 
Patrick
Member
Username: Patrick
Post Number: 3130
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.249.45.117
| | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 10:15 pm: |    |
At work the other day, we were discussing the possibly of a super-scraper being built in Detroit. Does anyone see this happening in the foreseeable future? It seems as many corporations like to use sprawling campuses rather than tall towers. With lack of transit and the noticeable sprawl, it doesn’t seem likely.
We were not talking 40 floor buildings. We were talking about 1200 foot tall ones. Could this ever happen here in the next 20 to 30 years? Let us just say that someone wants to build a super-scraper in Detroit. Where would be the most logical place to build at the moment? Perhaps near The Eddystone? Perhaps along the river near the site of the Uniroyal plant?
What are you thoughts on this crazy simcity-like idea? |
Bussey
Member
Username: Bussey
Post Number: 96
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 70.236.200.238
| | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 10:31 pm: | |
its detroit.....what do you really think?
I'd be happy if we could get a descent 500+ foot building.
Look what has recently been built. A true Phallic -esque scraper is not in our immediate future.
*Ten story Visteon Building
*Four or Five story PriceWaterHouseCoopers
*Ten or Twelve story Hilton Garden Inn
*Fifteen or sixteen story Compuware
*Lots of Six+ story parking garages
*Numerous surface lots (i.e. Madison Lenox)
When all of the major Abandoned buildings are occupied -
Train Station, Fort-Shelby Hotel, Book Cadillac, Lafayette Building, Metropolitan, Wurlitzer, Broderick, David Whitney, United Artist, Lee Plaza, Vinton, GAR, Detroit Building, Park Ave. Building, etc
- then I will get my hopes up for a 1000+ footer.
If you need vertical horizions move to Chicago, they are building like crazy these days.
Where is our Mayor Daley? |
The_aram
Member
Username: The_aram
Post Number: 4585
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.43.31.87
| | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 10:46 pm: | |
why build a super-scraper when we can't even fill the tall we already have? Anybody check the occupancy rates at the Guardian and the Penobscot recently? Plenty of fine space still available in the Book Tower as well. |
Patrick
Member
Username: Patrick
Post Number: 3131
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.249.45.117
| | Posted on Thursday, December 15, 2005 - 11:16 pm: | |
see, that was what I was trying to explain to these guys, one being an engineer. |
Sid
Member
Username: Sid
Post Number: 426
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 68.73.15.248
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 12:00 am: | |
supply and demand mofos. when new york is selling the air, and d has farm land available, why would you build up? |
Alexei289
Member
Username: Alexei289
Post Number: 912
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.61.183.223
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 12:01 am: | |
i think i brought this up once... |
Detourdetroit
Member
Username: Detourdetroit
Post Number: 141
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 69.215.246.124
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:17 am: | |
hudson's site... build a street wall to match the street on the other side, and then go up 150 stories. it would be so very awesome. |
Jeffrey_thomas
Member
Username: Jeffrey_thomas
Post Number: 26
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 205.188.116.201
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:25 am: | |
na, not in the near future, 2-3 decades maybe |
Jeffrey_thomas
Member
Username: Jeffrey_thomas
Post Number: 27
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 205.188.116.201
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:26 am: | |
after kwamidom |
Mbr
Member
Username: Mbr
Post Number: 13
Registered: 03-2005
Posted From: 69.246.43.231
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:35 am: | |
I don't think super huge skyscrapers should be our goal. Medium density, a lot of 5-15 story infill, is perfect.
However, I don't think we should rule out some sort of huge monument. I'm not talking space needle or anything, more like the gateway arch, but different, detroit style. |
Urban_shocker
Member
Username: Urban_shocker
Post Number: 231
Registered: 12-2003
Posted From: 71.144.82.70
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 1:36 am: | |
War arcologies. |
Broken_main
Member
Username: Broken_main
Post Number: 528
Registered: 06-2005
Posted From: 198.109.44.2
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 3:28 am: | |
Maybe, just maybe when we finally elect the young and talented motorcitymayor2026 wil we see that 1200 footer. How ironic 2026 is the year i will retire. Seems so far away |
The_aram
Member
Username: The_aram
Post Number: 4588
Registered: 10-2003
Posted From: 68.43.31.87
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 4:29 am: | |
Urban_shocker, to that I will say:
War SimCity 2000 |
Broken_main
Member
Username: Broken_main
Post Number: 533
Registered: 06-2005
Posted From: 198.109.44.2
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 4:39 am: | |
Hmmmm...I sense an invasion of ARCO's here. LOL |
Northend
Member
Username: Northend
Post Number: 528
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 69.217.229.122
| | Posted on Friday, December 16, 2005 - 12:17 pm: | |
Good point Mbr. A recognizable monument for Detroit might be a good thing. |
Citylover
Member
Username: Citylover
Post Number: 1440
Registered: 07-2004
Posted From: 4.229.123.14
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 12:37 pm: | |
Recognizable to who? I am from Ann Arbor and I recognize almost every bldg in downtown Detroit.
We have had this discussion before.There is no need for Detroit to have some super tall bldg.There me be some sort of variation of the "penis envy" theory going on here where ..."mine is bigger".... but that is about what a desire for a mammoth skyscraper is.
In Chicago and NY the old grand skyscrapers are still occupied.In Detroit they languish, the Penobscot,Guardian,Book, Stott all need tenants. |
Mike
Member
Username: Mike
Post Number: 523
Registered: 11-2003
Posted From: 68.41.109.36
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 1:05 pm: | |
I would love devolopment, especially something that fills in the vacant areas and lots that are scattered throughout downtown. How cool would it be to have other buildings actually near the riverfront and the RenCen, filling in the gaps?
However, lets concentrate on filling in the buildings that we do have. And as far as the gems that we currently have that are not quite filled. Those for the most part of Class B or C office space, they need to be competitive and get that Class A recognition.
Detroit needs to keep offering tax breaks and other incentives for corporations to relocate downtown. Delphi if moving out of troy should consolidate into a smaller building in Downtown, practically for free for a while, god knows they need the money. Kmart instead of going to Atlanta or wherever should be back in downtown. The suburbs have raped Detroit of all these corporations and jobs for far too long with their sprawling tax breaks and cheap land. It is time for Detroit to compete. And I am believe that if you start with Downtown a trickle down effect will work and the surrounding areas will start to improve. Mid-town, Downtown, NewCenter, start with viable, livable communuities around there, spark interest, spark demand, and sooner or later, those places fill up and people will want to start living closer to those areas again, sparking and improving the surrounding areas.
Pipedream stuff. too much politics, racism, spwralism, mass transitism, unionisms in the way. Ahhh... let me just do like everyone else and move somewhere else. |
Quinn
Member
Username: Quinn
Post Number: 638
Registered: 01-2005
Posted From: 68.42.170.20
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 3:22 pm: | |
I'd like to see some more 500 - 600 foot building..then a few 800 footers before we build anything record breaking. It would look odd right now having a 1200 ft tall tower in the city of Detroit. The skylike would be jacked.
Having said that...it will be a while before the lower one's would be built...so I think it is definitely OUT of the picture for a 1200 FT building in the next 20 - 30 years. |
Motorcitymayor2026
Member
Username: Motorcitymayor2026
Post Number: 269
Registered: 10-2005
Posted From: 69.218.157.241
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 3:47 pm: | |
Yes, Broken_Main, with my arrival to the CAY building in 2026, a building of these mass proportions can and will be built 
Maybe you dont need to reitre in 2026? You can be in charge of spearheading this project for my administration |
Ericdfan
Member
Username: Ericdfan
Post Number: 54
Registered: 08-2005
Posted From: 68.41.117.60
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:34 pm: | |
The campus thing seems to be getting more popular these days...Last year Radio Shack moved from the tandy towers in downtown Fort Worth to a campus-like style closer to the edge of downtown...
I don't like campuses...Doesn't seem like anyone is trying anymore..Whatever happened to "reaching for the stars"? |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 1620
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 4.229.6.210
| | Posted on Saturday, December 17, 2005 - 9:46 pm: | |
Sears moved from the Sears Tower in Chicago to a corporate campus in Hoffmann Estates IL., right next door to the 237 acre SBC (formerly Ameritech) corporate campus. Corporate campuses do seem to be all the rage. |
Jfwaterburry
Member
Username: Jfwaterburry
Post Number: 21
Registered: 04-2005
Posted From: 68.20.88.38
| | Posted on Sunday, December 18, 2005 - 1:33 am: | |
However, here in Chicago there are plans on the books for two 2000+ ft towers.
Also, Trump tower is already under construction.... although I can't remember its proposed height.
Interestingly enough, Sears moved out of its tower because of terrorism concerns in the 1990s. Too bad that forward thinking hasn't seemed to spill over into retail profits. |
Lt_tom
Member
Username: Lt_tom
Post Number: 49
Registered: 06-2004
Posted From: 208.0.107.92
| | Posted on Sunday, December 18, 2005 - 10:35 pm: | |
Arcologies? Arent those not going to be around until 2050 with the Plymouth Arco? |
Tigers2005
Member
Username: Tigers2005
Post Number: 83
Registered: 02-2005
Posted From: 68.61.252.136
| | Posted on Sunday, December 18, 2005 - 11:11 pm: | |
"Super-scrapers are only built in cities that have tremendous demand for space, but do not have much surface space available. This requires the space to be created vertically. I think we all agree that this is not the case in Detroit. Another problem with this type of building is the ability to get people in and out of the area. Without a good mass transit system, workers have to drive there and park. A building that size would require an incredible amount of parking spaces. It just isn't feasible at this time. |
Digitaldom
Member
Username: Digitaldom
Post Number: 375
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 67.149.110.53
| | Posted on Monday, December 19, 2005 - 3:32 am: | |
Isn't there an ordinance that said nothing can be taller that the Ren Cen.. I heard that rumor along time ago.. Is it true? Can someone please inform me on this.
Big buildings, small buildings, we need them all. But having the world's tallest building would definitely give the city some much needed press.
Now as far as the older buildings are considered I agree with renovating them, but my uncle is a VP for a real estate firm.. They want low column count and massive unobstructed floor space. A huge building like the one patrick is talking about with give more floor space per floor, per foot print than any of the older buildings..
Dan |
Danny
Member
Username: Danny
Post Number: 3591
Registered: 02-2004
Posted From: 207.74.110.60
| | Posted on Monday, December 19, 2005 - 9:44 am: | |
Detroit will not get a superscraper until after the year 2050. By then all of Downtown Detroit will be more beautiful than ever. |