"Time Square" Idea for The Lafayette Building

[bailey]

I'll reiterate that unless you're a licensed Professional Engineer, you have no authority to judge whether or not a building represents a danger to the public. So please, spare us the hysteria.

And unless you are one, you have no authority to lecture the rest about the lack of any danger.

[ghettopalmetto]

And unless you are one, you have no authority to lecture the rest about the lack of any danger.

I'm licensed and registered in four states.

[bailey]

And have you examined the building?

[detmich]

Preservation in DETROIT is necessary because DEGC want to destroy existing historically significant viable structures and replace them with new WEED-FILLED LOTS.

I'll reiterate that unless you're a licensed Professional Engineer, you have no authority to judge whether or not a building represents a danger to the public. So please, spare us the hysteria.

If they were viable, there wouldn't be any talk of demolition because they would be fully occupied and making a profit for their owners. This is not the case here.

[archytech]

And there lies the rub. If no one wants to build new modern offices in downtown, then why would they want to rebuild old obsolete offices in downtown. I understand that preservation efforts give folks with too much time on their hands something to do that makes them feel good, but they all seem to misunderstand when preservation is required and when it works.

Preservation in NY or Chicago or DC is necessary because developers want to destroy existing historically significant viable structures and replace them with new viable structures. That is not the case in Detroit. In Detroit the situation is this- there are many many existing non-viable structures of questionable historical significance that are expensive to keep standing and that often present a danger to the general public. There is no economic reason whatsoever to keep paying for these empty unused structures. There is no near term boom coming to downtown Detroit. Many think that there is not much of a long term boom either. The idea of preservation for preservation's sake, which is what we are witnessing here, is as vapid, vainglorious, and foolish as demolition for demolition's sake.

It's not so much that no one wants to build, rather it is because this city makes it to difficult, too expensive and to burdening to make it happen. Its honestly cheaper, faster and eaiser to build, and get permits in most of the suburbs. Until we can tackle the building and permiting and licensing of buildings and their tenants this city will continue to grow [[or fade) slowly. Many believe that clearing way for new structures, providing parking for a development, or offering some kind of gap financing or tax credit/reduction will help to bring new buisnesses in the city. That may be true in the long run once we can tackle crime and perception, but I must re-iterate that we MUST make it eaiser to start and do buisness in the city. This should be the current adminstration's priority.

[detmich]

It's not so much that no one wants to build, rather it is because this city makes it to difficult, too expensive and to burdening to make it happen. Its honestly cheaper, faster and eaiser to build, and get permits in most of the suburbs. Until we can tackle the building and permiting and licensing of buildings and their tenants this city will continue to grow [[or fade) slowly. Many believe that clearing way for new structures, providing parking for a development, or offering some kind of gap financing or tax credit/reduction will help to bring new buisnesses in the city. That may be true in the long run once we can tackle crime and perception, but I must re-iterate that we MUST make it eaiser to start and do buisness in the city. This should be the current adminstration's priority.

Hey, I'd like to build a house on the beach in Hawaii, but it is too difficult and expensive to do so. So I don't. The difference is that someone else like Gabby Reese will build that beach house, while in Detroit there is no one else who will take my place. That is because, for whatever reason you wish to ascribe to it, no one wants to have office buildings downtown. Thus, these buildings are not viable. I just explained this to the third grader I met, she was able to grasp the concept while few on here have made the cognitive leap.

[ghettopalmetto]

The buildings are viable. But who wants to purchase a building and redevelop it if the DEGC has already made up its mind that it's going to be demolished?

Be honest, pro-demo folks. Nobody is building ANYTHING in the country right now. The benefits of demolition are questionable at best and it will cost money the City doesn't have to do so. There is ZERO impetus to be tearing down viable buildings right now.

[iheartthed]

Hey, I'd like to build a house on the beach in Hawaii, but it is too difficult and expensive to do so. So I don't. The difference is that someone else like Gabby Reese will build that beach house, while in Detroit there is no one else who will take my place. That is because, for whatever reason you wish to ascribe to it, no one wants to have office buildings downtown. Thus, these buildings are not viable. I just explained this to the third grader I met, she was able to grasp the concept while few on here have made the cognitive leap.

I'm not hungry right now. And I probably won't be hungry in the next thirty minutes either. Since neither myself nor anyone else will be eating the food in my refrigerator at this moment, I should just throw it all in the trash according to your logic.

[detmich]

I'm not hungry right now. And I probably won't be hungry in the next thirty minutes either. Since neither myself nor anyone else will be eating the food in my refrigerator at this moment, I should just throw it all in the trash according to your logic.

Just when I think that you can't get any dumber you prove me wrong.

[DetroitDad]

In capitalism money followed by self interests almost always wins, bottom line.

Part of the problem is the tax structure. I'm not sure why Detroit hasn't implemented a hefty flat parking tax based on lot size. A flat parking tax would encourage new buildings and redevelopment, with parking being viewed as only a project necessesity or luxury and not a big business in and of itself. A flat parking tax would also encourage parking garages over surface lots.

Taxes should also be cheaper for large and urban buildings, buildings that meet a certain criteria of urbanism should pay less than the crumby suburban style designs. Right now, the tax and zoning structure encourages suburban style building or parking lots, and discourages density.

[Det_ard]

The buildings are viable. But who wants to purchase a building and redevelop it if the DEGC has already made up its mind that it's going to be demolished?

Be honest, pro-demo folks. Nobody is building ANYTHING in the country right now. The benefits of demolition are questionable at best and it will cost money the City doesn't have to do so. There is ZERO impetus to be tearing down viable buildings right now.

Drive through Ann Arbor sometime. Count the cranes. There's a hell of a lot of building in that town.

[ghettopalmetto]

Drive through Ann Arbor sometime. Count the cranes. There's a hell of a lot of building in that town.

By whom? When did they obtain their financing?

[DetroitDad]

By whom? When did they obtain their financing?

There are a lot of smaller projects going on in Detroit and Ann Arbor right now. Banks are making loans, but are requiring a much greater down payment. The days of the super projects are what is gone.

[bailey]

The benefits of demolition are questionable at best and it will cost money the City doesn't have to do so. There is ZERO impetus to be tearing down viable buildings right now.

Again... a building that has been empty for 13 years is by the definition of "abandoned", not "viable". if it was it wouldn't be in the DEGC's hands.

By whom? When did they obtain their financing?

It always helps to have a University with a 7 billion dollar endowment in the neighborhood. Many of AA's projects are university related.

[Hypestyles]

interesting... why not, if the right investors are in place..

[ghettopalmetto]

Again... a building that has been empty for 13 years is by the definition of "abandoned", not "viable". if it was it wouldn't be in the DEGC's hands.

In my opinion, "viable" means it can be reused. "Not viable" means it could *never* be reused. Abandoned has no bearing on these terms, as "viable" would pertain to a specific use of the building, e.g. whether or not it is viable to use as office space vis-a-vis condos.

It always helps to have a University with a 7 billion dollar endowment in the neighborhood. Many of AA's projects are university related.

This is precisely why Ann Arbor has construction. Most of the projects under construction by the University have likely spent years in planning and identifying financing. Try finding a private sector project anywhere that has obtained financing since October.

[staticstate]

where'd that pic go with the super-imposed billboard? someone should link it. it looked cool

[archytech]

Hey, I'd like to build a house on the beach in Hawaii, but it is too difficult and expensive to do so. So I don't. The difference is that someone else like Gabby Reese will build that beach house, while in Detroit there is no one else who will take my place. That is because, for whatever reason you wish to ascribe to it, no one wants to have office buildings downtown. Thus, these buildings are not viable. I just explained this to the third grader I met, she was able to grasp the concept while few on here have made the cognitive leap.

Sheesh...some people...Yeah, that's why I have clients who want to build downtown. Your third grader doesn't happen to be a developer, does she? I don't disagree that the demand isn't there, its just that many folks who try to get things built or started in this city have to be really connected or really shady...same thing basically.

[LodgeDodger]

In capitalism money followed by self interests almost always wins, bottom line.

Part of the problem is the tax structure. I'm not sure why Detroit hasn't implemented a hefty flat parking tax based on lot size. A flat parking tax would encourage new buildings and redevelopment, with parking being viewed as only a project necessesity or luxury and not a big business in and of itself. A flat parking tax would also encourage parking garages over surface lots.

Taxes should also be cheaper for large and urban buildings, buildings that meet a certain criteria of urbanism should pay less than the crumby suburban style designs. Right now, the tax and zoning structure encourages suburban style building or parking lots, and discourages density.

Exactly what should this criteria be? It sounds, to me, as if you're trying to regulate taste and design, which are subjective.

[DetroitDad]

Exactly what should this criteria be? It sounds, to me, as if you're trying to regulate taste and design, which are subjective.

LodgeDodger,

The suburbs and city have already done that with many zoning laws and community ordinances. Many such things discourage urbanism, or even make good urban design illegal. Did you know there are proven methods to activate streets by building design and placement alone? I'm not saying regulate architectural styles or look, just such things as discouraging excessive surface parking and large set backs.

Don't you want a community that is interesting to walk around?

[Retroit]

where'd that pic go with the super-imposed billboard? someone should link it. it looked cool

This picture was posted by forummember Thejesus on March 29, 2009 in response to a suggestion I made on Ye Olde Forume. I don't know how to post a link, but the thread is still there. It's titled "Lafayette Building appears doomed" [[12th one down).

[DetroitDad]

Broken up boards like those in Times Square would probably be more practical and eye pleasing. Pie shaped boards actually on top of the Arcade Bar up the Lafayette Building might look better. Getting American Coney Island on board would also make it seem more vibrant.

[LodgeDodger]

LodgeDodger,

The suburbs and city have already done that with many zoning laws and community ordinances. Many such things discourage urbanism, or even make good urban design illegal. Did you know there are proven methods to activate streets by building design and placement alone? I'm not saying regulate architectural styles or look, just such things as discouraging excessive surface parking and large set backs.

Don't you want a community that is interesting to walk around?

No Dearie, this community is already interesting enough to walk around.

[GOAT]

Guys if it is such a great place then pool your cash together and buy it instead of living in some fantasy sim world. The dump should be levelled.

[ghettopalmetto]

Guys if it is such a great place then pool your cash together and buy it instead of living in some fantasy sim world. The dump should be levelled.

Yeah, there ya go. Encourage any old person off the street to become a real estate developer. That way, you *ensure* success.

Why don't you pony up the money to demolish it???