http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...d-hudsons-site
I hope something awesome gets built in this site.
I'm hoping for a life size mural of the proposal so we can see if we like it before giving the go ahead.
I don't think they could build anything there that wouldn't be an improvement over what's there now.
That said, anything that brings a large number of people downtown to work or live is great with me. All the more if the build really adds to the the streetscape and/or skyline.
If you can't see the whole article... Google "Crain's Detroit Gilbert locks up Hudson's block".
Before "we" give it the go ahead?? Who said, or what makes you think, that you or "we" have any say in the design of the building?
This development will not be based on an internet poll. It will be based on sound business principles and whatever the developer feels will generate the highest return on investment.
Rough day at work Sy?
I believe don's comment was intended as a humorous reference to Gilbert's penchant for large murals and nothing more.
The good thing about this monstrosity not being built on the Hudsons block is that it will be very expensive to build such "cutting edge" design in a historic downtown. Especially with the value of property downtown... that and sticking out like a sore thumb. :eek:
Having retail up to the curb would help the entire lower Woodward district. Having dead zones like this in between does nothing to promote a retail district [[sure are a lot of people in this rendering).... I remember renderings like this back in the 1970s that showed how all those red monkey bars and a trolley on Washington Blvd. showed a lot of foot traffic [[that never actually showed up). :[[
I think 401don just wants a popular survey on the quality of a new design. He is clever enough to know that we won't make à difference in the décision making. Sound business practices are paths paved with good intentions and you know.where that often leads us. Don't try to shut him up. That would be undemocratic and indelicate.
I know I'm probably in the minority here... but I would love to see 1st floor retail with residential above in a historic pastiche sort of way like this facing Woodward. It would match the rest of street... but just be a more post modern version. Behind this facade they could do what they want in a modern way facing towards Farmer St. But at least with a nice matching streetwall the Woodward side won't look like Godzilla came by and tore the front part off the building.... :p
These images are stitched together from images of new construction in NYC in the last 3 years... these won't be to the liking of the "cutting edge crowd".... ;)
I'm expecting some significant differences between what we saw in those earlier [[leaked?) renderings and what the final product might look like.
The fact that we know it has a significant residential component also means I'm not too concerned about this being a dead block. At worst, there will be people coming and going throughout the day. Let's wait and see.
I hope the final building does not look like the one in the rendering. That building is hideous. Is it meant to extend over Gratiot? Looks like it's going right up against the Compuware Building. Also, don't most people in a building want to be able to see out of it? That Woodward facade, with its upward slope, appears to lack windows. Also, there appears to be a purposely placed hole in the roof. I agree with Gistok that the building in the rendering has no place in a traditional downtown setting
If you're expecting traditional in any way, you're probably going to hate whatever goes up there. DG is swinging for the fences. He's not going to create something that looks like everything else down there. He's going more Guggenheim museum than David Whitney it would seem.
the city spent $12 million to demolish hudsons and $28M to construct the garage - total investment $40M. wonder how much revenue the city has from parking fees thus far? the city is still $25M in the red and loses all future parking revenue with this deal. how are tax payers not getting screwed?
Crain's is now saying the plan is to build a "high-rise," perhaps 20 stories or more...
Here's hoping its either a) exactly as tall as Hudson's or b) 1 story more than the ren cen.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20160426/NEWS/160429865/gilbert-plans-high-rise-on-old-hudsons-site-in-downtown-detroit
if i'm financing this thru my taxes i want a say in their designer pick. since zaha has deceased RIP...i vote for Bjarke Ingles...NOT SHOP!
im mean his website is big.dk
his ego almost matches DG's!
http://www.big.dk/
http://time.com/4301248/bjarke-ingels-2016-time-100/
Also when will the last few paragraphs of any article about this stop being about the history of Hudson's? Seriously, let's move on!
Maybe the discounted price takes into account the fact that repairs have to be made to prevent flooding on the lowest level. Also consider the revenue the city will capture from at least three different uses the finished product will have [[retail, residential, and possibly office) and the value added to downtown from an architectural showpiece. The site has sat empty for nearly two decades, you don't want to chase away the only viable developer by bitching that he's not paying enough for the property.
They're going to lose the parking revenue, but here's what they gain:
- Property Tax revenue from the building
- New Income Tax revenue from the people who work there
- Increased Development desirability for all of the downtown, which will bring
- More property and income tax revenue as per above
- As downtown continues to price people out, more people looking at outskirts of greater downtown...more property and income tax revenue, etc.
The importance of anchor tenants cannot be understated. I don't mind the anchor tenant getting a sweetheart deal if it means that we can fill up the remaining vacancies. This is a prime example of that.
Full details at 3:00 today:
http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...bert/83585792/
We may not see renderings today, but what are the chances we hear details? As in, an office tenet for the 250,000 sq feet? [[which would be between 1,000 - 1,500 people). I assume there will be street level retail, but that will not make up the entirety of the commercial square feet.
I don't know but check it: If Somerset wants a space downtown why not eventually move into this new project? Ask for 100,000-125,000 square feet of a retail space in the building and be the anchor to downtown retail as their own department store "Somerset & Co". All a dream, of course.
http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...bert/83585792/
Says on Freep full details of plan to be revealed. So we might at least here specs, I highly doubt any renderings though. Will need to keep an eye out this afternoon.
Note that they are now talking about a high rise [[~20 stories, though if I remember correctly there's a hard cap on what the underlying parking garage can support around 18 or so). Meanwhile all of our year-old renderings show a squat box about six stories tall. I wouldn't be surprised if everything we have seen was basically a single phase of concept work for the lower floors. You know Gilbert wants to make a huge splash when he finally shows the visuals.
It's time to add some glass to the skyline. :)
This may sound crazy, but rumors abound that he wants to do a high-rise of 70 stories...taller than the Ren Cen. Obviously this would require a major rework of the parking garage.
This sort of says it all from the Freep article about "innovative designs".....
---
"At the Barclays Center arena in Brooklyn, those reddish exterior panels have dripped wet rusty drops onto the walkways below. Iron workers have had to replace hundreds of bolts anchoring the panels to the structure when engineers found they were weaker than needed.But such issues might be expected when architects push against the limits of accepted technology and practice. Even Frank Lloyd Wright drew complaints now and then about leaky roofs in his buildings."
----
The Disney Center for the Arts in Los Angeles [[a Gehry design) had to redo the shiny finish on that venue because the highly reflective surfaces on the building were causing the sun to heat up nearby buildings with the reflective sunshine... and caused skyrocketing heating bills for Disney's neighbors... that had to be fixed.
Yes Frank Lloyd Wrights houses had many "innovative" problems such as leaky roofs and lack of closet space... and heaven forbid if you were much over 6 ft. tall.
Mies van der Rohe's innovative Farsnworth House in the boonies of Illinois... was found to be almost unlivable.
Utzon's Sydney Opera House is not usable for grand opera [[only the smaller shows). It's acoustics are so-so, and it's not even in the top 20 opera houses list for best venue to perform in. And the costs to replace the tile roof and other problems runs into the hundreds of millions of dollars.
A lot of "innovative architecture" = "maintenance nightmare". :[[
If that were announced, I may literally shat myself.
I highly doubt it would be that tall, but I'm really hoping for more than 20.
It wouldn't surprise me if he guts the garage, even if it can support 20 stories, he may not like the column placement or other constraints the existing structure has.
If DG wants a 70 story building, I'd much rather see that erected elsewhere. Put it on the Monroe Block or on Grand Circus Park with a cluster of skyscrapers. It's tough to picture anything in that spot over 25-30 stories.
So we now have the potential of another $500 million - $1 billion play announced today. If that happens...
Eesh. It'd be fun to drool over, and who am I to tell Dan Gilbert he can't make something a success, but honestly I'd rather have 15 stories on the Hudson site, 35 on the Monroe block and 20 on the Statler site [[or whatever). Spread it around to fill in downtown. I'd worry that 70 stories would suck a lot of the oxygen out of the room as far as demand for additional renovations and infill.
I support 80+ story buildings on the Hudson's site, the Monroe Block, and on other key sites around downtown.
There is nothing wrong with a tall development there as long as it interacts with the street well. Empire State Bldg. is surrounded by 5-20 story buildings but you have to look up to notice anything unusual.
The most important thing is a well executed, well constructed development ASAP, and an end to the unsettling, gaping hole downtown.
Has there been any word from the DDA meeting this afternoon? Did anyone go that has updates?
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...r-hudsons-site
No new information really besides the 700 additional parking spaces number and the 24 retail spots.
I think 18 stories is more than enough. I would much rather see other holes filled in than one building sucking up all the demand.
Not necessarily it all depends on how you build it. Compuware and One Detroit Center are are similar in total size around one million sq ft, but very different in height. With residential you can build on much smaller floor plans. 432 Park and Central Park Tower are great examples of very tall and very narrow buildings. 432 is less than half the size of the ones in Detroit..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/432_Park_Avenue
http://therealdeal.com/issues_articl...monster-tower/
Some innovative architecture has led to maintenance nightmares, true. Add Calatrava's Valencia Opera House to the list for its tiles. Though what a marvel to behold. Opera houses are among the few types of buildings to warrant such [[design, not financial) extravagance.
http://www.dezeen.com/2014/01/02/san...-and-sciences/
However certainly not all innovative architecture has these issues. I think the freep does SHoP a bit of a disservice with its criticisms of the Barclays Center. I don't like living near it, but as stadia go I don't mind its design. The bolts were not the architects' mistake. A subcontractor didn't follow directions and used the wrong size. And while I noticed some rust stains on the sidewalks, they're cleaner and flatter than most in the vicinity. As anticipated, like a new pair of jeans stops giving color after a few washes, the issue seems to have faded over time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/ny...arly-days.html
...So at least in this case I think it's unfair to say the design has caused any maintenance nightmares. Unrelated to that, I prefer its "hunkered-down, hunchbacked, brooding sight" to the gaudy flash we'd have if it were designed by Gehry as originally planned. :)
DG quoted from the MLS announcement just prior to the DDA approval: "Downtown is out of room. Expansion will now be vertical."
I would slightly disagree with that, as there are still some surface lots and other areas [[Foxtown) that could see development on vacant parcels, but for the most part, he is right. Immediate downtown CDB is basically out of room, so either you go up or start moving out into Midtown, Corktown, New Center with new buildings.
Interesting. I interpret what he means as-- the buildings are essentially fully occupied. He's restored and put tenants in so many old buildings. Now its time for infill, and the infill should be vertical. I applaud this very much.
No doubt we have too many surface parking lots which need to go bye-bye. The goal must be to create density and an outstanding street feel as we build. I trust Gilbert and a handful of others on that. I do not trust Olympia.
IMO, projects like 432 Park are uniquely Manhattan-esque, and would be difficult to imagine as commercially viable in a city like Detroit---where land is so inexpensive & plentiful, it's basically at a surplus. "Skinny skyscrapers" like 432 are expensive to engineer/construct and can serve only one purpose: residential. The square footage on each floor is too small for more profitable mass commercial leases. Allegedly, some wealthy potential owners even passed on 432, because [[despite the view), the square footage of one floor was far too small to meet their needs.
The required pricing for each residence in order to pay for such a costly project would be a tough sell in the Detroit real estate market---actually in any market outside of a handful of US cities.
Another footnote regarding 432 Park is that it is currently the tallest building in the US. Like many other skyscrapers, One World Trade & Willis [[former Sears) "cheat" by including the spire [[non occupy-able space) in the total height of the building. Willis is 1,354 to the top floor, 432 Park is 1,396.
So is there any official word on floor count? I suppose if there is a total square footage one could use the lot size to give an estimate.
City did what it had to do to maintain the property as the owner at that point. By the time it was demolished, Hudson's was a death trap waiting to happen. My dad was DFD working at Squad 2 behind the Fox during the 90s and he said the only building that would flat out terrify him if they had to respond to a fire was Hudson's.
While imploding Hudson's was heartbreaking for those of us who both remembered the shopping experience and loved the massive, beautiful old building, it was necessary on so many levels. The city could not afford to maintain it in any form, really. It was both a physical danger as El Jimbo noted; and a gigantic, decaying, graffiti-covered, pigeon and rat infested sign of failure, abandonment and blight. Much of what has happened since downtown would have been prevented by the former Hudson's. Sadly, if the building were around today, with today's market conditions, it would have a future [[AMAZING LOFT APARTMENTS). In reality, though, today's market conditions could not have come into existence with the 28-story monument to blight in the middle of downtown. I don't know how much money has been lost on the site by the city; but nothing could have been gained had Hudson's remained.
Huh? What are you two talking about? Hudson's was in no more danger of collapse than were either the MCS or United Artists Buildings.... both of which were in abandon mode for much longer than was Hudson's. It was built to last.
The reason that firemen wouldn't want to deal with Hudson's is that each floor was about 2 acres in size, a maze of building additions, and you were often nearly 100 ft from the nearest window [[for emergency exit). At the MCS, a building in worse shape, you're never more than 30 ft. from the nearest window. So yeah firemen wouldn't want to deal with a building with such a huge footprint and labyrinth-like interior. But that had nothing to do with the buildings condition.
If Gilbert erect this ugly-looking skyscraper and now one occupies it. It would be his greatest architectural blunder in Detroit history.
I'm not understanding why the purchase of the underground parking garage was a point of contention, causing a delay in the property being turned over to Dan Gilbert. Wasn't it agreed upon over a year ago that Dan Gilbert was going to develop the Hudson's site? He was supposed to make an announcement as to what was going to be built there at the end of the year: 2015. Shouldn't the parking garage asking price been arranged and approved sooner than now? Just my two cents.
It has been my speculation, and something heard from a former SHOP architect, that they were having some serious design issues which caused the delay. I would venture a guess that Dan was still tinkering around with it and what would actually go there outside of the residential component. The garage negotiation could have acted as pretty good cover for his indecisiveness on what should go there. You don't want the public thinking that you are struggling with the design when you have pumped up how important the site is and how ground breaking the building will be.
Let't just state this: architectural beauty is subjective. That's the great part about architecture. Everyone has their own opinion about what quantifies as beauty, just as DG does. Yes, there have been some "questionable" interior design elements in his buildings that kinda make you ask what they were thinking. But I think leaving the design elements with SHoP and giving them an outline of what he envisions, we will come up with something that may not be universally loved, but much debated. However, my fear is that he is trying to inject himself too much into the design and is tinkering. Either way, we are going to end up with a landmark building that will be critiqued for years to come, good or bad.
Yes. The economics of the skinny supertall residentials only really makes sense in Manhattan. You need tremendous psf sales prices to justify the massive engineering costs and lost common/elevator space on the higher floors.
Just to illustrate, these supertall towers can justify up to 8,000-9,000 psf in sales prices. That's insanely expensive. The most prime parts of Chicago get maybe 1,000 psf. If Chicago is nowhere in the universe of where the supertall economics work out, you can see that smaller cities won't be getting such buildings anytime soon.
432 Park is about to be surpassed by two taller residential supertalls- 111 W.57 and Central Park Tower. CPT will be the tallest residential tower on earth.
Technically not a supertall, but these are the types of prices on the extreme high end of new construction- a $250 million condo at 220 Central Park South.
http://therealdeal.com/2016/05/05/22...he-sky-photos/
To compare, the best office building in Michigan, One Detroit Center, recently sold to Gilbert for around $100 million. So that's a million square foot trophy office tower for less than half the price of a Manhattan apartment.
imo the client doesn't really have much place in the direct design of the building.
The client should hire an architecture firm who does the type of work that they want to have done with design beliefs and theories and processes and values that they find agreeable. They should be cooperative and engaged in the process, and they should let the architects do their work and have some trust and faith in their expertise. If you don't trust the architect enough to trust their decisions then you've hired the wrong architect [[and at the same time part of their professional expertise is knowing how to build trust with clients). If you think you are a better architect than the architect then you've either hired the wrong architect or you're a hopeless egomaniac.
Don't hire a death metal band to do polka for your wedding. :)
For some reason it's extremely easy for me to imagine Dan Gilbert being a PITA client and dragging the project down. :p
We'll find out soon if Dan starts making angry tweets about SHoP on twitter. :)
4-6 Story "Podium" with an unspecified height residential tower on that podium.
http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...tial/85304910/
Quote:
Cullen said the "podium" portion of the building will probably measure four to six stories and a residential tower of unspecified height will rise above that. The rental rates for the apartments "will certainly set the high-water mark for rents in the city as well, just given the nature of it," Cullen said.
It also states end of year, so no new design renderings anytime soon...
I really don't know why they need a civic component to a building so close to CMart. If they want to have a little area at the front with sculptures, a small fountain, etc. similar to what you might find in a shopping mall, fine, but I don't see the need for anything more. Also, I wonder if it's possible to transfer the affordable units component to other Gilbert owned properties. i.e. if you allow me to leave out the required 40 units in this building I'll put 50 more in xyz buildings.
I actually like the civic component. CMP and Cadillac Square are typically swamped during the day. As downtown continues to grow and more people live/work there it will be nice to have additional gathering places as well as activating ones we already have like Grand Circus and Hart Plaza. It looks like they are taking that approach with the new 1001 Woodward Plaza.
If the Cavaliers win the NBA finals, will the development get fast-tracked?
I suspect somewhere between 20 and 40. Less than 20 isn't even really considered a high-rise, and it is probably impossible to justify going higher than 40 on economic grounds as the per square foot cost starts to escalate. On the other hand, it seems pretty clear that Gilbert wants this to be a signature building, so he will probably be biased toward the higher end.
However, if they build a 60 story tower I won't complain.
I really like this concept...looks like old Detroit...but with AC and Wi-Fi. Should really blend well with our current architectural treasures.
I'm excited, but at the same time, frustrated that they're dragging it out. This is a big test for Gilbert's credibility. If he delivers, it will solidify him as the promise-keeper, a man that keeps renovating and bringing jobs. If he fails to deliver, it will bring doubt onto his future promises.
I'm hoping for 30+ floors, and anything more than that would be simply amazing to me.
Oh I don't know.... does Gilbert even HAVE a credibility issue? He seems to have delivered on everything he has promised. It's that other billionaire that has a serious credibility issue.... owning over 100 dormant parcels of land downtown.
Tallest Building in the Western Hemisphere has a nice ring to it.....:rolleyes:
We can all get a GoFundMe page setup to help subsidize the cost of such a massive building. Maybe DG will reward us with free elevator rides to the observation deck.
Rumors circling it will be bigger than rencen... from insider doing pre construction work. Totally tearing up the garage and rebuilding
I find it to be so out of character that this is being "mismanaged" given DG's track record. They don't comment or speculate on anything, and when the announcement finally breaks on a development, it's usually a presser.....at the building....with shovels going in the ground. Seems odd that they would keep putting these dates out there and continually go past without any explanation.
Regarding larger than the RenCen, then were talking a structure in the 800-1000ft arena. That would be an absolute game changer for the area, especially if most or all of it is privately financed or financed "conventionally" using little/no subsides.
This makes me wonder though; did he not expect to get the underground garage initially and that's where we say the leaked rendering? Once he got the garage did he just say screw it lets build a monster? That would explain for all the setbacks and missed dates if they tore it up and started from scratch on a new monster tower.
How reliable is your insider source RESTORE?
I sure hope not. Haven't we learned from the Ren Cen? Let's not make an even bigger mistake. A large building would be nice here, something to be proud of, but let's not get carried away. Detroit has plenty of room to grow besides up. Last thing it needs is for a giant flood of prime space to suck away the building momentum spreading into the so many worthy structures that haven't yet been renovated and nearby areas with room to grow. When the Ren Cen opened it sucked so much business from its neighbors. Supply and demand, folks. Let's check our hubris. Please, not again!
Taller than the Renaissance Center I can understand.... larger than the Renaissance Center is not realistic.
Hudson's was 2.2 million square ft., RenCen is 5.5 million square ft.
For me, the mistake of the RenCen is that it's one of those super-blocks that interrupts the street grid. It's also self-contained so you don't have to go anywhere other than within the building.
So I don't think this would be completely comparable to a super-block self-contained campus like the RenCen.
i have a feeling gilbert wants to put yahoo new world HQ in the building if he's able to secure the purchase... would be a dream come true if it's taller than ren cen. game changer for detroit
There's a theory in economics that suggests correlation between skyscrapers and recessions. :I
http://www.businessinsider.com/skysc...cession-2012-1
Hope the curse doesn't blow the wind out of our sails.
A relocation of Yahoo! HQ to Detroit would be a game-changer for the region. Of course, it appears the plan for this site is mostly residential. As to a new tallest-building, I submit that the Monroe Block or one of the empty lots in the heart of the financial district [[or along Randolph) would be more appropriate sites, but if DG wants to go HAM on the Hudson Block, that's cool.