Wurlitzer or Metropolitan

[Cushkid]

Given Detroit's desire for attached parking, If either of these buildings are saved it will be at the expense of the other. Which would you be willing to lose to see the other saved. I know we have talked at length about both buildings but not in a side by side style thread.

[BrushStart]

Why would one need to go for the other to be saved? There is ample parking everywhere and neither building has a large enough footprint for a parking structure. Actually, the best chance either one has to be saved, is if the other is renovated.

[Cushkid]

I agree, since the Opera house parking is across the street, however developers seem to love attached parking.

[BrushStart]

Right. Parking structures are insanely costly to build, and those two buildings are odd-shaped and nowhere near large enough to build a functional structure on. Typical parking structures often occupy an entire city block.

[Eric_c]

In the past, I've speculated as to whether the two buildings couldn't be attached together by way of new construction on the empty corner lot. Using this approach could potentially provide more floor space for each building, make for more workable floor plans as well as redevelop the empty lot.

[esp1986]

In the past, I've speculated as to whether the two buildings couldn't be attached together by way of new construction on the empty corner lot. Using this approach could potentially provide more floor space for each building, make for more workable floor plans as well as redevelop the empty lot.

Given the alley that runs between the two, I'd say this is incredibly unlikely, not impossible, but unlikely to ever happen.

[Eric_c]

Given the alley that runs between the two, I'd say this is incredibly unlikely, not impossible, but unlikely to ever happen.

I thought of that, but the fact that the Metro has alleys down both sides might make that point moot. Moreover, going pie-in-the-sky, in theory, this imagined addition could cantaliever over the alley, no?

[wolverine]

I agree with BrushStart. No buildings should be demolished for the other. Detroit needs to become a real urban city instead of the suburban wasteland that the majority of downtown is.

[jsmyers]

I thought of that, but the fact that the Metro has alleys down both sides might make that point moot. Moreover, going pie-in-the-sky, in theory, this imagined addition could cantaliever over the alley, no?

I think is an excellent idea Eric_c.

It may be possible to vacate the alley on the east side of the building and still serve 1515 Broadway from the other side. But that would make the entire alley only accessible from one location, unless an access point is pushed through the Madison Building parking lot, or the small empty lot facing Woodward.

I think it would make much more sense to build a bridge over the alley above the 3rd or 4th floor.

A really big challenge would be negotiating the difference in floor levels between the two buildings. Their might have to be some combination of ramps and stairs in the cantilevered portion. Unless this is very artfully executed within residential units, it is going to take a lot of potential floor space, and either way is going to create ADA and fire safety challenges.

The advantage of tying them together is that you can save of elevators and staircases. The new addition facing the south would be able to take advantage of the great views over the Y and toward Campus Martius. You might also be able to cantilever additional space and/or better windows over 1515 Broadway, to take advantage of the view into the ballpark.

I believe that the Metro is 15 floors in about the same height as the Wurlitzer's 14. You'd probably have to take out one "floor" of the metro and turn it into a mezzanine level within individual units.

But not only is this a complicated project, it is also a really big one. The resulting building would have nearly 200,000 sf of total floor area. That is only a bit smaller than the Broderick Tower. While it would have a similarly great effect of its surroundings, it is a much more difficult and expensive project.

[esp1986]

Right. Parking structures are insanely costly to build, and those two buildings are odd-shaped and nowhere near large enough to build a functional structure on. Typical parking structures often occupy an entire city block.

Obviously you've never been to Chicago. Parking stuctures there blend right into a block that that would resemble Merchant's Row on Woodward. Now granted, property values there are much higher, enough so to significantly offset the costs, but on either site, there is enough room for parking, just depends how much someone is willing to spend.

My worry is that both of these will end up falling. The Metropolitan's issues are well known, while the Wurlitzer's are not so much, other than the crumbling facade. If property values are high enough, any project could be viable, but [[and I hope I'm wrong here) I don't think property values can go up fast enough to save them both, let alone one.

The owner of the Wurlitzer could care less about the building. It is crumbling, and he is fighting a court order to fix it. The building has been for sale for years, but no takers on the high asking price. He bought the building as an investment, and isn't about to budge on the price. A rehab likely would be tough financially if the building was free, so as long as he owns it, it will sit and continue to rot. Given the guy is a lawyer, I can actually see a Matty Moroun style court battle shaping up over fixing up the property. We'll see.

[BrushStart]

Obviously you've never been to Chicago. Parking stuctures there blend right into a block that that would resemble Merchant's Row on Woodward. Now granted, property values there are much higher, enough so to significantly offset the costs, but on either site, there is enough room for parking, just depends how much someone is willing to spend.

Merchant's Row is an anomaly for Detroit. In fact, I believe it is the only parking structure like that in Detroit, with elevators to move cars instead of ramps.

Chicago is a completely different story, and yes, of course I've been there. Space is at a premium in Chicago. In Detroit, we have huge open lots with which to build parking structures. That small space where the Metropolitan and Wurlitzer sit would not make for a viable for a parking garage, and I would not expect it to ever become one. It will either be a building or another asphalt lot.

[esp1986]

Merchant's Row is an anomaly for Detroit. In fact, I believe it is the only parking structure like that in Detroit, with elevators to move cars instead of ramps.

Chicago is a completely different story, and yes, of course I've been there. Space is at a premium in Chicago. In Detroit, we have huge open lots with which to build parking structures. That small space where the Metropolitan and Wurlitzer sit would not make for a viable for a parking garage, and I would not expect it to ever become one. It will either be a building or another asphalt lot.

I wasn't referring to "The Lofts at Merchant's Row" parking garage, I was referring to Merchant's Row in general and the typical size of the buildings. In Chicago, winding garages are crammed into some pretty tight spaces. If a developer wants one, he can find a way to do it. However, this doesn't change the fact that these buildings are in quite decrepit shape, and financial viability is the furthest thing from certain.

[jsmyers]

And that is without parking. I don't think there is any good way to attach parking to the building. And I hope that developers and banks stop seeing that as a requirement as Central Detroit develops to be more walkable.

However, the two vacant lots across John R, facing Farmer could be built into a parking garage shared among a number of buildings. One of the lots is parking for the Lofts at Woodward Center, and the other looks like it is for Puppet Art.

It is a really tight squeeze to get a deck in there, without using lift technology like in Merhants Row. I don't think it could be done in a cost-effective manner, but it could provide doorstep parking to the Lofts at Woodward Center, while also taking away some of their views. Residents of the Wurlitzer and Metropolitan would have to go down and cross the street, just like would if they were parking in the Opera House garage. If more parking is really needed, it would make more sense to build a garage on the Opera House's surface lot.

Perhaps some of the KDG guys/gals can run some numbers and draw up some plans to present to the greedy lawyer. I'm sure they think about the potential of the buildings a lot, considering where their offices are.

BTW - Similarly, I've also often thought about how a huge office building could be built over the two parking lots in the Library/Broadway/Grand River/Gratiot block. There could be retail and entrances in both outside corners, but the offices could cantilever over the alley in the middle. That floor plate is so big, you'd only needing 10-11 floors for a half million square feet.

[esp1986]

And that is without parking. I don't think there is any good way to attach parking to the building. And I hope that developers and banks stop seeing that as a requirement as Central Detroit develops to be more walkable.

However, the two vacant lots across John R, facing Farmer could be built into a parking garage shared among a number of buildings. One of the lots is parking for the Lofts at Woodward Center, and the other looks like it is for Puppet Art.

It is a really tight squeeze to get a deck in there, without using lift technology like in Merhants Row. I don't think it could be done in a cost-effective manner, but it could provide doorstep parking to the Lofts at Woodward Center, while also taking away some of their views. Residents of the Wurlitzer and Metropolitan would have to go down and cross the street, just like would if they were parking in the Opera House garage. If more parking is really needed, it would make more sense to build a garage on the Opera House's surface lot.

Perhaps some of the KDG guys/gals can run some numbers and draw up some plans to present to the greedy lawyer. I'm sure they think about the potential of the buildings a lot, considering where their offices are.

BTW - Similarly, I've also often thought about how a huge office building could be built over the two parking lots in the Library/Broadway/Grand River/Gratiot block. There could be retail and entrances in both outside corners, but the offices could cantilever over the alley in the middle. That floor plate is so big, you'd only needing 10-11 floors for a half million square feet.

Problem is, even with a walkable downtown, a car is still a necessity in this region. Having an attached parking garage for residents will continue to be a big selling point as long as we live in such an autocentric region, therefore, developers will continue to necessitate parking garages.

[DetroitPlanner]

Merchant's Row is an anomaly for Detroit. In fact, I believe it is the only parking structure like that in Detroit, with elevators to move cars instead of ramps.

The Holiday Inn has this as well.

[313rd]

Right. Parking structures are insanely costly to build, and those two buildings are odd-shaped and nowhere near large enough to build a functional structure on. Typical parking structures often occupy an entire city block.

Parking Structures can run from $10,000 to $15,000 per spot to build from ground up.

[BrushStart]

Parking Structures can run from $10,000 to $15,000 per spot to build from ground up.

Exactly. So, if you assume that the structure cost $12,500/spot and you charged tenants $80/month [[the going rate) to park, it would take 13 years just to pay off each spot. That is assuming that you paid cash and did not borrow the money and that your garage is at 100% capacity for the entire period. Small parking garages do not work unless the value of the land is astronomical and space is extremely limited. In Detroit, it only makes sense to build large, sprawling parking structures that have a large footprint.

[jsmyers]

Really? The Holiday Inn Express on Michigan and Washington? I stayed there last fall, and I didn't notice that.

[Gistok]

I don't forsee the Detroit Opera House selling any of their surface parking lot behind the building for any other use. They do have some ideas on developing the space that may involve outdoor performance space or other uses.... when the economy improves. I see that parking lot as temporary.

When the theatre was opened in 1922, they designed it so that they could possibly put performance space on top of the roof.... which was common in the pre-air conditioning era.... to generate revenue during summer months when many theatres were closed. Of course much of that space now houses the air conditioning units.

[jsmyers]

I don't forsee the Detroit Opera House selling any of their surface parking lot behind the building for any other use. They do have some ideas on developing the space that may involve outdoor performance space or other uses.... when the economy improves. I see that parking lot as temporary.

It is great to hear that the lot is temporary. I didn't think they would sell, but rather that if they lease out enough of their current garage to nearby tenets, they have an option to easily build more garage space. They still do, jut not on their own property, there are a number of large lots within a block or two of the opera house.

[jsmyers]

esp1986, I wish you wouldn't act like I'm attacking you. We don't really disagree much anyway. You're right that things are "going back" in 5-10 years. But I'm pretty sure than 5-10 years from now a redeveloped Wurlitzer and car sharing in Detroit are very strong possibilities. That is all I'm claiming.

Five years ago, the Book Cadillac was a dead project, and the Broderick tower redevelopment was a joke. I don't know for sure, but I don't think that Zipcar was in AA either. I don't remember it from 2006, when I moved from AA to Detroit.

[esp1986]

esp1986, I wish you would act like I'm attacking you. We don't really disagree much anyway. You're right that things are "going back" in 5-10 years. But I'm pretty sure than 5-10 years from now a redeveloped Wurlitzer and car sharing in Detroit are very strong possibilities. That is all I'm claiming.

Five years ago, the Book Cadillac was a dead project, and the Broderick tower redevelopment was a joke. I don't know for sure, but I don't think that Zipcar was in AA either. I don't remember it from 2006, when I moved from AA to Detroit.

I don't disagree. Some people may be able to get by with sharing a car every now and then. However, the point I am making, is the majority of the population will still have to own a car, that being the reason that almost no project in Detroit will be done without a designated place to park. A designated parking area, whether attached, across the street, whatever, will for a long time be a selling point for residential developments in the city.

[mikeg19]

I'm not sure of the current capacity or if it's even an option, but what about the Hudson's underground parking structure? It's right there. I'm not sure how many spots are spoken for in that garage.

[lukabottle]

I used ZipCar regularly in Oakland, CA and now in Pittsburgh. The amount of money I have saved not having a car is huge. For longer trips over 180 miles, a standard car rental company makes more sense.

Before moving to Oakland, I gave up my car the last 6 months I lived in Detroit. Granted, I lived in Cass Park, so proximity to WSU and to Downtown made it easy. Many of my friends in Detroit don't have cars. If I move back to the City [[as I hope to do), I plan on not having a car. The stress relief from not dealing with gas, car insurance rates, and repairs was huge. I really hope ZipCar comes to Detroit. I definitely think there is a market for it in Downtown, Corktown, Midtown, and other nearby neighborhoods.

[agrahlma]

Saw a crew pumping water out of the Wurlitzer building on Sunday. One of the gates was moved back and nobody was around -- I was tempted to walk in and check it out.