Hudson's Site Building Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason

I think there's a lot of people who would like to live downtown and that 250 of them have money. It has the potential to be the only true luxury residential building downtown.

imo the residential units at the Book Cadillac aren't actually very nice. It's like they were an afterthought. A lot of spaces that don't make much sense, a lot of bad detailing, and a lot of thoughtlessness and cheapness, with a few really expensive looking features added in. Like a McMansion or something. It's shocking to me that they were asking so much money for such mediocre units. Unless they were counting on the condo owners to renovate.

---

To caveat on this... Many of the "high end" housing buildings downtown are repurposed buildings. Book Cadillac, Broderick Tower, Lofts at Merchants Row, etc. Although these are historic buildings, and valuable redevelopments right in the downtown core, there is something to be said for "high end" housing built with the specific purpose of housing a family. While the converted properties are absolutely awesome to have there are no constraints to this new construction. Everything can be designed and built with purpose. That is not a shot against the repurposed buildings, just a reality of new construction without boundaries and limitations.

With Roasting Plant and Desert Oasis within walking distance of the Starbucks in the EY Building why would anyone go to Starbucks... Just really excited about all the great coffee options in Detroit [[Ashe, Great Lakes, Anthology, Germack, and others)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetBill

Mike, I dont know if you just hit a quiet day but wouldnt be too worried about DIA attendance. Im there often and its generally very well attended. A friend in management there said its drawing very well this and the last couple of years. Friday nights also are a huge success.

---

It was really cold out that Sunday, sunny, but chilling... would have thought it would have been busier, I am there often, and it was slower than usual... but for the most part, the DIA is always empty in comparison to other big city Art museums I have been to. In fact all of the museums [[save for Henry Ford) are usually relatively empty in Detroit.

Southen, dtwoncitylover, emusteve, jason, detroitsoldier: I agree. Detroit needs and can absorb the additional class A office and retail space. And new purpose built high end residences would provide something to Detroit's resurgence it still lacks. They make sense here. My concern is that 250 of them all coming online at the same time, and on the same block, is a bad plan for Detroit. A much better plan would be for more organic growth that doesn't shock the market. 75 high end apartments here, then another 50, another 25, 50 more, 20, then 30 — so long as the market can bear them. And this is crucial: not all in the same place. 250 all at once will flood the market. 250 all in the same place will stunt resurgence in other parts downtown. Any other developers considering investing in high end residential will shelve those plans. It might make sense to Gilbert to corner the market, but there remains way too much empty or underutilized space downtown for stacking so many high end apartments on top of each other to make any sense for Detroit. It would be much better for Detroit to literally spread the wealth, more gradually. There is so much wonderful historic architecture left to repurpose. So many parking lots to fill. Let's not kill the incentive to invest in them. Besides, Gilbert has done a lot of great for Detroit but let's not forget it would of course be much healthier if Detroit's real estate market were not so concentrated under one person's control. Competition is essential for healthy capitalism.

That said I think what Detroit needs more than anything is to nurture a healthy middle class. And a successful creative class. The wealthy tend to be transients. And much less community-oriented. I'm much more excited about Gilbert's plans for City Modern in Brush Park because I think what Detroit needs is to invest in thriving communities for regular people.

And remember, 250 at Hudson's site and how many potentially at the 'fail jail' site?

Will those be fairly pricey, as well? So around 2020, two big residential buildings coming on line?

Yes, I think it would be too much competition for smaller projects.

I think the Hudson's site will be a great winner but might take a lot of oxygen out of the high end rental market.

The fail jail site could do similar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

And remember, 250 at Hudson's site and how many potentially at the 'fail jail' site?

Will those be fairly pricey, as well? So around 2020, two big residential buildings coming on line?

Yes, I think it would be too much competition for smaller projects.

I think the Hudson's site will be a great winner but might take a lot of oxygen out of the high end rental market.

The fail jail site could do similar.

---

Feels odd to be more optimistic than emu steve but I disagree. Barring, of course, a larger economic meltdown, I don't see this doing damage to other developments. There's not exactly an excess of modern, purpose-built, first class high-rise residences in Detroit. I'm willing to believe there are 250 people in a region of 4.3 million who don't care to live in a renovated older building or weird garage-top condo complex but would love to live in a flashy, new, tallest-in-the-city tower right on top of Woodward.

This is something for a different post somewhere, but ultimately it goes to what you think the long-term future of Detroit is. We've seen plenty of articles on the bifurcation between struggling smaller towns in the US and booming big cities that increasingly concentrate companies, people, small businesses, education, and the arts. Is Detroit the biggest example of a failing small town, or a latecomer to the economic magnet game? I hope it's the latter. Dan Gilbert is trying to drag it there. He's betting that this makes downtown more attractive to further development rather than soaking up the remainder of a permanently small market. If you think this is the crest of the market and it prevents further growth, then maybe you think we're sort of in graph A. But I guarantee you Gilbert thinks we're in graph B.

Attachment 32849

I completely disagree with the idea that this could flood the market. We are living in a different time than when the Renaissance Center was built. The RenCen was built during a time that offices were flooding out of cities across America. The Class A office space of the RenCen took away tenants for lower quality buildings because at that point it was a race to Class A office space. Right now, Detroit has a shortage of office space. That market is not going to be flooded any time soon.

In terms of residential, I believe strongly like most other city planners, that synergy is a real thing. If the national housing market is growing, and a neighborhood gains more improvements and amenities, the demand will ultimately grow. With retail and office being such a large piece of the Lower Woodward redevelopment "puzzle", we are gaining more possible users through this new development, and in turn, more demand. This is happening in Midtown Atlanta right now. There was a slight lull in the market and it took some time for the market to pick back up after the recession, but once a synergy began from a couple of new developments, new proposals began to flood into the marketplace. Now there are at least ten cranes in the air building high-rises for apartments. Once these are all built, and if these new residents do not depend solely on the single-occupancy vehicle, then we will continue to see more cranes rising into the sky.

Don't forget they will be able to sell those 250 spots during the construction of the building, so the sales will get stretched out. I just hope they go to full time residents, rather than to folks looking for a Detroit pied-a-terre. Selling these to rich ex-Detroiters would be tempting, but full time residents would contribute to the vibrancy downtown.

Why not higher such as 1000 feet where the observation deck could be at the top? Why does Detroit has a height limitation if no more the 700 and a few feet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikehamm45

With Roasting Plant and Desert Oasis within walking distance of the Starbucks in the EY Building why would anyone go to Starbucks... Just really excited about all the great coffee options in Detroit [[Ashe, Great Lakes, Anthology, Germack, and others)

---

Don't forget the up and coming Avalon Bakery cafe on Woodward when they finally be allowed to open

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeg19

8ft? Really man? lol Couldn't hit at least like the 800ft plateau? Either way, bout time we say this.

---

Is there a height limitation in Detroit?

I'm not the least bit worried whether downtown can absorb the office and retail space. It needs it. And no one suggested the demand for downtown residential is about to crest. My questions are whether it's important this building be taller than the Ren Cen. Whether it even makes sense for the market. And for the city. And whether it's wise to offer giant tax credits to make it happen.

The so called "Michigan Thrive Initiative" [[ridiculous name) would allow Gilbert to capture up to $40 million in taxes per year that would otherwise pay for government services, ostensibly to reimburse him for expenses he incurred for cleaning up a brownfield. No more than 5 developments in the entire State would be able to qualify for this program per year.

I fully support tax credits for cleaning up hazards and pollutants, especially in higher density areas where they affect the most people and prevent developments that could otherwise be successful. But the Hudson's block is not by any reasonable definition a brownfield. It's a far cry from the Uniroyal site or Zug Island. I don't support misapplying the term brownfield there just so a developer will build illogically tall.

Gilbert says he'll reduce the scale of the project without the $40 million in taxes he hopes to capture annually. That means he doesn't believe the market can support so many high end residences and it doesn't make sense for him without such a generous subsidy.

What are other developers to think? Especially after Gilbert builds 250 units in the best location? Not only will they be facing a market that just got flooded they'll be doing so without Gilbert's $40 million annual subsidy. Won't it give them pause?

If more modest tax credits result in 125 or 150 high end residences instead of 250 that's probably best — for all the reasons I outlined above. It's not important at all that this building is taller than the Ren Cen. It can be a great success without that. But it is important to encourage other developers to invest in Detroit and bring more properties online besides this one.

Detroit has way too much unused and underutilized real estate. We should not encourage any one developer to build taller than the market could otherwise bear.

I love the plans for offices, retail, residences, and a public atrium that were just revealed. Something like that will be great for the city and probably great for the developer. But height competitions are juvenile. A 30 story development will solve the problem of the Hudson's block just as well. And it will leave more oxygen in the market for other developments to occur.

We'd be better off saving some tax breaks for the many other locations that need them to better encourage Detroit's resurgence to spread. Or to clean up actual pollution. Or to pay for the government services we need.

Michigan Senate Passes Bill to Facilitate Brownfield Cleanups
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...field-cleanups

EPA site on Brownfields
https://www.epa.gov/brownfields

Yeah but the apartments are the part that make money in the development. The multiple floors of civic and atrium uses don't, and there's not really that much office space. I'd like to know what would actually be scaled back.

I don't disagree about the height. Getting a new tallest would be fun, but the tallest building in Detroit isn't exactly considered a tall building nowadays.

I'm struggling to see how 250 units would "flood the market". That's less units than Millender, Detroit City Apartments, or any one of the three Riverfront Towers. It would be roughly the same as the Park Shelton.

Just FYI in light of the recent posts...

Could Detroit soon have too many new apartments?


http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...tate/97640058/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bust

I'm not the least bit worried whether downtown can absorb the office and retail space. It needs it. And no one suggested the demand for downtown residential is about to crest. My questions are whether it's important this building be taller than the Ren Cen. Whether it even makes sense for the market. And for the city. And whether it's wise to offer giant tax credits to make it happen.
...

---

I think it's important to Dan Gilbert that he build the tallest building in the city.

A Interesting thing about people selling fear, it can be very telling of what is actually the thought process inside someone's head.

Fear of overbuilding 250 luxury new apartments? Get real, Gilbert's ideas on where he wants to go in this town are a hell of a lot bigger than that plus he isn't interested in taking an entire generation to get there. Too much coming on line at once is a short term manageable problem. Not having the inventory at all is a much longer term issue.

Edit:

I quoted my wrong post... But I initially posted about the unfinished back corner of the building. I thinking finishing it would compliment the side of the building that faced the Hudson site, making it more visually appealing and complete.
Well this certainly answered my question above...

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...-to-one-campus

RIP murals :[[

So the question is what load does the back of One Woodward support? Is it just filling in the wedge to match or can they add something more substantial? That would be an interesting design. Although it would suck to currently have a window office on that side with a nice view of the Hudson's site and have it filled in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeg19

So the question is what load does the back of One Woodward support? Is it just filling in the wedge to match or can they add something more substantial? That would be an interesting design. Although it would suck to currently have a window office on that side with a nice view of the Hudson's site and have it filled in.

---

You mean "One Campus Martius".

I'm not sure how much load it supports. However, I can tell you that the existing building has two elevator banks, each containing 8 elevators and 2 empty shafts. The story I heard was that the four empty shafts were there in case the building was ever expanded. The expansion could utilizing the existing elevator shafts.

The murals are painted on the backside of the elevator shafts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Junjie

Well, there are a couple differences. This is TIF, meaning the developer is taking some of the new tax returns generated by the project. In other words, and I'm open to being corrected, it's not possible for the project to reduce public tax receipts relative to today.

Further, I personally would much rather see us subsidizing urban buildings with people living in them than stadiums. Every person renting here will generate trips to CVS, lunches and dinners, purchases at retailers, rides on transit, and just add to the general presence of people downtown that makes the entire area more attractive to other new businesses and residents. You also add a building to a currently empty block, rather than blowing up existing building to build something that is empty the vast majority of the year and with massive parking requirements that results in further dead garages, lots, etc. Every dollar spent on this project is getting a much bigger return than the dollars spent on the stadiums.

Overall, yeah, I wish Gilbert could just build this without any incentives and allow the entire increase in tax revenue to go the city and state. My estimation of him isn't quite as high as previously. But if the city/state gives him half of the marginal increase in tax receipts for 20 years [[while still keeping the other half)... I can live with it for a project like this.

---

This response makes economic sense.

I seem to recall reading when One Campus Martius was constructed that the plan was to add on to the back when demand called for it, so I believe this expansion plan was accommodated for in the original design.

^Yep, you can see the beams on top of the section they'd expand upwards.

Walking down Woodward, I saw they painted half the I-beams sticking out of the site orange on the northern side of the site. Looked like they were also painting lines on the actual street level surface of the site. No idea why