Lafayette Building's top two floors subsiding?

[Detroitnerd]

You're under the assumption that hanging on to the Lafayette Building when there are not any prospects for the building is a new way of doing things. It's not, that's the old way. Ford Auditorium. 20 years. Nothing.

I don't know the story of the Ford Auditorium. I heard the acoustics were terrible.

[Novine]

Sorry PQZ that not all of us have as much free time as you apparently do to play "bombard the forums" today. I only have a second to address two points:

"The $1.4 million for demo is coming from outside the DDAs usual funding from what I understand and is therefore not taking away from its usual revenue streams."

I asked you before and I'll ask it again. Document the claim. I've seen nothing that shows that this demo. is coming from anything other than DDA dollars. There is no "demo fund" within the DDA budget that's for demolition exclusively. The state dollars that I think you're talking about were exhausted on the Ilitch demolitions. Where were you then to complain about demolition dollars being spent to benefit a very rich man? Busy collecting a paycheck from him or the DDA?

Next.

Your demands to ask what to be cut. Give us the numbers. I have no problem reviewing the DDA budget and taking a whack at what's worthwhile and what's not. Where are the numbers? I found the old DDA budget digging through Council committee documents on the CoD's web site. You can't even find a list of the DDA members much less the budget on the CoD web site. As you appear to have an in at the DDA or at least know who signs your checks, see if they can share with you the DDA budget and projections of revenues for the tax authority. Then post the numbers or links to the documents. Before you keep shouting down the rest of us with your insults, give us a chance to look at the numbers.

[PQZ]

I asked you before and I'll ask it again. Document the claim. I've seen nothing that shows that this demo. is coming from anything other than DDA dollars. There is no "demo fund" within the DDA budget that's for demolition exclusively.

And as I detailed earlier, it is my understanding that the $1.4 million is cominmg from the $8 million demo fund that is out of state funds. I amy not be exaclty coorect on that but it is my understanding.

Your demands to ask what to be cut. Give us the numbers. I have no problem reviewing the DDA budget and taking a whack at what's worthwhile and what's not. Where are the numbers? I found the old DDA budget digging through Council committee documents on the CoD's web site. You can't even find a list of the DDA members much less the budget on the CoD web site. As you appear to have an in at the DDA or at least know who signs your checks, see if they can share with you the DDA budget and projections of revenues for the tax authority. Then post the numbers or links to the documents.

I don't even live in the State of Michigan, and I certainly don't have direct access to the DDA budget but I did post a listing of DDA projects takend from public newspaper sources that are all from the FY 2010 budget.

I have simply asked which of the announced DDA projects / funding centers anyone would cut to pay for the mothballing of the Lafayette.

Not a single person here has even been able do that simple exercise...all have wandered off into theoreticals.

I'll repost here:

* $1.9 million for 1515 Griswold - knowing this will result in the building staying 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.
No need to spend hours reading the budget - just play around with what is published - what would you trade in order to get a mothballed Lafayette?

[kraig]

I don't know the story of the Ford Auditorium. I heard the acoustics were terrible.

Then I suggest you not try to give history lessons if you don't know the history that you're speaking of.

[Detroitnerd]

kraig, we're not talking about the Ford Auditorium. You are. And if you have something to say, say it, so that way everybody can pile on you if you try to bullshit us.

[kraig]

kraig, we're not talking about the Ford Auditorium. You are. And if you have something to say, say it, so that way everybody can pile on you if you try to bullshit us.

"but I do enjoy getting a sense of people's personalities in here."

You're telling on yourself nerd. It's not so easy to just hide behind corny jokes. But, I'm quite sure that people tell you that all the time.

Anyway, Ford Auditorium was in the same situation that the Lafayette Building is in today. The differences being that Comerica was looking to develop the site into its headquarters and the then Detroit City Council voting to save Ford Auditorium. 20 years later it's still sitting there vacant without prospects and costing the city money.

[Detroitnerd]

"but I do enjoy getting a sense of people's personalities in here."

You're telling on yourself nerd. It's not so easy to just hide behind corny jokes. But, I'm quite sure that people tell you that all the time.

I'm sorry, kraig. I don't understand the thrust of this new insult. You'll have to explain it to me.

Anyway, Ford Auditorium was in the same situation that the Lafayette Building is in today. The differences being that Comerica was looking to develop the site into its headquarters and the then Detroit City Council voting to save Ford Auditorium. 20 years later it's still sitting there vacant without prospects and costing the city money.

Sounds like it doesn't have any prospects. It's not exactly an architectural prize, is it? And if the acoustics in there are as bad as they say, it would probably be too much work to improve them. Then again, developing a corporate headquarters on the recreation-oriented riverfront would have been a bad idea. And, with Comerica largely in Texas, we'd probably have another largely empty hulk if they had razed and developed it. Maybe all that stalling was for the best in the end.

[kraig]

I'm sorry, kraig. I don't understand the thrust of this new insult. You'll have to explain it to me.



Sounds like it doesn't have any prospects. It's not exactly an architectural prize, is it? And if the acoustics in there are as bad as they say, it would probably be too much work to improve them. Then again, developing a corporate headquarters on the recreation-oriented riverfront would have been a bad idea. And, with Comerica largely in Texas, we'd probably have another largely empty hulk if they had razed and developed it. Maybe all that stalling was for the best in the end.

Or maybe if we had demonstrated to one of our largest corporate citizens that its needs outweighed the need to keep an abandoned building and let that corporation build where it wanted. That corporation would have made a bigger investment into its corporate headquarters. Possibly, a large enough investment that it wouldn't have moved. But hey, we still have Ford Auditorium, just sitting there.

[Detroitnerd]

Or maybe if we had demonstrated to one of our largest corporate citizens that its needs outweighed the need to keep an abandoned building and let that corporation build where it wanted. That corporation would have made a bigger investment into its corporate headquarters. Possibly, a large enough investment that it wouldn't have moved. But hey, we still have Ford Auditorium, just sitting there.

So you're saying that if the auditorium had been razed [[who would have paid for this?) and the city had OK'd Comerica's plan to build a headquarters on the riverfront, it would have stayed? There are a few problems with the scenario, though:

1) There's no way to say that smoothing the way for Comerica would have kept it here. In fact, I've seen some studies that show that no matter how well a municipality treats a company [[over and above the baseline of providing services, etc.), they'll still leave if they feel it's more profitable to be somewhere else. We can call corporations "corporate citizens" all we want, but they're self-interested, publicly unaccountable and don't necessarily have any long-term committment based on sweetheart deals.

2) In general, we in Detroit have done everything we could for our companies here. Want to get rid of this green space for a factory? Go for it. Want us to reroute transit? Done. Want to build out over the street or have us wipe away the old street grid? Done. Want tax abatement? Done. Well, what has that gotten us? I'm not saying I'm a fan of some of the emotional, stubborn, divisive antics on City Council [[please don't lump me in with them), but that sort of cozy do-anything-for-you attitude toward our companies has allowed them to be lazy, sluggish, defiant, destructive and, ultimately, to leave when they're done.

3) If we'd had a big corporate campus on the riverfront, that would certainly have been in the way of the Detroit Riverwalk. It's 20 years later, and one sensible move has been to free up our shoreline for pleasure-seekers. In that sense, I guess I'm kind of glad that there's not a huge presence there to be an obstacle to the new plan.

Anyway, to return to whether the Ford should have been demo'd, it's obvious that not every building will have a place in the future, but it's a lot easier to repurpose an office tower than it is to repurpose an auditorium.