Lafayette Building's top two floors subsiding?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by McIPor

Does the city have much better uses for the more than $1.4 million it would spend to mothball the Lafayette Building?

Let Dennis Kafalonos buy the building. He could do a facade improvement, and occupy the first 2-3 floors. At least he keeps the heat and lights on in his buildings. More then we can say for city owned properties.

---

While I am in favor of letting Keffalinos buy the Lafayette, it should be noted that's not true for EVERY building he owns. The YMCA by Clark Park, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buildingsofdetroit

While I am in favor of letting Keffalinos buy the Lafayette, it should be noted that's not true for EVERY building he owns. The YMCA by Clark Park, for example.

---

That maybe true, but he owns A LOT of buildings, I think about 12 downtown. Most have occupants, electricity and heat. Thats better than any number of city owned properties and he doen't seem to knock them down either. At least his buildings survive to see better days.

Soho didn't happen over night and there were more Kafalonos types that helped make it than Compuwares or corporate types. Remember, NY was nearly bankrupt in the 70's. Maybe Detroit is in its NY 70's period now.

Stop jerking off over empty building. If you want to do something worthwhile for the city, do something for the kids [[or any of the other worthwhile organizations that help the kids directly).

Oh and yes, please tear down every building Geo. Washington has slept in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toolbox

Oh and yes, please tear down every building Geo. Washington has slept in.

---

Thanks for, um, not reading my post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearinabox

Thanks for, um, not reading my post.

---

Thanks for not answering my original question. What is the significance [[historical or architectural) of the Lafayette Building that it merits this much bitching and moaning? I can think of more worthwhile buildings for this amount of energy to be spent on [[ie GAR Building or Broadhead Armory or Jefferson YMCA's Pewabic Pool).

And I meant "tear all the buildings Geo. Washington didn't sleep in". Sorry but lack of sleep due to infant apparently has interfered with typing abilities.

Quote:

---

What is the significance [[historical or architectural) of the Lafayette Building

---

http://www.detroit1701.org/Lafayette%20Building.html

"Does the city have much better uses for the more than $1.4 million it would spend to mothball the Lafayette Building?"

Of course it does. It's equally true of spending that money being spent on demolition. There's 1000 things that the money should be spend on instead of demolition. Can you acknowledge that?

If the decision is between spending $1.4 million on demolition or $1.4 million plus some additional cost for mothballing, there's no doubt that the additional cost for mothballing is a better use of the money. Demolition adds zero value to downtown. It creates more vacant property, which downtown doesn't need, and which adds zero value to the surrounding properties. Mothballing the building reduces the long-term maintenance and rehabilitation costs when the building is rehabbed. As has been noted by others, the DDAs failure to maintain its buildings has resulted in millions of additional costs for those rehabilitating those buildings. If spending an extra $500,000 saves millions in future development costs, it's money well-spent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novine

"Does the city have much better uses for the more than $1.4 million it would spend to mothball the Lafayette Building?"

Of course it does. It's equally true of spending that money being spent on demolition. There's 1000 things that the money should be spend on instead of demolition. Can you acknowledge that?

If the decision is between spending $1.4 million on demolition or $1.4 million plus some additional cost for mothballing, there's no doubt that the additional cost for mothballing is a better use of the money. Demolition adds zero value to downtown. It creates more vacant property, which downtown doesn't need, and which adds zero value to the surrounding properties. Mothballing the building reduces the long-term maintenance and rehabilitation costs when the building is rehabbed. As has been noted by others, the DDAs failure to maintain its buildings has resulted in millions of additional costs for those rehabilitating those buildings. If spending an extra $500,000 saves millions in future development costs, it's money well-spent.

---

Are you interested in buying the Belle Isle Bridge from me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kraig

Are you interested in buying the Belle Isle Bridge from me?

---

C'mon, kraig. That chestnut is so old Granpappy Detroitnerd could have used it. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kraig

Are you interested in buying the Belle Isle Bridge from me?

---

No, but if you could figure out a way to get legal title, I'm sure Matty Mouran would give you a bundle for it.

Hey Detroitnerd, you can't blame a guy for trying. If Novine believes that all it will take to repair the Lafayette Building is an additional $500,000.00, well, like they say, a fool and his money is soon parted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Novine

"Does the city have much better uses for the more than $1.4 million it would spend to mothball the Lafayette Building?"

Of course it does. It's equally true of spending that money being spent on demolition. There's 1000 things that the money should be spend on instead of demolition. Can you acknowledge that?

If the decision is between spending $1.4 million on demolition or $1.4 million plus some additional cost for mothballing, there's no doubt that the additional cost for mothballing is a better use of the money. Demolition adds zero value to downtown. It creates more vacant property, which downtown doesn't need, and which adds zero value to the surrounding properties. Mothballing the building reduces the long-term maintenance and rehabilitation costs when the building is rehabbed. As has been noted by others, the DDAs failure to maintain its buildings has resulted in millions of additional costs for those rehabilitating those buildings. If spending an extra $500,000 saves millions in future development costs, it's money well-spent.

---

The flawed presumption is that the building WILL be redeveloped. If the building is never going to be rehabbed, what value is gained by the City in spending $5 million + on having a vacant building occupying a block?

The main crux of all this rigamarole is that many here assume or believe that every single building can and should be rehabbed. That simply cannot happen. Until that reality is faced and people begin acting like adults, this debate is going to go around and around and around.

I have asked the question numerous times and no-one has had the balls to answer what programs or proects they would have the DDA discontinue in order to mothball the Lafayette.

There are limited funds and more projects and programs that can be paid for. Mothballing the Lafayette means something else has to go.

You're taking pot shots at policy makers. Put yourself in their shoes. Here's your chance to play George Jackson:

In order to source an additional $3 million to mothball you must eliminate one or more of the following:

* $1.9 million for 1515 Griswold - knowing this will result in the building stayiong as is for many more years.
* Cut light rail funding from $9 million to $6 million
* Kill the Small Business Loan Transaction for the next two years
* Eliminate Capital Park improvements.
* Eliminate half the funding for Clean Detroit for the next four years.

Go on. Do it. Pick one or two. Play George Jackson. Play DDA board.

While you are thinking about it, keep the Book Cadillac condo price cut in the back of your head. Also keep in mind that IF, by some magical market turnaround, you might be able to find a developer to make sense of the project, you will still need to put $6 - $10 million in DDA funds beyond tax credits into the project and even more of those project will go.

Light rail or Lafayette?

Which one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kraig

Hey Detroitnerd, you can't blame a guy for trying. If Novine believes that all it will take to repair the Lafayette Building is an additional $500,000.00, well, like they say, a fool and his money is soon parted.

---

Okay, you're the expert, kraig. How much WILL it cost to repair the Lafayette Building? What's the Scope of Repair?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kraig

Hey Detroitnerd, you can't blame a guy for trying. If Novine believes that all it will take to repair the Lafayette Building is an additional $500,000.00, well, like they say, a fool and his money is soon parted.

---

Actually, it's a fool and his money ARE soon parted. [[I know, I know. ;))

But I think you are in a bit of a rush to condemn those looking for new ways to do things. History is littered with instances where the "popular wisdom" or "expert opinion" on something was firm and looked unassailable. And then it was proved wrong, usually by a small, committed group of people.

I mean, c'mon. Even there you take his comments out of context and twist them a bit. He's not saying it will cost an additional $500,000 to repair it. I believe he's saying that if it requires $1.9 million to secure it, so we can preserve the building for its future use, it's money well-spent. And it very well could be.

After all, nobody has a crystal ball. But isn't it possible that things could turn around here? No person in Detroit 45 years ago could have imagined what it would look like today. Why are we so certain what the Detroit of 45 years in the future is going to look like?

I think the main point is that spending money to mothball the structure is a good gamble. Sure it costs $1.4 million to demolish, and then it's over. And, at current market rates, maybe that sounds like a good deal to you. But what will the building's value be in 10, 20, 30 years? Could be more, and most certainly, if it is mothballed, will not be less.

Here's the thing: These voices that are calling for mothballing instead of demolition represent a break from business as usual, which isn't working. Demolishing buildings is not bringing in new investment; it is wiping away history. Demolishing buildings does not make downtown more attractive; it makes it smaller. You can argue the numbers all you want, but I must say I like their vision, their spirit, and their mettle. The Same Old Stuff just isn't doing it for me. Hell, we're not even buying a bogus bridge. We're buying empty lots. :confused:

PQZ: Not to quibble. I know you have a deep affection for downtown and an intimate knowledge of Detroit, the city you loved enough to try to help. But it's not "Capital Park," it's "Capitol Park."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

I think the main point is that spending money to mothball the structure is a good gamble. Sure it costs $1.4 million to demolish, and then it's over. And, at current market rates, maybe that sounds like a good deal to you. But what will the building's value be in 10, 20, 30 years? Could be more, and most certainly, if it is mothballed, will not be less.

Here's the thing: These voices that are calling for mothballing instead of demolition represent a break from business as usual, which isn't working. Demolishing buildings is not bringing in new investment; it is wiping away history. Demolishing buildings does not make downtown more attractive; it makes it smaller. You can argue the numbers all you want, but I must say I like their vision, their spirit, and their mettle.

---

OK, so you're voting to mothball it. How do pay for it? You STILL have not made a statement of preference on what you would cut to pay for it.

Y'all keep acting like you could make better decisions. Here's you're chance to prove it.

What are you going to cut to pay for a comprehensive mothballing of the Lafayette?

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO CUT?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

You're taking pot shots at policy makers. Put yourself in their shoes. Here's your chance to play George Jackson:

In order to source an additional $3 million to mothball you must eliminate one or more of the following:

* $1.9 million for 1515 Griswold - knowing this will result in the building stayiong as is for many more years.
* Cut light rail funding from $9 million to $6 million
* Kill the Small Business Loan Transaction for the next two years
* Eliminate Capital Park improvements.
* Eliminate half the funding for Clean Detroit for the next four years.

Go on. Do it. Pick one or two. Play George Jackson. Play DDA board.

While you are thinking about it, keep the Book Cadillac condo price cut in the back of your head. Also keep in mind that IF, by some magical market turnaround, you might be able to find a developer to make sense of the project, you will still need to put $6 - $10 million in DDA funds beyond tax credits into the project and even more of those project will go.

Light rail or Lafayette?

Which one?

---

If I was playing George Jackson's role, I'd first consider Kelafanos' offer instead of jumping ahead of the gun repeatedly. If his offer is accepted and K uses the $3-4m in his bank account, the DDA saves the $1.4m allocated for demo. I mean, I still haven't heard what K's offer is? Why?

Also, is the cost only $1.4m? Once it's demo'd, I'm sure residents in the BC will be still complaining that the former site needs to be developed into a high end park because that empty space does nothing to recover their property values. What's the cost of lanscaping with flowers, fountains, benches, setting up video cameras with security guards reviewing them, etc.??? I'm sure those residents are gonna want something expensive and classy put there, not something shady looking like Capitol Park. So, you're probably gonna spend a lot more anyway trying to put something there that residents will be happy with.

I say let's wait and see what K's is offering and let it be publically known first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davewindsor

If I was playing George Jackson's role, I'd first consider Kelafanos' offer instead of jumping ahead of the gun repeatedly. If his offer is accepted and K uses the $3-4m in his bank account, the DDA saves the $1.4m allocated for demo. I mean, I still haven't heard what K's offer is? Why?

Also, is the cost only $1.4m? Once it's demo'd, I'm sure residents in the BC will be still complaining that the former site needs to be developed into a high end park because that empty space does nothing to recover their property values. What's the cost of lanscaping with flowers, fountains, benches, setting up video cameras with security guards reviewing them, etc.??? I'm sure those residents are gonna want something expensive and classy put there, not something shady looking like Capitol Park. So, you're probably gonna spend a lot more anyway trying to put something there that residents will be happy with.

I say let's wait and see what K's is offering and let it be publically known first.

---

OK, so you are calling a time out to decide whether to punt or go for it. Hope the wind dies down or something.

In order to get even a temproary certificate of occupancy for the building, it will need to be watertight, have health endangeroing and hazardous materials removed and will need to have code complaint water, sanitary, heating, electical and fire supproession systems. That is going to clock in closer to $13 million to $14 million than it will to $3 million to $4 million. One the face of it, the Keffilanos proposal isn't worth the paper its written on.

When he can't come up with then money, what then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

OK, so you're voting to mothball it. How do pay for it? You STILL have not made a statement of preference on what you would cut to pay for it.

Y'all keep acting like you could make better decisions. Here's you're chance to prove it.

What are you going to cut to pay for a comprehensive mothballing of the Lafayette?

WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO CUT?

---

Haha. Too bad you don't work there. My first act would be to fire you. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

Haha. Too bad you don't work there. My first act would be to fire you. :p

---

Just as I thought. You don't have the stones or wherewithal to make a decision about public policy goals an a limited budget.

Next please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

OK, so you are calling a time out to decide whether to punt or go for it. Hope the wind dies down or something.

In order to get even a temproary certificate of occupancy for the building, it will need to be watertight, have health endangeroing and hazardous materials removed and will need to have code complaint water, sanitary, heating, electical and fire supproession systems. That is going to clock in closer to $13 million to $14 million than it will to $3 million to $4 million. One the face of it, the Keffilanos proposal isn't worth the paper its written on.

When he can't come up with then money, what then?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

OK, so you are calling a time out to decide whether to punt or go for it. Hope the wind dies down or something.

In order to get even a temproary certificate of occupancy for the building, it will need to be watertight, have health danger and hazardous materials removed and will need to have code water, sanitary, heating, electical and fire supproession systems. That is going to clock in closer to $13 million to $14 million than it will to $3 million to $4 million. One the face of it, the Keffilanos proposal isn't worth the paper its written on.

When he can't come up with then money, what then?

---

Does the Broderick building have code water, sanitary, heating, electrical and fire suppression systems for the whole building or just the main floor for that restaurant? Are you telling me one floor costs $13-14million? BS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davewindsor

Does the Broderick building have code water, sanitary, heating, electrical and fire suppression systems for the whole building or just the main floor for that restaurant? Are you telling me one floor costs $13-14million? BS.

---

Is the Shit Stop still open? I thought it got closed down for health and sanitary reasons.

There are also major differnces between the physical conditions of the two buildings. One has been margianlly occupied with continuous water and electrical service and does not have severe water penetration issues. The other has no water or eletrical system to speak of which will need to be restablished

Water is poring through holes in the roof of the Lafayette and its open windows left and right. The roof in the center of the V is is completely gone. If you are in the building when its raining you can watch the water through to the ground floor. Its not about redoing just one floor.

To open up the first floor, you will need to seal the building well enough to prevent rain and snow melt from shorting out the electical system. That means new roofing systems, extensive window boarding and facade repair and sealing - across the entirely of the building. You will need to open the walls and replace the entire water and sainatry systems fore the affected floor including reestablishing the water and sewer connections, at least one of which has collapsed. You will need to meet EPA requirements on removing friable asbetos from being able to circulate through the building. That includes removing all the sewage soaked junk in the basement which is amongst the worst I have seen in any building.

Pipedreams aside, its much closer to $13 million than it is to $3 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

OK, so you are calling a time out to decide whether to punt or go for it. Hope the wind dies down or something.

In order to get even a temproary certificate of occupancy for the building, it will need to be watertight, have health endangeroing and hazardous materials removed and will need to have code complaint water, sanitary, heating, electical and fire supproession systems. That is going to clock in closer to $13 million to $14 million than it will to $3 million to $4 million. One the face of it, the Keffilanos proposal isn't worth the paper its written on.

When he can't come up with then money, what then?

---

On whose report is that $13 million to $14 million based? I'd like to see what the Scope of Repair is before making a decision predicated on guesswork.

You may know your Bean Counting inside-out, PQZ, but I don't see a "PE" or "AIA" after your name, so any "professional" opinion you provide on the condition of the building isn't going to carry much weight.

It would be a crime against humanity for the city to spend a single penny on this building [[demolition or mothballing). The residents of the non-downtown areas of Detroit desperately need city services. They need more police. They need to have burnt out homes torn down. They need to have the grass cut on city owned properties. An abandoned building in downtown is irrelevant. Take care of the people.

I appreciate the passion on this thread, but it is all rather academic. Whether the Lafayette is restored or mothballed or demolished and turned into a park or a parking lot or a new building is built is inconsequential to 99% of Detroit's residents.

Take care of the people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PQZ

Just as I thought. You don't have the stones or wherewithal to make a decision about public policy goals an a limited budget.

Next please.

---

Haha. I'm just making fun of you.

For starters, we could cancel all catered meetings with police and security honchos at the DAC. Those are useless, in my opinion.

I don't like the idea of using funds to give well-connected business owners a break because they insisted on opening a high-end restaurant [[with too-salty food) to appeal to honchos from GM and city bureaucrats. We need fewer of those restaurants, and the people who run them are often there due to connections, not competence. Letting people skip on paying principal is a very tactful way of giving people free money: $190,000 here, $230,000 there, $140,000 there; a few more and you have a cool mil. As for those places that had their hearts set on pricey dreams? Maybe they should have been more realistic. I notice Cliff Bell's isn't having any problems paying.

Also, I think we could also open up the decision-making process by being more transparent. Bringing the public in on decisions and at least making attempts to be open could invite people to have trust in missions, and could raise badly needed money.

So, yeah, there's a few ideas. :D