  Mccarus Member Username: Mccarus Post Number: 21 Registered: 10-2006 |
The date is unclear Today is thursday March 26. Andy was talking about Thursday March 27. So is the meeting today or tomorrow? | ||
Jtw Member Username: Jtw Post Number: 179 Registered: 06-2005 |
how about a warning that the linked PDF is 46 MB? | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 568 Registered: 09-2004 |
What if the DetroitYES community sends out a RFP for the complete demolition of the DDA headquarters (On Randolph, I think?)? We can move the process along faster and knock them down before they can get to the Lafayette hehe | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 3810 Registered: 06-2008 |
I know I'm in the minority here, but good riddance. That building is such an eyesore in an otherwise decent area. I used to walk past it on a daily basis when I worked in that area a couple years ago and always hoped the city would eventually come to its senses and tear it down. The building's architecture is also terribly overrated by some on this forum. From the side, it's a bunch of right angles with a cornice at the top...nothing to write home about. Its "unique V-shape" is nothing to get excited about either, since anything else that gets built on that parcel would have the same shape. And I can't blame guests of the Westin for not wanted to look out their window at that thing. If knocking down the LB is the price of a newly renovated BC, I say it's well worth it. | ||
D_mcc Member Username: D_mcc Post Number: 1784 Registered: 12-2007 |
I'm sure some said they were tired of looking at the hulking BC when it was abandoned. Don't we think there is a problem, when cities around the country retrofit these great old buildings and we're busy tearing them down. When you elect morons, you get moronic leadership | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 3811 Registered: 06-2008 |
"Makes no sense what good will another parking lot be downtown..." The value is in the absence of an eyesore rather than the presence of a parking lot...if the parcel ends up getting used for parking, that would just be incidental. | ||
Mccarus Member Username: Mccarus Post Number: 22 Registered: 10-2006 |
Tearing down more buildings is moronic. Exactly. It's just moronic. | ||
J_to_the_jeremy Member Username: J_to_the_jeremy Post Number: 202 Registered: 03-2007 |
TheJesus- it's not even the only vacant building in the area! And when you used to walk by it, I know the Book Caddy was also vacant. I guess I can't understand the problem some people have with "eyesores". I see abandoned buildings in every city I go to. I know we have more of them here, but I would rather have the Lafayette any day over a parking lot. Look! http://maps.google.com/maps?q= detroit&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozil la:en-US:official&client=firef ox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl= us&ei=35jLSanwD-DrnQfL_vDYCQ&s a=X&oi=geocode_result&resnum=1 &ct=image If the Lafayette goes, that's 5 parking lots and 1 garage in a 2 block radius in the CBD. What is this, "Foxtown"? | ||
J_to_the_jeremy Member Username: J_to_the_jeremy Post Number: 203 Registered: 03-2007 |
Not to mention the sea of parking just across the street from the Holiday Inn! | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 1376 Registered: 01-2005 |
I've got the answer. Actually, it's been used. Didn't a guy 10 or 12 years ago come up with the idea to create a "skyscraper park?" Of course the Tuller, Statler and a couple of others have been demoed but there are still the Lafayette, MCS and several other which would qualify. The skyscraper park would become a designated tourist attraction and visitor could be escorted thru the ruins and observe a few derelicts (in winter), various small animals, the trees growing out of the roofs, and so forth. These abandoned hulks could be turned into moneymakers until the earlier of the point at which they become candidates for economically viable rehabilitation, or they crumble to dust. | ||
Birdie Member Username: Birdie Post Number: 142 Registered: 04-2007 |
The meeting is today, Thursday March 26th. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 846 Registered: 11-2003 |
You can't save them all but how moronic is it that you have a perfect example across the street from the Lafayette of what happens when you redevelop a historic building. The building can apply for millions in tax breaks for being historic; it is worth so much more than as a parking lot. Not to mention, they are never going to find a developer to fill that lot due to the odd shape of it. The city thinks that it will be easier to market with the building gone. The Monroe block has been empty for years and the west end of Grand Circus Park looks like crap. Spend the few thousands to seal the place up and make it look nice for the Book Hotel guests. I can’t wait until they build another beautiful Holiday Inn Express on the site, that will really bring people downtown. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 3812 Registered: 06-2008 |
Jeremy: The building's vacancy isn't a big issue for me. Rather, it's the vacancy coupled with its mediocre architecture and slim prospects for ever being rehabbed (check out the Peebles attempt a few years back). The BC doesn't fall into that category in my opinion, nor would the Free Press building for that matter. "I would rather have the Lafayette any day over a parking lot." And again, the building isn't being knocked down because the area needs more parking. It's being knocked down because its an eyesore with no hope of being rehabbed. If it gets used for parking, that would be incidental. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 1290 Registered: 07-2007 |
"And again, the building isn't being knocked down because the area needs more parking. It's being knocked down because its an eyesore with no hope of being rehabbed. If it gets used for parking, that would be incidental." And then what? | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 1291 Registered: 07-2007 |
An excellent article on preservation versus demolition focused on two buildings in Lincoln Park where the city manager hews to the DEGC vision of "development". http://www.metromodemedia.com/ features/LincolnParkMellus0109 .aspx | ||
Sciencefair Member Username: Sciencefair Post Number: 158 Registered: 10-2007 |
"mediocre architecture?" Should we just level Troy and Southfield as well? There aren't a whole lot of buildings left that can compete with the style and elegance of the Lafayette. I understand your argument that it is cracked out and unsightly, but shouldn't we be spending money on improving what we already have, rather than wasting resources to remove "eyesores?" | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 3815 Registered: 06-2008 |
"And then what?" The area will look better, the value of buildings in the area will increase, out of towners who stay at the BC will have a more pleasant experience to tell people about, and if something else is to ever get built there, this will only make it happen sooner. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 3816 Registered: 06-2008 |
"Should we just level Troy and Southfield as well?" If the buildings in Troy and Southfield were vacant and unlikely to ever be used again, absolutely. | ||
Novine Member Username: Novine Post Number: 1292 Registered: 07-2007 |
"The area will look better, the value of buildings in the area will increase, out of towners who stay at the BC will have a more pleasant experience to tell people about, and if something else is to ever get built there, this will only make it happen sooner." You're basing this on what? Look around the current inventory of demolition sites. Which ones of those have led to increased property values of the surrounding sites? What new buildings have been constructed downtown because an abandoned building was demolished? You repeat these "benefits" as if you have evidence to back up these claims. Let's see it. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1986 Registered: 12-2004 |
quote:quote: #1. As for whether or not a parking lot will make the area look better, I will simply say that there's no arguing taste (or lack thereof). #2. We have knocked down dozens of historic buildings in Detroit. None of those demolitions has produced a corresponding increase in value for the remaining structures. #3. Most people who stay at the BC can't even see the Lafayette Bldg. For those who can, it's highly doubtful that seeing a parking lot will improve their stay at all. quote:quote: You're assuming that the Lafayette Bldg. is only likely to ever be used again. Please search the archives of this forum. It was only a year or two ago that people thought I was nuts for arguing that the Book-Cadillac had potential for redevelopment. | ||
Detroitred Member Username: Detroitred Post Number: 27 Registered: 02-2009 |
Am I crazy or aren't these vacant skyscrapers actually resources in a way? What exists is shell, but it is a usable and convertible shell. It may be an eyesore to some (I like the old architecture even if it is vacant with trees growing from the roof), but it is certainly more valuable than an empty lot. It's not like money is drained through maintenance (Cobo). And the cost to renovate an old building is surely less than the cost of building a new one. I guess I don't understand why people crusade to save valueless eyesores (Tiger Stadium), and the city is so quick to destroy valuable eyesores (Lafayette). As people have said... What's next after demolition? | ||
Noodles Member Username: Noodles Post Number: 27 Registered: 02-2009 |
quote: But the Broderick Tower's new website looks good. Why do you have to focus on the negative? | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 4618 Registered: 10-2003 |
Thejesus is just making shit up. Anyone with any construction knowledge knows that demolition is far from free, that empty lots NEVER increase land values, and that "revitalization by demolition" is a losing proposition--have you seen what the price of steel has done in the past 10 years, Thejesus? Never mind the concept of embedded energy. The labor and material that went into constructing the Lafayette Building is just as disposable as anything else, right? This is SCARY thinking. Every other city has rediscovered its core in the past 10 years, if not longer. Every city, that is, except Detroit, which is hellbent on staying in the 1950s. It's not every city that's wealthy enough to demolish every building it can, just because it feels like it. God bless ya. If it wasn't for Ferchill, the Book Cadillac would be a piece of toast right now too. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 4428 Registered: 02-2005 |
Do you think people staying from outside Detroit have never seen a vacant building before? I think people would rather see a historic empty building than a parking lot. At least they'd get a better sense of Detroit and its history. Perhaps some high-rolling business people staying in the B-C and impressed with their time in Detroit would be inspired to purchase and renovate it. The Lafayette is not the most exteriorally interesting Detroit building, but it is Crane-designed skyscraper and has several unique interior design cues as well. I'm also guessing that many of the decorative elements that make it distinctive have been stripped. To dismiss it as mediocre here in 2009 when something half as good cannot be designed really makes you sound like a boob. Again, note that it is abandoned, heavily stripped, unsecured, and has thereby lost its luster. Blame the people who let it rot and made it appear mediocre. | ||
Russix Member Username: Russix Post Number: 221 Registered: 11-2006 |
A parking lot is more profitable now and who really cares about the future. "But the Broderick Tower's new website looks good. Why do you have to focus on the negative?" The negative is that it looks good because its still there, unlike other buildings whose reuse potential have been flatten to dirt and crab grass. It doesn't take a degree in economics to realize that rehabing old building is less expensive then trying to build something the same caliber from scratch. It also doesn't require any formal education to realize that once buildings are demolished that redevelopment is something akin to winning the lottery. | ||
Gsgeorge Member Username: Gsgeorge Post Number: 782 Registered: 08-2006 |
No wonder Detroit is disappearing faster than we can keep track. It's own residents want this city torn down. Well this is one resident who doesn't, "eyesore" or not. How can a building be an eyesore just because it has a few broken windows? I think the Lafayette is a piece of art, and not to mention a canvas for brilliant artists who take advantage of its windows for some of the most impressive paintings in the city. I feel like this is a good temporary solution to turning an "eyesore" into an art gallery. While we are waiting for redevelopment, the city should seal the building & preserve its bizarre window art, maybe even let more artists in to do their own window art. It is certainly an eye-catcher and coversation piece for out of town visitors, and quintessentially DETROIT. Where else can you see something as unique as this? Let's not kid ourselves here, people. Detroit has abandoned buildings. Do you really think that just because this is across the street from the BC that people will think any differently of the city? It doesn't take a genius to look around downtown and see countless vacant buildings. Guess what else is right across the street from the Book Cadillac Hotel -- the huge, hulking, dirty, abandoned and left to rot BOOK TOWER. If anything, residents will go home with the image of a towering abandoned skyscraper in their head, and will probably think little of a small, Chicago-style office building next door that just so happens to have some broken windows and some interesting drawings all over it. The real value of this building is in its potential, not in the value of its land. On the other side of the coin, it's hardly more of an "eyesore" than the Wurlizter or Metropolitan buildings (hardly eyesores), the AAA Building on Grand Circus (get rid of it), or the horrid Hotel Charlevoix on Park & Elizabeth (yikes... hard to say what to do with this 1905 oddity).    | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 848 Registered: 11-2003 |
Keep up the excellent contributions Noodles http://www.freep.com/article/2 0090326/BUSINESS06/90326046/Bi ds+sought+to+demolish+Lafayett e+Building+in+Detroit | ||
Urbanfisherman Member Username: Urbanfisherman Post Number: 136 Registered: 07-2008 |
quote: Once again DaninDC sticks his head in to make another ad hominem pronouncement about someone who has a different viewpoint than he does. | ||
Bragaboutme Member Username: Bragaboutme Post Number: 639 Registered: 02-2008 |
I think numbers will solve this argument. What are the actual numbers for demolition vs. renovation vs. maintaining this structure as is. There is no practical use for the Lafeyette building outside of ideas. When I stayed at the Book I thought the building was an eye sore. The Book-cadillac and the Lafayette are two totally different buildings and can't be used in the same way. Since 98, when the hudson building came down, that whole area witnessed change. The new Y.M.C.A., new lofts, Compuware, and the list goes on. Some buildings stand in the way of progress, and IMHO the Lafeyette is one of them. The V-shape is what is killing any chance of it being redeveloped into anything that would be profitable, lofts no, hotel no, office space no, apartments no, it has to go. Same with the MCS, same with tigers stadium. Trust me those building won't be missed. | ||
Noodles Member Username: Noodles Post Number: 28 Registered: 02-2009 |
quote: A plea to keep things positive is answered in sarcasm? That's a shame. The city needs people supporting it and you're just tearing it down with broad statements about Grand Circus Park. That's unfortunate. |
