Printable View
The Financial District has been put on the National Register of Historic Places. Check out the Detroit News article below for some info on how it could boost the district.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...ncial-District
Also, check out this map in the article with all the buildings in the district. I'm going to have to photograph them all sometime.
Great News. This will also help make it more affordable for businesses in general to relocate to the CBD, with lower rehab costs for the owners, the savings can be passed on to tenants in the form of lower rent, and actually help to lure business downtown... Don't underestimate the magnitude of this... this could be huge for downtown.
And if the Free Press Building comes online! That will make Washington Blvd that much more attractive.
I'd love to see the Free Press building go online, BUT I'd much rather see Detroit occupancy rates get higher for the existing/in use structures first.
Don't under estimate the power of historic preservation!
While I too would like to see the Free Press become re-occupied, I think focusing on buildings that are already occupied yet have low occupancy should be first priority. That being said, however, If some ground floor retail were opened in the Free Press building, while the upper floors were mothballed correctly, that would help enliven that little stretch of Washington Blvd. and Lafayette.
I also see that the Vinton Bldg. on Woodward has been included. Anyone know the latest on this historic structure of lower Woodward? I walked by a few months ago but wasn't really paying much attention. It seems like its position on the busy corner of Woodward and Congress would make it a good place for ground floor retail, even if it takes longer to get something going on the upper floors.
Regardless, a great effort has been put in here to individually document each and every one of these important historic structures.
I agree.
I thought it said that the developer wanted to make the Free Press Building residential units. Yet having just the ground floor occupied is just as good for the time being.
It's seemingly little things like this that can mean the most down the road. It's not a sexy issue, but its an essential building block for historic downtowns all across the country. Kudos to the business owner that started this process and brought it to the state's historic preservation office attention getting the ball rolling on designating the ENTIRE district historic.
Getting the designation opens the door for such restoration projects because of historic tax credits. And you can't have ground floor retail without window and roof repair, new plumbing and electrical, etc., run throughout the building first.Quote:
Originally Posted by French777
I am with Rocko and Detroit500... we need to see the buildings that are currently there become occupied first and foremost, but this will help... so many of those are in need of work... I have heard the Penobscot mentioned as well as a couple of others, so if those can get the needed work done on them, at a considerably lower price than before, it will make it easier for the owners to fill them up, being able to offer rent at rates competitive with the suburbs.
I'm wondering why they stopped with just the Financial District. Why not the rest of downtown? Why not the whole city, for that matter? Let's make it easy: any building older than 60 or 70 years old gets "historical" status and is eligible for any credits, funding, etc.
Agree 100%. But this is a stepping stone to eventual progress in the area. Great work by the person to get this area designated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroit500
Rebecca Binno Savage is her name and saving schitt is her game.Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeg19
Because not everything older than 60 years is necessarily historic. Do you want to challenge preservation laws every time you want to knock down a crackhouse that just happens to have been built in 1920?Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit
I'm pretty sure his comment was tongue in cheek.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gsgeorge
When has Retroit ever said something positive about Detroit proper? :rolleyes:
So, none of the buildings in the Financial District can ever be torn down? Does the historic designation prevent demolition if warranted, or is it more for tax and funding opportunities?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gsgeorge
[[And, no, I'm not being tongue-and-cheek, just trying to learn. Sorry, I wasn't born with a degree in Historic Preservation Bylaws.)
Nothing stops demolition. The owner would have to get approval from the Historic District Commission. If the demo money is federal, a "Section 106 Review" is necessary. Skipping this step could cost future federal dollars.
Historic preservation is very positive overall, but it does come with limitations and restrictions. Even things such as the materials, colors, and appearances of building materials used in exterior renovations are controlled. Some funding is made available for saving old buildings and yes it becomes much more difficult to demolish buildings that are designated historic, although to my knowledge it can be done.
The bloggers that have said this is not to be under estimated are correct, this designation has potential for Downtown but it is not a guarantee that private money will appear to save the buildings that need to be rescued. It is a definite glimmer of hope for Downtown though.
While a pain [[I had a limited selection of colors I could choose from when I painted my house, which is in a historic neighborhood), it also prevents things like the Film Exchange Building from being painted a horrific, eye-searing white.Quote:
Originally Posted by kryptonite
Well, it prevents those things from happening in theory, but that level of control is held at the local level with the city's Historic District Commission. Ask anyone who lives in a historic district in Detroit and they'll tell you that just about anything goes and/or gets approved. The HDC really exists to facilitate tax credits and not much else. They effectively have 0 enforcement powers/abilities in Detroit. Other communities are very diligent with their HDC's
If I'm wrong, I'm sure that one of the DYes historic preservation people will correct me, but I think that the Financial District does NOT have any kind of local historic designation except for maybe a couple of individual buildings. Instead, the recently publicized designation is a federal designation. Contrary to what some folks have stated, the Historic District Commission does not have authority or jurisdiction over any work or renovations in a historic district that only has a federal National Register designation.
The federal designation does not prevent an owner from doing anything to his/her/its building [[including demolition) as long federal funds are not being used and/or historic rehabilitation tax credits are not involved. In that case, the State Historic Preservation Office and the National Park Service get involved with oversight and approvals. But right now, if the current owner wants to paint the Penobscot building pink, they can get started tomorrow.
The National Register listing is a good thing that has created the potential for the availability of tax credit financing for owners interested in making capital improvements. The designation has made every building in the district more valuable. The Lafayette Building's potential restoration would have benefited from inclusion in the National Register designation but the DEGC had too many demolition dollars burning a hole in its pocket to exercise the patience to wait on the market recovery.