Renderings For New Midtown Building Revealed

[motz]

I guess the consensus is that this is a "middling" design... and some folks here are comfortable with "middling"...

Yeah, everything should be another Guardian Building. or One Woodward. I mean, its not like there are pricetags to these things. Might as well dream big right?

[casscorridor]

If Wayne State is involved in a development there is usually demolition involved as well.

[Huggybear]

What would Albert Khan say?

KKKIIIIIIRRRRRKKKK!

With the exception of his innovative factories, which he developed from scratch, Kahn mainly did whatever made his projects' owners happy.

HB

[Pcm]

From this angle with The Ellington in the background, it looks like they may possibly re-introduce Selden Street into the grid between Woodward and John R; this would be an excellent choice!

Parsons is this street, not Selden, just to clarify.

The rendering is also deceiving, because it shows the gap between the Ellington [[where the current surface lot is) remains, but the corner of the new building is built to a street corner.

If the rendering is accurate, then "east" Parsons will be reintroduced a half of a block north from the existing Parsons that is west of Woodward. It appears that the new building is situated right on what would have been the original Parsons.

Does anyone see any different?

[wolverine]

When has building a building not been developer driven? I think it has a lot to do with lower expectations and a Walmart society.

Are you asking what percentage? I would say not many. But I've worked on some tenant owned office buildings with flexible budgets. They want the best design they can get

[Gistok]

Yeah, everything should be another Guardian Building. or One Woodward. I mean, its not like there are pricetags to these things. Might as well dream big right?

Providing an absurd analogy in a debate does not follow logic...

[bailey]

Providing an absurd analogy in a debate does not follow logic...

It is when it is responding to the absurdly high expectations. It would seem to the main critique of this building is that it's not a landmark building.

[rb336]

It is when it is responding to the absurdly high expectations. It would seem to the main critique of this building is that it's not a landmark building.

no, the main critique is that it is generic. No one has said it has to be a new landmark, just that more care should be taken to not over-run the city with suburban blah architecture. There is a difference

[bailey]

no, the main critique is that it is generic. No one has said it has to be a new landmark, just that more care should be taken to not over-run the city with suburban blah architecture. There is a difference

I get that it's a bit boring. But it at least has zero set back and isn't' 60% parking deck. I think that makes it a net positive... hell that is practically revolutionary design for Detroit.

[motz]

I get that it's a bit boring. But it at least has zero set back and isn't' 60% parking deck. I think that makes it a net positive... hell that is practically revolutionary design for Detroit.

Pretty much this. Its not the worst thing in the world, so for Detroit, that's pretty dang good.

Part of what seems to be lost on some people is that we are not capable of building the beautiful, elaborate buildings of yesteryear. The profit margins and money are just not there. Very very few developers, basically Gilbert at this point in time, have the ability to bankroll anything that might be called something other than suburban blah architecture. If we get something with zero set back, that isn't 60%+ parking and is either replacing an empty building or taking up empty space, I'm pretty alright with that. Once things get off the ground and the demand starts to rise, I'm sure we'll start to see more "landmark" buildings.

[Sharnelle]

Good architects make the best, most creative use of the client's investment. Others blame the budget for boring design.

[Gistok]

Very very few developers, basically Gilbert at this point in time, have the ability to bankroll anything that might be called something other than suburban blah architecture.

OK... finally we're on the same page... many folks here do have issue with architecture that can be found in just any suburb. Partly what makes the city worth visiting is getting away from the blandness of suburbia [[I know... I live in it)... so making the city virtually the same as M-59 or any other suburban office park look is more the issue here. And it doesn't require deep pockets to do at least something to get away from that...

[Gistok]

Here's an example of modern architecture... that at least has somewhat of an urban feel to it...

[rb336]

Here's an example of modern architecture... that at least has somewhat of an urban feel to it...

I think I like that

We could also get away from the strip-mall [[oh, did I offend a developer? OK, "lifestyle center") effect by judicious use of alternative cladding, like ventilated ceramic tile, granite facades, patterned and colored concretes, etc. None of these are significantly more expensive than brick veneer

[DetroitPlanner]

I get that it's a bit boring. But it at least has zero set back and isn't' 60% parking deck. I think that makes it a net positive... hell that is practically revolutionary design for Detroit.

I would take setbacks over blank walls with no street interaction any day. Motor City Casino has no setback, but it does not lead to the vitality of Grand River. It could have been built anywhere, even a farm field for as much as it contributes to the quality of street life.

Setbacks are given way too much respect in this forum. Without setbacks much of Chicago's loop area would be boring and sterile with little place to get out and see the sun. Setbacks can be a way to bring placemaking to an area void of it. I'll take Daley Plaza or Rockefeller Center any day over a mass with no street interaction. http://www.pps.org/store/books/the-s...-urban-spaces/

[Sharnelle]

Here's an example of modern architecture... that at least has somewhat of an urban feel to it...

Thanks for this example which I think is what we are talking about. Add some textured and/or industrial materials used in an updated, creative way that might say you're in Detroit and I'm there!!

Let us keep in mind that public expectations for investments in design rise and fall over time. Sixty years ago people expected and bought auto design and technology that was fabulous. Then expectations for aesthetics and technical quality dropped globally until people expected crappy econoboxes. Over the past decade or so, worldwide expectations for what each auto dollar will buy has risen due to competition and a more knowledgable, discerning public.


Expectations for investments in architecture by developers are currently low, but they do not have to stay that way. While not every building should aim to be a "landmark" or "iconic" let's not assume average developers must build Plymouth Caravelles.

[motz]

Expectations for investments in architecture by developers are currently low, but they do not have to stay that way. While not every building should aim to be a "landmark" or "iconic" let's not assume average developers must build Plymouth Caravelles.

I think we're slowly getting on the same page here. The example posted by Gistok is an example of what I would personally like to see. Set-backs can be used very well to accent a building and, as mentioned, allow for some type of place making, but are far too often used to valet driveways or whatnot. I'd love to see more buildings like the one posted above, but I also recognize that we're a little ways from the capital being invested to bring such structures to our city.

Also Motor City Casino is a neat casino, but everything else about the building is just uggghhh. It just feels like Illitch crapped a casino out on a random part of Grand River that was kind of by his other properties a little bit I guess.