Progress on Gilbert Buildings Downtown?

[GUSHI]

You know what we need on Woodward, a few more liquor stores, a few more coneys, and a few more wig shops,

How about a Target[[smaller scale) there is not enough people to support a apple store, People can barely afford healthy food in the d, not many buying I pads, or I phones.

[gthomas]

You know what we need on Woodward, a few more liquor stores, a few more coneys, and a few more wig shops,

How about a Target[[smaller scale) there is not enough people to support a apple store, People can barely afford healthy food in the d, not many buying I pads, or I phones.

You'll be surprise how many Detroiter's have Apple products, but with no food in the refrigerator. I'm sure the Apple store is not only Gilbert's plan for retail on Woodward. He quoted to have a full line-up of retail up and down Woodward, specialty shops, and restaurants.

[Gistok]

gthomas, I would respectfully disagree with some of your images for Detroit.

While "cutting edge" is nice for much new architecture in the world... Detroit has been rather conservative in its' architecture. And I don't think that is all bad.

Glass is nice, but as an exclusive building skin... I find it lacking as a "quality material". Perhaps the horror stories I've heard about some glass enclosed buildings such as the John Hancock Tower of Boston [[where entire windows would pop out during high winds) have sort of jaded me as using it as an exclusive building exterior. Some buildings, such as 1001 Woodward Ave. have a glass facade with granite frames, and maybe they're not so bad after all. But I like the warmth of stone in a building facade to be rather "pleasing to the eye".

One Detroit Center [[Comerica Tower) is one such building. When you compare it to the two 900 foot glass enclosed towers in Philadelphia with fancy tops... I think One Detroit Center will stand the "test of time" better than those buildings will.

Perhaps some buildings will look better with more glass [[such as the Chase Tower... formerly the NBD "cheese grater", and the green Visteon Building across the street), but I think that glass at the expense of all other materials just doesn't provide the warmth of stone [[mixed it).

I'm reminded of the PP&G Building [[Pittsburgh Paint & Glass) in Pittsburgh [[a Johnson/Burgee building IIRC)... a British Houses of Parliament inspired building that just doesn't look right.

Or maybe again I'm just old fashioned. But I like to include real stone veneer in any new buildings in Detroit... only because most all the existing buildings in Detroit have at least some stone in it.

[southen]

i personally think we need more innovative and modern buildings in the city. our best examples downtown are compuware, one kennedy and the ren cen and i dont think those buildings really inspire people, or at least they dont really do it for me. the buildings we all cherish, the penobscot, guardian, stott, were all pushing the envelope for design in their day and we have sort of stopped since then. 150 west jefferson and comerica tower were great additions to the skyline, but they are post modern buildings. they play well with what we already have but arent as inspiring as our older buildings. we dont need a frank gehry in detroit, but i think it would be nice to see something on a larger scale that both contrasts and complements what we already have. im hoping gilbert feels the same.

[DetroitPlanner]

I think we need more buildings like the Millender Center and Trolley Plaza. Stuff that can be built fast and cheap. That way we would look more like Toronto or some other Soviet Bloc City.

[gthomas]

I think we need more buildings like the Millender Center and Trolley Plaza. Stuff that can be built fast and cheap. That way we would look more like Toronto or some other Soviet Bloc City.

Trolley Plaza?? Really...that place exterior is UGLY!! Interior nice though, still UGLY and cheap like you said. We need to catch up with the rest of the world, as for "Innovative, Modern design/architecture". I want to see something NEW, striking, and exciting in our skyline.

[southen]

i think you may have missed some sarcasm there.

[AGinthe313]

Has anyone else noticed the security guard that sits in a parked car at the corner of Woodward and John R in the evening? I walk my dogs over there around 8:00 and he’s been there every night. Possibly hired by Bedrock to keep an eye on the properties?

BTW, I saw a bunch or workers taking a lunch break outside of 1520 Woodard today.

[gthomas]

Has anyone else noticed the security guard that sits in a parked car at the corner of Woodward and John R in the evening? I walk my dogs over there around 8:00 and he’s been there every night. Possibly hired by Bedrock to keep an eye on the properties?

BTW, I saw a bunch or workers taking a lunch break outside of 1520 Woodard today.

Yes, I've notice too, and seen workers in and out of those three buildings for the past two weeks. I'm not surprise anymore about how "efficient, progressive, and consistent" he is with his development and most importantly, his WORD. Unlike most city leaders and politician..

[casscorridor]

Landmark architecture is something that Detroit prides itself on, but most of the buildings that are revered by critics, residents and visitors alike were built in the late 19th century or early 20th century [[and in fact, most of the skyscrapers of this era where built in a few year span right before the Great Depression). Yet, Detroit's leaders have often tried to resurrect landmark building projects, the most prominent example being the Renaissance Center. Yet although the RenCen did earn national or global recognition, it did not earn the respect and celebration of the Fisher Building or the Guardian Building [[perhaps the most celebrated of all Detroit buildings).

I think Detroit would have better luck returning to practicality and tradition in architecture rather than seeking the cutting-edge. Skyscrapers such as Comerica Tower are not renowned cutting-edge, but they blend well with historic architecture, a sort of break with modernism and return to past conventions. This should be translated into neighborhoods, with a return to neighborhood-scaled structures with facades that resemble traditional, but diverse, designs schemes such as neo-classical, art deco, arts and crafts, Victorian and so on as well as some more modernist structures intermixed. We also need an outright rejection of all suburbanist designs, such as numerous housing projects in Midtown along 1-75 and Lodge fwy or in Lafayette/Elmwood Park that are in complete aesthetic and practical opposition to urbanist designs in that they are car-oriented rather than people-oriented. So much of central Detroit is empty that a revolution in urbanism could take place, with a return to a high-density, vibrant, walkable, bikable, transit-oriented city.

[mikeg19]

Landmark architecture is something that Detroit prides itself on, but most of the buildings that are revered by critics, residents and visitors alike were built in the late 19th century or early 20th century [[and in fact, most of the skyscrapers of this era where built in a few year span right before the Great Depression). Yet, Detroit's leaders have often tried to resurrect landmark building projects, the most prominent example being the Renaissance Center. Yet although the RenCen did earn national or global recognition, it did not earn the respect and celebration of the Fisher Building or the Guardian Building [[perhaps the most celebrated of all Detroit buildings).

I think Detroit would have better luck returning to practicality and tradition in architecture rather than seeking the cutting-edge. Skyscrapers such as Comerica Tower are not renowned cutting-edge, but they blend well with historic architecture, a sort of break with modernism and return to past conventions.

I agree wholeheartedly. I'm a big fan of art deco skyscrapers, which for the most part had their heyday in Detroit's 1920's. Buildings like the Guardian, Penobscot, and Stott are interesting to look at because of the ornament and detail associated with them. A simple glass tower such as One Kennedy fits in, but it really doesn't do much for most people it seems. Detroit needs to stop trying to hit everything out of the park and take a more simplistic approach to its architectural ambitions. Of course, serving its purpose and being useful are always helpful too

[DetroitPlanner]

I'd love to be able to work on a building like this one someday.

http://mam.org/info/details/quadracci.php

The whole experience of it is mind boggling.

[Jason]

Landmark architecture is something that Detroit prides itself on, but most of the buildings that are revered by critics, residents and visitors alike were built in the late 19th century or early 20th century [[and in fact, most of the skyscrapers of this era where built in a few year span right before the Great Depression).

Those buildings are insignificant outside of Detroit. Except for Albert Kahn's industrial buildings, Detroit's architectural noteworthiness started when Cranbrook was founded and Eliel Saarinen came. Most history of architecture books will mention Detroit's factories and Kahn, but they almost never mention his Fisher Building. Most books will mention Eero Saarinen, and none will mention Wirt Rowland.

I think Detroit would have better luck returning to practicality and tradition in architecture rather than seeking the cutting-edge. Skyscrapers such as Comerica Tower are not renowned cutting-edge

Comerica Tower is starchitecture. iirc, some German investor guy thought it would be a good idea to build skyscraper twins [[One Detroit Center and Two Detroit Center) in Detroit, and hired fancy pants architects to design it. It's not a well known project, but Phillip Johnson is a very well known architect. It would be hard to write a history book without him. It was starchitecture and it was built at the trailing end of when that kind of architecture was considered cutting edge.

but they blend well with historic architecture, a sort of break with modernism and return to past conventions. This should be translated into neighborhoods, with a return to neighborhood-scaled structures with facades that resemble traditional, but diverse, designs schemes such as neo-classical, art deco, arts and crafts, Victorian and so on as well as some more modernist structures intermixed.

And once again, Detroit would be late to the party. So late that the party ended 30 years ago. And Detrot's finally decided to look into the "broken windows" crime prevention strategy... 30 years too late as well, lol

Maybe if that were built Detroit's reputation would be upgraded from industrial armpit to provincial backwaters. I'd rather Detroit be known as a progressive leader.

We also need an outright rejection of all suburbanist designs, such as numerous housing projects in Midtown along 1-75 and Lodge fwy or in Lafayette/Elmwood Park that are in complete aesthetic and practical opposition to urbanist designs in that they are car-oriented rather than people-oriented. So much of central Detroit is empty that a revolution in urbanism could take place, with a return to a high-density, vibrant, walkable, bikable, transit-oriented city.

I think the main thing you're getting at and what I agree with is that our city needs to be designed for the human experience. But I would argue that there are different ways of designing around humans. You mentioned Lafayette Park, but I think LP is something to be proud of.

LP is 4 times denser Corktown. The only greater downtown census tracts that compare are the ones directly south of WSU which are about the same density.

LP is within walking distance to all of Downtown via the People Mover, plus Gratiot, Jefferson, and Eastern Market.

The architecture itself is designed around the human, every brick, every path, every bush. It might look like those other places from google maps but in person you feel the attention to detail and the resulting sense of place.

LP has a very strong community. They know their neighbors, they have neighborhood events, they watch out for each other, etc.

It's not dominated by hipsters and college students. It's racially and economically diverse AND intergrated. It's one of the only places in Detroit that's integrated. And it's been that way since it was built.


Now I'm definitely not saying that all of Detroit should be built in LP's image. What I'm saying is that human oriented design can take different forms. Architects need to have a deep understanding of the past, because every architecture movement has valuable ideas that we can learn from. But our cities, especially Detroit, in 2012 have unique problems that need creative unique solutions.

[Jason]

Detroit needs to stop trying to hit everything out of the park and take a more simplistic approach to its architectural ambitions. Of course, serving its purpose and being useful are always helpful too

Detroit hasn't tried to hit anything out of the park for decades. It's been building thoughtless lowest-common-denominator architecture like One Kennedy instead. I don't know how anyone could interpret anything in Detroit as ambitious.

[downtownguy]

Why all the disrespect against One Kennedy Square? It's no masterpiece, but I don't think it's offensive either. On the other hand, doesn't anybody have something to say about the Compuware HQ Building? I appreciate Karmanos' commitment to downtown a decade before Gilbert [[who I admire GREATLY) got on board. But, really.... isn't that one of the most ugly buildings you've ever seen?

[Gistok]

The One Detroit Center was developed by Gerald Hines of Houston, who liked to put fancy Johnson/Burgee Post Modern tops on his buildings. I think that his Detroit German Gothic top and Milwaukee's German Renaissance top will withstand the test of time as buildings of interest, regardless of whether architects deride them as "pastiche". They look a lot better than the pair of 900 ft. glass Chrysler Building wannabees that grace Philadelphia with virtually nothing but glass at different angles.

The Chase Tower, while made of quality material has always looked like a giant cheese grater, and will always do so. Yamasaki's One Woodward Ave has a modern Gothic look to it reminiscent of his former World Trade Center. The MacNamara Federal Building is made of poured concrete, and although it's not awful... it's not exactly noteworthy.

I do like 411 W. Fort however. It catches your eye and briefly holds your attention with its' almost Star Wars Death Star relief. 1001 Woodward is nothing special, but it is made of quality material, and that site could do worse. Our new green One Kennedy Sq. Building is as nice as any found along Big Beaver or Northwestern... which isn't saying much.

I do feel that one day the blue Swedish patterned granite Ford Auditorium will one day be lamented as one of the best of mid 20th century performing arts architecture [[which isn't really saying a lot). But when you compare it to such centers as the Lincoln Center in NYC or the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in LA...I prefer sculptured relief over precast arches any day.

What is a challenge in architecture.... is the test of time. If things look too dated, then that's not exactly a positive.

What I would like to see Gilbert build on the Hudson block is NOT a zillion levels of parking between first floor retail and 12-15 story residential. It'll end up looking like Trolley Plaza all over again. What I would like to see [[with just the underground parking).... is a contest of sorts. Partition the building [[taking up the full block) into segments that resemble the thin blocks of buildings along lower Woodward... with different architects designing a 50 ft. wide 12 [[or so) story section, so that it looks like a block of about 20 separate buildings. And since such a mass would be impractical to be solid, make a large inner rectangular section an atrium type area with a large skylight roof. I don't really care if this were residential or retail. If it were residential, then a private oasis [[with pool?) could be built in the atrium area.

As for cutting edge architecture.... England's Prince Charles said it best... the professors of modern architects have thrown away thousands of years of architectural ideas and drilled their students to build new architecture of buildings so out of human scale so that these Frankenstein concoctions, grimaces, and maintenance nightmares are what the regular folks have to live with, while architects pat themselves on their backs for having produced what the rest of us have to endure on a daily basis....