Lafayette Building next on DEGC hit list?

[bailey]

what the DEGC is doing is demolishing RIGHT NOW for a development that might happen in 30 years, but most likely never...

You;re making the same argument in reverse. You are arguing it must be kept up for a re-use that may or may not happen 10-20 years from now to a building already empty for 13 years....

[ghettopalmetto]

You;re making the same argument in reverse. You are arguing it must be kept up for a re-use that may or may not happen 10-20 years from now to a building already empty for 13 years....

Here's the difference: By preserving the building, you make development on that site more likely, as the costs of the project will be lower, making redevelopment more financially feasible than if a completely new structure were to be erected.

With every building DEGC demolishes, they make an economic rebound for Detroit less and less likely to happen.

[kraig]

Actually, they do have control over pretty much every historic building in and around downtown Detroit.

That's not exactly a list now, is it?

[kraig]

[quote=andylinn;34146]

Compuware - You're confusing Hudson's with Kern's, no?
Campus Martius - What was demolished to create this?

Hudson's, Kern Block, Premiere Garage, Compuware and Campus Martius were all tied together in the same package.

Ernst & Young - You're counting a garage here... wasn't it just really a park, anyway?

Demolition of structure and development of a building.

Brewery Park [[may be a little more than 20) -Was'nt this mostly an adaptive reuse project?

Isn't that pretty much what you wanted for Tiger Stadium?
So, what's your complaint?

IHOP on Jefferson - This was an illegal night time demolition of one of Detroit's oldest homes. Thanks Anita Baker.

How dare she and her then husband tear down an empty building that they had bought and paid for to open a restaurant that's still open [[and just had outdoor seating added) today.

The other buildings: Ford Field, Comerica Park, Greektown Hotel, One Detroit Center, etc...
Few people on here are arguing against demolishing RIGHT NOW for some big development that is coming in RIGHT NOW. Though hard to swallow, that is different and somewhat easier to understand... what the DEGC is doing is demolishing RIGHT NOW for a development that might happen in 30 years, but most likely never...

And for the preservationist in you, don't forget about the costly move of the Gem Theatre and the Elmwood Grill.

Ok, so that leaves us with two correctly identified vacant properties that have been redeveloped in the past 20 years. That's awesome!
Chene Square -Vacant Property
Starbucks [[soon to be Tim Horton's) on Jefferson -Vacant Property.

No that leaves us with everything I named.

Look, there's nothing wrong with preservation, all I'm trying to explain is that you should go to a group when the property you would like to preserve and develop is not on the radar as opposed to running in after the desire to demolish has been put out there. By then it's going to be too late.

[HazenPingree]

You;re making the same argument in reverse. You are arguing it must be kept up for a re-use that may or may not happen 10-20 years from now to a building already empty for 13 years....

As seen on the lists presented of "developments," many occurred on sites occupied by abandoned buildings. An abandoned building on a site will not scare off a serious developer. Demolish the building once there is a serious offer on the table. Once a building is gone, it is gone forever. Lafayette cannot be replaced today.

[bailey]

Demolish the building once there is a serious offer on the table. Once a building is gone, it is gone forever. Lafayette cannot be replaced today.

So, if I bought the building and wanted to demolish it to put up an IHOP you wouldn't have a problem?

The assumption you keep putting forth is that the building itself will be attractive for re-use of any kind. Given the fortunes of the region, it seems a flawed assumption to make.

[ghettopalmetto]

The assumption you keep putting forth is that the building itself will be attractive for re-use of any kind. Given the fortunes of the region, it seems a flawed assumption to make.

Nobody ever thought SoHo and TriBeCa would be desirable neighborhoods in Manhattan, either. Those areas were just a collection of old buildings slated to be demolished to make way for the West Side Highway.

There seems to be a difference between people who want to make things happen, vis-a-vis those who want to demolish the Lafayette and HOPE things happen in the future.

[bailey]

Nobody ever thought SoHo and TriBeCa would be desirable neighborhoods in Manhattan, either. Those areas were just a collection of old buildings slated to be demolished to make way for the West Side Highway.

Stop comparing detroit to a functioning city. TriBeca, SoHo and Chelsea are all there because they are in NYC. there is a need...more importantly, there is money and demand.

There seems to be a difference between people who want to make things happen, vis-a-vis those who want to demolish the Lafayette and HOPE things happen in the future.]

But your argument is different by demanding it stay up and HOPE that in 20 or 30 years enough of it is still standing to rehab?

[choquant]

I think the general idea is: let's not spend city tax dollars [[which are not exactly plentiful as it is) to demolish a structure that is not a danger and could be of interest to developers in the not so distant future. Most of the people arguing for preservation at this point believe that if a developer was interested in building something on the plot, we have a different story. It's hard to reject development in such a strained economy.

However, there is no such interest and therefore the rush to demolish is foolish and unnecessary.

[HazenPingree]

Originally Posted by kraig

Hudson's, Kern Block, Premiere Garage, Compuware and Campus Martius were all tied together in the same package. Does Compuware use the Premier Garage? They have their own huge Garage that is always half empty.

Demolition of structure and development of a building. Ok, I stand corrected. There was a parking structure there. I won't miss it. Doesn't count as an abandoned building.

Brewery Park [[may be a little more than 20) -Was'nt this mostly an adaptive reuse project?
Isn't that pretty much what you wanted for Tiger Stadium?
So, what's your complaint? I have no complaint! It was a wonderful development. I was just pointing out that the original poster considered it a demolished building being turned into a development, where as it is the other way around... a historic building was attractive and therefore adaptively reused.

IHOP on Jefferson - This was an illegal night time demolition of one of Detroit's oldest homes. Thanks Anita Baker.
How dare she and her then husband tear down an empty building that they had bought and paid for to open a restaurant that's still open [[and just had outdoor seating added) today. - I don't care who did or owned what. They were not supposed to demolish it.

The other buildings: Ford Field, Comerica Park, Greektown Hotel, One Detroit Center, etc...
Few people on here are arguing against demolishing RIGHT NOW for some big development that is coming in RIGHT NOW. Though hard to swallow, that is different and somewhat easier to understand... what the DEGC is doing is demolishing RIGHT NOW for a development that might happen in 30 years, but most likely never...
And for the preservationist in you, don't forget about the costly move of the Gem Theatre and the Elmwood Grill. I appreciated that. In this case, I am not complaining about major developments coming in and replacing old structures. like I said, this is a tough pill to swallow, but at least it makes sense. What I don't like is corrupt government agencies lining someones pockets to rid our city of one of its only advantages - historic buildings.

Ok, so that leaves us with two correctly identified vacant properties that have been redeveloped in the past 20 years. That's awesome! - the point I was trying to make here was that we have only two lots [[that you could think of) made into vacant lots in the past 20 years that were found to be attractive to developers AFTER they were vacant.
Chene Square -Vacant Property
Starbucks [[soon to be Tim Horton's) on Jefferson -Vacant Property.

I don't like bickering about this stuff, but I just don't understand the demolition angle... What is it about it that is supposed to make Detroit more attractive? George Jackson doesn't even live here... How come he gets to decide?

[ghettopalmetto]

Stop comparing detroit to a functioning city. TriBeca, SoHo and Chelsea are all there because they are in NYC. there is a need...more importantly, there is money and demand.

Are you knowledgable of 1960s and 1970s New York? Ha ha! But, you know--keep demolishing shit. That'll certainly boost demand and raise property values. After all, who doesn't want to locate to the middle of Thunderdome?

But your argument s different by demanding it stay up and HOPE that in 20 or 30 years enough of it is still standing to rehab?

At least with the building remaining, you have the option of rehabilitation. Once you demolish it, you will have a permanent empty lot because the costs of removing foundations and constructing a completely brand new structure on the site will be cost-prohibitive for the dirt-cheap rents that are commanded amongst the sea of pavement.

You're using the same ridiculous arguments that people were making about the Book-Cadillac and Fort Shelby as little as two years ago. How did those turn out?

No demand, my ass.

[kraig]

I don't like bickering about this stuff, but I just don't understand the demolition angle... What is it about it that is supposed to make Detroit more attractive? George Jackson doesn't even live here... How come he gets to decide?

You do realize that George Jackson has a Board and a Mayor that he has to answer to? Besides, you have to keep in mind that businesses want to be associated with the development of a property not the demolition of a historic building that sat on the property. Who would want to purchase bad PR? Why not let the people that you already don't like take that hit?

[kraig]

Are you knowledgable of 1960s and 1970s New York? Ha ha! But, you know--keep demolishing shit. That'll certainly boost demand and raise property values. After all, who doesn't want to locate to the middle of Thunderdome?



At least with the building remaining, you have the option of rehabilitation. Once you demolish it, you will have a permanent empty lot because the costs of removing foundations and constructing a completely brand new structure on the site will be cost-prohibitive for the dirt-cheap rents that are commanded amongst the sea of pavement.

You're using the same ridiculous arguments that people were making about the Book-Cadillac and Fort Shelby as little as two years ago. How did those turn out?

No demand, my ass.

You aren't seriously trying to compare the property demands of probably the most crowded city in america with the city that has lost close to a million people in population are you?

[bailey]

You're using the same ridiculous arguments that people were making about the Book-Cadillac and Fort Shelby as little as two years ago. How did those turn out?

Great... and that is wonderful. I'm just wondering where the next nearly half a billion in public and private funding is going to come from to pull off two redevelopments?

No demand, my ass.

Let's talk in two - three years. Let's talk occupancy rates and how upside down the Book's Condo owners are. Let's talk about which still has a restaurant in it.

Are you knowledgable of 1960s and 1970s New York? Ha ha! But, you know--keep demolishing shit.

New York at it's worst doesnt come close to the levels of divestment and exodus witnessed here. Again, apples to oranges.

[HazenPingree]

Well, to be fair, in 1970, I don't think many people would have thought that NYC was much more attractive than Detroit... NYC was dangerous, dirty, and losing population rapidly.

You do realize that George Jackson has a Board and a Mayor that he has to answer to?

Well, I think that George Jackson works with outmoded ideas, and somehow has infected other upper city leadership with the same backwardness... Word on the street was that Kwame tried to fire GJ, but was blackmailed.

Besides, you have to keep in mind that businesses want to be associated with the development of a property not the demolition of a historic building that sat on the property. Who would want to purchase bad PR? Why not let the people that you already don't like take that hit?

- good point. Most likely true, too. Although that hasn't stopped any of the major downtown developments in recent years.

[ghettopalmetto]

Great... and that is wonderful. I'm just wondering where the next nearly half a billion in public and private funding is going to come from to pull off two redevelopments?

Let's talk in two - three years. Let's talk occupancy rates and how upside down the Book's Condo owners are. Let's talk about which still has a restaurant in it.

New York at it's worst doesnt come close to the levels of divestment and exodus witnessed here. Again, apples to oranges.

You don't like the SoHo example? Fine. Let's use the 1980s South Beach Art Deco district. Or 1990s Chicago. There's a million examples that a student of this topic would understand are nearly identical in nature.

You don't want to try to learn lessons from elsewhere, fine. I can't force you to lose your stubborn naivete.

Let's do pure apples-to-apples, then. Granny Smith-to-Granny Smith. Show me a city that has leveled as much as Detroit has and been successful.

[bailey]

You don't like the SoHo example? Fine. Let's use the 1980s South Beach Art Deco district. Or 1990s Chicago. There's a million examples that a student of this topic would understand are nearly identical in nature.

Where is the tourist industry and explosive growth that drove the Miami resurgence? Where is financial resurgence and growth that drove Chicago's "comeback" [[as if it ever really "went away")?

Pretending Detroit is rising doesn't make it so. There is "optimism" and then there is fantasy. If you want to live in fantasy land, well, knock yourself out. The rest of us live in the real world.

The question is, in the largest poorest city in the country, what is more important; spending 15-20 years trying to keep abandoned buildings up in the hope that some seismic shift will occur that will suddenly make Detroit desirable...or tearing down empty, derelict and abandoned structures before someone get's killed?

Show me a city that has leveled as much as Detroit has and been successful.

I have no idea. Are there any? Probably not, but again you ignore that Detroit is unique in it's level of abandonment in both financial capital and population.

Also, the reverse of that statement is for you to show me a city that had higher percentage of empty buildings in its CBD that has had successful re-use for them?.

Or, if we are really comparing apples to apples [[which you refuse to do) , show me a city that has had more divestment, more loss of population, more segregation, is more hostile to any outside intervention, AND has has a CBD with the SAME empty buildings standing for 15 to 20 years that has been successful?

[ghettopalmetto]

Detroit is not as "unique" as you think. Stop feeling so God damned sorry for yourself. All you're doing is reiterating a litany of excuses why something CAN'T be done. GET. SOME. BALLS. Despite all evidence to the contrary, you're too mentally lazy and stubborn to see any sort of "improvement" other than the most simple-minded bullshit: demolition. As was stated above, a third-grader can come up with that idea. Do we really need to pay George Jackson to come up with "economic development" ideas that we can get for free from an eight-year-old?

So, Negative Nancy, when the local populace is this optimistic about Detroit, tell me why anyone would ever want to invest money there. You don't give a shit about your history, you have no regard for economics, and you do nothing but feel sorry for your city while you let--encourage--billionaires to continue to rape and pillage the place. And yet people wonder why the young and educated are leaving Michigan in droves. Is it that difficult to figure out?

So much for the blue collar work ethic. If Detroiters are really this mentally weak and helpless, maybe the city does deserve to die. Good luck.

[bailey]

Boy, I'm having trouble keeping up with all your edits.... every time I go to answer you've added new insults and pithy comments. Funny how some get banned for stuff like that and others don't...strange. In case you're not done editing and adding more insulting comments ..I'm just going to answer this draft....

Detroit is not as "unique" as you think. Stop feeling so God damned sorry for yourself. All you're doing is reiterating a litany of excuses why something CAN'T be done. GET. SOME. BALLS. Despite all evidence to the contrary, you're too mentally lazy and stubborn to see any sort of "improvement" other than the most simple-minded bullshit: demolition. As was stated above, a third-grader can come up with that idea. Do we really need to pay George Jackson to come up with "economic development" ideas that we can get for free from an eight-year-old?

So, Negative Nancy, when the local populace is this optimistic about Detroit, tell me why anyone would ever want to invest money there. You don't give a shit about your history, you have no regard for economics, and you do nothing but feel sorry for your city while you let--encourage--billionaires to continue to rape and pillage the place. And yet people wonder why the young and educated are leaving Michigan in droves. Is it that difficult to figure out?

So much for the blue collar work ethic. If Detroiters are really this mentally weak and helpless, maybe the city does deserve to die. Good luck.

I don't feel sorry for anything. But, I must admit, listening to you spout off this ridiculous "every building must be saved...because they did something kinda like that in New York, Chicago or Miami" mantra is pretty irritating. Especially since you apparently [[judging from the references you just made to detroit as "there" and to "your history") don't even live in the region. Thus you are simply talking out of your ass.

No where did I say demolition is the first option. Nowhere did I say demolition the only option. Anyone with reading comprehension skills could have gotten that. I'm simply rejecting the "every building must be saved" argument . Some can be saved…other can’t….or shouldn’t. I reject the idea that a city with a 300,000,000 million dollar hole in it's budget needs to maintain empty and derelict buildings for a generation in hopes that one day there will be a need for them.

So, Negative Nancy, when the local populace is this optimistic about Detroit, tell me why anyone would ever want to invest money there. You don't give a shit about your history, you have no regard for economics, and you do nothing but feel sorry for your city while you let--encourage--billionaires to continue to rape and pillage the place. And yet people wonder why the young and educated are leaving Michigan in droves. Is it that difficult to figure out?

First of all. Blow me. I understand plenty about my history and the region's economics. It isn’t the "billionaires to continue to rape and pillage the place" Detroit's elected representatives and their families have already seen to that. There is nothing left to steal. Why don't you "GET.SOME.BALLS" and move here since you have all the answers?

Second, I am one of the young and educated that hasn’t yet left… but with uninformed like you around pretending that everything is just fine and lecturing about how scant resources should be used to keep abandoned buildings up…but not renovated, just up - because maybe in the next 30 years someone might put a cheesecake factory on the first floor…. Well, Chicago does sound nicer and nicer these days.

Optimism? Live here for a while and see how optimistic you are. This region's rejection of education, rejection of clean governance, rejection of innovation, rejection of change, and it's entitlement mentality are it;s greatest obstacles....but of course some really nice renderings of a loft conversion slapped on an empty building will change all that.

[kraig]

Countdown to Ghettopalmetto falling apart during another discussion. And 3, 2, 1 meltdown.

Detroit is not as "unique" as you think. Stop feeling so God damned sorry for yourself. All you're doing is reiterating a litany of excuses why something CAN'T be done. GET. SOME. BALLS. Despite all evidence to the contrary, you're too mentally lazy and stubborn to see any sort of "improvement" other than the most simple-minded bullshit: demolition. As was stated above, a third-grader can come up with that idea. Do we really need to pay George Jackson to come up with "economic development" ideas that we can get for free from an eight-year-old?

So, Negative Nancy, when the local populace is this optimistic about Detroit, tell me why anyone would ever want to invest money there. You don't give a shit about your history, you have no regard for economics, and you do nothing but feel sorry for your city while you let--encourage--billionaires to continue to rape and pillage the place. And yet people wonder why the young and educated are leaving Michigan in droves. Is it that difficult to figure out?

So much for the blue collar work ethic. If Detroiters are really this mentally weak and helpless, maybe the city does deserve to die. Good luck.

[HazenPingree]

Countdown to Ghettopalmetto falling apart during another discussion. And 3, 2, 1 meltdown.

hey!!! I'm still waiting for you to devalue what I just said!

[kraig]

I don't like bickering about this stuff, but I just don't understand the demolition angle... What is it about it that is supposed to make Detroit more attractive? George Jackson doesn't even live here... How come he gets to decide?

Would you feel better about the Tiger Stadium decision if George Jackson did live here? It's always funny how we bring residency into play when we don't like someone. I notice that we never complain about someone not being a resident during Angel's Night or Motor City Makeover. Andy, there were a lot of OTSC and Tiger Stadium supporters holding a vigil for the stadium that were from the suburbs. Did you have a problem with them?

[HazenPingree]

Would you feel better about the Tiger Stadium decision if George Jackson did live here? It's always funny how we bring residency into play when we don't like someone. I notice that we never complain about someone not being a resident during Angel's Night or Motor City Makeover. Andy, there were a lot of OTSC and Tiger Stadium supporters holding a vigil for the stadium that were from the suburbs. Did you have a problem with them?

I was waiting for something like that. Why do you assume that "a lot of OTSC and Tiger Stadium supporters holding a vigil for the stadium that were from the suburbs?"

And no, I don't have a problem with "them." I have a problem with people being destructive in a city where they do not live [[Jackson and Maroun come to mind.) However, if people are doing positive things, but are not from Detroit, I welcome them. Please, if you are a good natured positive person and want to spend time in Detroit, come here now!

[kraig]

I was waiting for something like that. Why do you assume that "a lot of OTSC and Tiger Stadium supporters holding a vigil for the stadium that were from the suburbs?"

Because they were quoted in the newspapers and the papers stated where they were from. So, what exactly were you waiting on? Someone pointing out your double standards?

[HazenPingree]

kraig, do you not like me or something?

are you working for the DEGC?

And I don't have a double standard. Read my response. I don't like folks who come into Detroit and try to destroy it. I do like folks who have a good heart and try to do positive things here. Why is that a double standard?