Exciting! | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 2102 Registered: 03-2008 |
That would be very welcome news! Thank you French, I forgot it was Model D Day. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3915 Registered: 10-2003 |
That would be something. It sounds like they are much further than simply courting developers to actually trying to work out a financing plan with a developer. This is unexpected. I'm also glad they mentioned the land directly around the building, because the only way I see this working is if there is some usage built around it as a buffer to the existing neighborhood; something that practically forces the area directly around it to promote some positive activity, because otherwise, this one would really feel like an island. I grew up just to the north of here, and it's rough. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3610 Registered: 04-2006 |
I think that's gonna be a hard one to sell to a developer. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1488 Registered: 11-2004 |
Great news. This would be quite the undertaking, but imagine the economic and psychological impact it could have on the surrounding community. The best part is it would be in the neighborhoods, not the downtown. Mildred Robbins of the West Grand Blvd. Collaborative is my new hero. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 879 Registered: 10-2003 |
i wish them the best of luck, but it's highly doubtful that any developer could make the numbers work. i went to the last RFP walk thru. the windows have been missing for so long that water has been getting in between the structure and the brick. this amount of time and water has rusted the metal clips that anchor the brick to the structure (in every place i looked). this would mean that the entire brick facade will have to be either taken down and rebuilt or re-anchored somehow (i haven't heard of an economical way of doing this yet). given this fact, and the amount of subsidy other project in the city have required, it is unlikely that it's an economical to rehab it, unfortunately. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1489 Registered: 11-2004 |
Hey RSA, what are the other major obstacles to redeveloping it other than shoring up the exterior brick? | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1073 Registered: 04-2006 |
It would have been nice if they had thought of this when the building had a roof and windows, and when there was still some semblance of a real estate market in this town. Nonetheless, I wish them luck. BTW, I'm pretty sure Ms. Robbins meant Northwestern High School, not Northern. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4056 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: It's possible that metal elements supporting the facade system had already deteriorated long ago. Replacement of these elements, in a building this age, would seem to be a given (a lot of metal in facade systems of this vintage was never galvanized or otherwise protected from corrosion). I'd put a ballpark figure of $3 million (give or take) on rehabbing the facade system. Now see, the disconnect between treatment of Lee Plaza versus the Lafayette or Madison-Lenox is what drives me absolutely nuts about Detroit. You never really know when the city is hellbent on tearing something down (just because!) or whether they're going to wholeheartedly embrace renovation. | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 2759 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Is this true? It is my understanding that the Lions that were used in the Chicago condos are still in fact part of the building and HAVE NOT been returned. The only lions heads that were returned were those that had not been used. Even then, I don't believe all of the heads were found and accounted for. This topic was beat to death on here a few years ago, though perhaps my memory is a little foggy. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 880 Registered: 10-2003 |
i think the brick is the biggest obstacle. other biggies are: rebuilding the roof. since the copper sheathing was stolen off of it a few years ago the wood is pretty much rotting away. so a new structure, new sheathing, weaterproofing, etc. will be needed. also due to the windows being out of the building, almost everything in the upper floors will need to be removed. [this can be both a blessing and a curse.] but interior demo and clean-up will take a while. reinstalling new windows itself is a major cost and undertaking. on the plus side, the structure itself is in pretty good condition. and a lot of the embelleshments on the interior main floors are still mostly intact. of course, the architectural embelleshments on the outside are an obvious plus as well. really, the main thing that makes this building a lot different than many other renovations and/or abandoned buildings in the city is the fact that the windows have been missing for so long. the more water can get into a building (especially around structural elements) the more costly it's going to be to rehab it. this is why it's so disheartening to see the eddystone and harbor lights also stripped of their windows recently. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 881 Registered: 10-2003 |
you're right dan, it could've deteriorated before the windows were removed. however, this would mean that the facade was never installed correctly in the first place. even if this was the case, removing the windows has only exacerbated the situation. whereas a minor deterioration before could withstand securing now, i fear that these anchors are now to fragile to withstand any type of stress (eg. the vibrations from machinery used to install new anchors). quote:not necessarily true. i've worked on many buildings where this system was as true as the day it was installed. many times this system was overdesigned to begin with, so even if there is a problem with infiltration, other rows compensate for ones that are affected. i think that the same is true today as for back then: if it was installed correctly, maintained properly, and repaired properly if it was ever damaged, it will last. even then, if the envelope stays somewhat watertight, the infilatration and seepage shouldn't be enough to rust all anchors everywhere. [interesting anecdote; one tell-tale sign of if water is getting behind brick, is white staining. i was told this is called calcification; it occurs when the mortar is saturated. this breaks down the components in the cement and stains the outside of the brick. usually after this appears is when the brick wall will startbowing out and eventually collapsing. however it is not always visible and timings vary.] | ||
Slider Member Username: Slider Post Number: 54 Registered: 06-2007 |
Does anyone know where the building project is in Chicago that has the stolen lions in it? I'm heading out there over New Years and would like to see it first hand | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1490 Registered: 11-2004 |
More info on that here: https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/6790/6085.html?118486424 7 | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4057 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Not necessarily true. Masonry, like all stones, is porous, and absorbs water. Is this a solid-wall facade, or a cavity system? The condition of the anchors will depend, in part, on the construction method and drainage characteristics, as well as the maintenance history (of which there has been little the past few decades). I agree that removal of the windows has likely accelerated deterioration, but that in no way implies that the details would have been in a serviceable condition otherwise. quote: This isn't necessarily true. Calcification often occurs when new masonry construction has experienced a rainstorm (i.e. saturation). It's a naturally-occurring phenomenon, and doesn't indicate much about the structural integrity of the construction. It's more cosmetic than anything. A far better predictor of collapse of masonry walls is the condition of your mortar joints. | ||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 2928 Registered: 10-2003 |
You are not foggy Sport. You are correct that not all of the Lion heads were returned and not all found. But the scrapping continues... | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 468 Registered: 10-2006 |
There's no possible way the numbers can work without subsidies, so the issue is how much is the city willing to subsidize the project? If the city wants the building removated, it can be done. Is is worthwhile for a flat broke city to massively subsidize a renovation in a glutted market? I would say probably not, but it would depend on the level of subsidy and assumed potential for spin-off development. My pessimistic outlook would say no, but I could reasonably see others arriving at different conclusions. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 685 Registered: 11-2003 |
Am I the only one wondering why this building is being looked at for redevelopment, while the Lafayette is being slated for demo? | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 882 Registered: 10-2003 |
dan; you and i are saying the same thing. if the facade was installed correctly, then there would've been propper amount of drainage installed. i also go on to say that as long as it was maintained properly, it should fare pretty well. it is a cavity system and i did not mean to imply that no water would get in that cavity ever. and there are many ways now-and-days to determine the status of this system (fiber optics, accoustics, mini-cameras, etc.). calcification does occur in many other instances. i did not mean to imply that this was the only and/or best method of determining iminent strutural failure. i was refering to older buildings and non-uniform white stains on the facade [thus meaning that one portion is subject to higher saturation than the rest of the system which usually indicates that portion may have water behind it as well as normal facial saturation]. i'm not mentioning these things as a guide for developers or people looking to restore. i'm mentioning them as a very brief explanations for a layman. so what i'm saying is not going into specifics or should be taken as the end-all, be-all for structural problems. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 883 Registered: 10-2003 |
crawford; the city is not the only entity that could provide subsidies for this project. eric_c; no, you're not the only one. however my intuition tells me that the lee plaza is less visible that the lafayette building so that's why there is more time to find a feasable renovation plan for it. [reference this board; how many people have been calling for the demo of the lafayette vs. how many people have been calling for the demo of the lee?] | ||
Retroit Member Username: Retroit Post Number: 589 Registered: 04-2008 |
Don't get your hopes up. There is not a waiting list for people who want to move into the city. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 884 Registered: 10-2003 |
perhaps not, but there is a huge waiting list in the city of detroit who need housing. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1491 Registered: 11-2004 |
There is a demand for quality high-rise living in the city, too, especially rentals. And I agree with Eric_c. It's quite coincidental the city is making this public right after news of the Lafayette and the Ilitch's latest subsidized bulldozing spree leaks out. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4058 Registered: 10-2003 |
Gotcha, Rsa. Did you get a chance to see the flashing on your walk-through? | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 885 Registered: 10-2003 |
sorry dan, the walk-thru i went on was over three years ago. i can't remember what condition the flashing was in specifically. any roof flashing was taken or terribly damaged when they stole the copper sheathing off the roof. i think any other flashing (bump-outs, etc.) was kind of rendered moot due to the damage incurred taking out the windows (water just circumvents it). however, this is all from memory. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4503 Registered: 02-2004 |
The Lee Plaza getting rehabed. Where are those 27 lions heads? At least we have them back since the sneak developer from Chicago tried to steal them. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 1577 Registered: 11-2005 |
"Am I the only one wondering why this building is being looked at for redevelopment, while the Lafayette is being slated for demo?" My thoughts EXACTLY. The Lafayette is not a shred as bad as the Lee. Plus, that isn't a great part of town at all. Further proof that the DEGC has a bunch of idiots in charge. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 760 Registered: 11-2006 |
"interesting anecdote; one tell-tale sign of if water is getting behind brick, is white staining. i was told this is called calcification" The white staining on brick and concrete is actually called efflorescence and it is the leaching of salt from concrete or brick products caused by the infiltration of water into the wall cavity. If you can see it on the outside of a building there is an underlying water problem that should be addressed. Simply cleaning the wall is only a temporary solution that does not resolve the underlying issue. This does cause the concrete or masonry elements to loose strength and is a very serious concern. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4060 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: If there's salt in the brick or the mortar, you have bigger problems than efflorescence. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 2070 Registered: 02-2006 |
If anyone is curious, here are the "Lion Houses" in Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood. Google Maps | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3919 Registered: 10-2003 |
Rhymes, Just so you know, Lee Plaza is owned by the Detroit Housing Commission, and the Lafayette is owned by some other department or quasi-city agency (is it the DDA?). Anyway, that's probably why there is a disconnect. We're talking about two different agencies. That really shouldn't be an excuse, as there should be some unified view of development in the city, though. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 1581 Registered: 11-2005 |
As far as I'm concerned, they are both owned by the City of Detroit, just like the Metropolitan Building. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3920 Registered: 10-2003 |
Yeah, same here. At least, that's how they should be viewed. Just saying that, in practice, I bet you the two have never even been in the same room together, let alone regularly coordinating policy. And, with the federal takeover, I bet you the two operate even more in different worlds then they usesd to. | ||
56packman Member Username: 56packman Post Number: 2409 Registered: 12-2005 |
Quote: "interesting anecdote; one tell-tale sign of if water is getting behind brick, is white staining. i was told this is called calcification" The white staining on brick and concrete is actually called efflorescence and it is the leaching of salt from concrete or brick products caused by the infiltration of water into the wall cavity. If you can see it on the outside of a building there is an underlying water problem that should be addressed. Simply cleaning the wall is only a temporary solution that does not resolve the underlying issue. This does cause the concrete or masonry elements to loose strength and is a very serious concern I can see it now, some money comes through (not at all likely, but for the sake of humor go with me on this) The Lee plaza is stripped of its tenious brick and is coated with EFIS. would that make you happy? |
