State Savings Bank in Danger of Demolition

[royce]

I know three Quicken people that park in the Lothrop garage. Just because you park closer doesn't mean others do too.

I have seen this first hand. If your employer is giving you free parking and a shuttle to work, what difference does it make whether or not the parking is 3 blocks away or 3 miles away?

[royce]

The need for mass-transit will make sense to people when there's no more cheap parking downtown and when that expensive parking becomes scarce. I remember years ago when there were "express" busses along Gratiot. If you had parking at the State Fairgrounds that was cheap and then used express busses to get those who parked there to a few stops like New Center, Wayne State, Grand Circus Park, Campus Martius Park, and the CAY Municipal building, you might convince people to "park and ride." For that matter, I have always envisioned a transit stop at Woodward and I-696. A park and ride there might convince Oakland County and some Macomb County residents to ditch their cars and take a SMART "express bus" to downtown Detroit.

[dtowncitylover]

The need for mass-transit will make sense to people when there's no more cheap parking downtown and when that expensive parking becomes scarce. I remember years ago when there were "express" busses along Gratiot. If you had parking at the State Fairgrounds that was cheap and then used express busses to get those who parked there to a few stops like New Center, Wayne State, Grand Circus Park, Campus Martius Park, and the CAY Municipal building, you might convince people to "park and ride." For that matter, I have always envisioned a transit stop at Woodward and I-696. A park and ride there might convince Oakland County and some Macomb County residents to ditch their cars and take a SMART "express bus" to downtown Detroit.

I saw this type of transit big time in Seattle. Huge parking lots in the middle of or next to the I-5 and buses going into Seattle.

[[Realized this wasn't a transit thread after I posted it, so let's digress)

[313rd]

Royce, I believe that you are correct. When Quicken or your employer is providing you free parking at a lot, that requires a shuttle, then Yes you will probably take it. Although it maybe inconvenient.

As far as Casino parking during the day, Greektown does not allow you to park between certain hours like 6:00-9:00am, unless you are a gold card member, or get your stub validated?

Also, I believe that MGM casino leases spots to Quicken and DTE Employees, something like the top few floors?

[wolverine]

No, actually, these building owners know what they're talking about. No dedicated parking, no tenants. There's no healthy downtown office building without dedicated parking.

Maybe in Detroit's case, though I still see exception. Most healthy downtowns have centralized parking. Bonus if you have transit. Some class A trophy buildings will have limited on site parking, but Penobscot can't be a class A trophy building by modern standards. Therefore it needs no parking. It's needs to work out a monthly discount program with a neighboring garage or buy into a shuttle service program which is not common but very prevelant in Chicago.

Plenty of office and residential towers are built today without parking. It may be a new trend, but I suggest you get familiar with it.

[WaCoTS]

What you are proposing is effectively near killing the patient with chemo in order to save it from dying from cancer.

no, i am proposing they leave the State Bank alone completely. i just threw out the "build on top" idea as a off-the-top-of-my-head compromise, knowing that they would probably reject it as impossible, or economically not feasible.

kind of like how they gave us such a farcical "we have to either knock down the State Bank, or we'll lose the Penobscot" scenario.

[Gistok]

no, i am proposing they leave the State Bank alone completely. i just threw out the "build on top" idea as a off-the-top-of-my-head compromise, knowing that they would probably reject it as impossible, or economically not feasible.

kind of like how they gave us such a farcical "we have to either knock down the State Bank, or we'll lose the Penobscot" scenario.

I agree... the 20 year old idea of a 20 story hotel tower on top of the building made sense in that it would have utilized the sumptuous marbled interior of the buildings 3 levels as a hotel lobby and common spaces. That idea never got beyond the feasibility phase.

But having a parking structure on top, it would have been awful...

[Novine]

Look! Not enough parking!

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/08/14...ntown-detroit/

[401don]

This guy seems to grab what he can on the cheap and then try to figure out what to do with it. First the Silverdome, now the Penobscot. How could a businessman not have a plan for parking if he spent even one hour looking into why the building was struggling before he bought it. It doesn't bode well for him acquiring the jail site [[which I'm certain he won't).

[Bham1982]

I have seen this first hand. If your employer is giving you free parking and a shuttle to work, what difference does it make whether or not the parking is 3 blocks away or 3 miles away?

Wouldn't that kind of make an enormous difference?

If given a choice between parking three blocks and three miles from work, you find no difference? Obviously with one you lengthen your commute, switch to two modes of transit, and become reliant on some shuttle. With the other you just park and start work.

[Bham1982]

Plenty of office and residential towers are built today without parking. It may be a new trend, but I suggest you get familiar with it.

No, actually it's a very old trend, and it's one I'm well familiar with.

My question is why is this relevant to Detroit? Who cares about the land-use patterns in Rome or Mumbai? The fact is that the Detroit market requires dedicated parking for office space. If you don't have it, you lose [[which is why, you'll notice, all the people advocating for parking for Penobscot are people who actually have a financial stake in the building, such as the leasing agent, the restaurant, and the like, and all the people advocating against the parking are preservationists with no personal financial stake).

Detroit has been a car-centered market since cars were accessible to the middle class. This shows no sign of changing. If you harbor fantasies of mostly transit-oriented cities, then, excepting NYC, pick somewhere outside the U.S. Detroit isn't built for transit, and you would basically have to demolish the entire tri-county area and start over if you want Detroit to look like Madrid or Tokyo.

[stinkytofu]

This guy seems to grab what he can on the cheap and then try to figure out what to do with it. First the Silverdome, now the Penobscot. How could a businessman not have a plan for parking if he spent even one hour looking into why the building was struggling before he bought it. It doesn't bode well for him acquiring the jail site [[which I'm certain he won't).

I'd argue neglect by owner of the Penobscot is more harmful to occupancy than parking. I've heard very poor reviews of the building and there is a reason that occupancy is skyrocketing downtown...while in the Penobscot it's shrinking. Parking may have some effect, but certainly not the sole reason.

[stinkytofu]

Speaking of which, Apogogoguioaguioagu [[whatever his name is) has proven to be a horrible owner of the Silverdome by letting the roof implode and not doing anything to secure the building. I hope to god that somehow we can make sure he doesn't neglect the State Savings until it's in horrible shape. Somebody needs to pry the building out of his hands.

[Gistok]

Stinkytofu.... like the former president of Iran, who had the alias of "Aberdinnerjacket".... we can "simplify" the Penobscot owners name to Apoopstopolus...

[downtownguy]

For the record, I can recall two individuals [[outside Kraemer) who publicly supported demo...

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that Kraemer Design Group was also supporting the demo? If so, that will certainly knock them down several pegs on my respect scale.

[stinkytofu]

Stinkytofu.... like the former president of Iran, who had the alias of "Aberdinnerjacket".... we can "simplify" the Penobscot owners name to Apoopstopolus...

Haha...I like it.

[stinkytofu]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that Kraemer Design Group was also supporting the demo? If so, that will certainly knock them down several pegs on my respect scale.

You are reading it correctly. Kraemer Design Group didn't just support the demolition, but Bob Kramer was actually the individual representing Penobscot ownership at the hearing. He made the presentation arguing the building had to go and also was the one fielding questions from the committee. Very disappointing...but anything to make a buck, I guess.

[Richard]

No, actually it's a very old trend, and it's one I'm well familiar with.

My question is why is this relevant to Detroit? Who cares about the land-use patterns in Rome or Mumbai? The fact is that the Detroit market requires dedicated parking for office space. If you don't have it, you lose [[which is why, you'll notice, all the people advocating for parking for Penobscot are people who actually have a financial stake in the building, such as the leasing agent, the restaurant, and the like, and all the people advocating against the parking are preservationists with no personal financial stake).

Detroit has been a car-centered market since cars were accessible to the middle class. This shows no sign of changing. If you harbor fantasies of mostly transit-oriented cities, then, excepting NYC, pick somewhere outside the U.S. Detroit isn't built for transit, and you would basically have to demolish the entire tri-county area and start over if you want Detroit to look like Madrid or Tokyo.

A couple of things I put in bold in your quote to put a little bit of a different perspective on things.

and all the people advocating against the parking are preservationists with no personal financial stake).

So are you saying that the citizens of Detroit have no personal financial stake in their city?
Personally I think they do and as so they have every right to preserve and protect just like what happens in every other city.

This shows no sign of changing.

This action shows a big sign that things are changing,assets such as this are not only an asset for the city and state but also to the country as a whole.They said when they bought the building it was because it was cheap,so now they are looking for the cheapest way to add value or make it more desirable.

I guess two options ,either spend 50 million to make it a stand out property as it is or spend 5 million to add parking.

It has been a speculative flip from the start.

[Bham1982]

A couple of things I put in bold in your quote to put a little bit of a different perspective on things.

So are you saying that the citizens of Detroit have no personal financial stake in their city?

I have no idea if the protesting preservationists are Detroit residents [[I suspect most aren't), but no, they don't have any direct stake in the future of the Penobscot.

The key takeaway, to me, is that everyone whose livelihood depends on the Penobscot's health wants dedicated parking. There is no such thing as a healthy downtown Detroit office building without dedicated parking. Why would one assume the Penobscot would buck the trend and be the first?

Granted, the entire real estate community could be wrong, and the entire preservation community could be right, but who in their right mind would be the one to buck the trend? The decisionmakers who own firms and sign office leases will not be happy with a building with no dedicated parking.

This action shows a big sign that things are changing,assets such as this are not only an asset for the city and state but also to the country as a whole.

Not sure how demolishing an old building for another parking garage shows things are changing. The same thing has been happening for 60 years [[along with the understandable dismay by preservationists).

I guess two options ,either spend 50 million to make it a stand out property as it is or spend 5 million to add parking.

No one is spending 50 million on an office building anywhere in Michigan. The Penobscot, even beautifully renovated, wouldn't even sell for half that. Metro Detroit rents don't support that kind of investment.

[rjlj]

Most of what you say is based on assumptions. You should have went to the meeting and you would have clearly seen that everyone in the room either lived in Detroit, worked in Detroit or had some tie to Detroit. You are either in the parking lot business or the biggest armchair expert on this board.

[QUOTE=Bham1982;399326][/B]
I have no idea if the protesting preservationists are Detroit residents [[I suspect most aren't), but no, they don't have any direct stake in the future of the Penobscot.

[Bham1982]

Most of what you say is based on assumptions.

Every single successful office building downtown has dedicated parking. Everyone with a financial stake in downtown office space speaks about the absolute critical need for on-site parking, which is demanded by both tenants and their visitors.

Yet you are the one claiming this is all based on assumptions.

Whatever floats your boat, dude. If you think office space in Metro Detroit doesn't need parking, go ahead and build your own office building, with no parking. Maybe you're smarter than everyone else, and will make a killing.

[Richard]

[QUOTE=Bham1982;399326][/B]

I have no idea if the protesting preservationists are Detroit residents [[I suspect most aren't), but no, they don't have any direct stake in the future of the Penobscot.

Of course they do,they could have said we like an incompetent form of city leadership and keep things as they were,what would the value then be.

The key takeaway, to me, is that everyone whose livelihood depends on the Penobscot's health wants dedicated parking. There is no such thing as a healthy downtown Detroit office building without dedicated parking. Why would one assume the Penobscot would buck the trend and be the first?

They knew when they bought the building that it had no dedicated parking,they bought the bank without looking at it because there was no need to as the plan was to demo from the start.

You buy a building knowing full well it has no parking then cry because it has no parking,the city is broke but maybe we can do a collection for a box of Kleenex to dry those tears.

You look at a undervalued building and say,what can I do to add value,if adding dedicated parking to a building that has never had it and is coming out of a time where it could have vanished over the weekend with a few well placed cash envelopes,odds are it is not going to happen now.

Granted, the entire real estate community could be wrong, and the entire preservation community could be right, but who in their right mind would be the one to buck the trend? The decisionmakers who own firms and sign office leases will not be happy with a building with no dedicated parking.

Who ever stands to profit will support it,goes without saying.

Not sure how demolishing an old building for another parking garage shows things are changing. The same thing has been happening for 60 years [[along with the understandable dismay by preservationists).

The demo was not approved in favor of a parking lot,I would say that it was a positive move towards bucking the trend.

It shows a city ready to move forward and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

It shows the beginnings of a city with strong leadership ready to move forward while respecting the past contributions.

It shows the citizens care about how the city progresses into the future and were there to show their support to those who believe in the city and fight to make it a better place.

If that element was there before none of this would be an issue to begin with.

No one is spending 50 million on an office building anywhere in Michigan. The Penobscot, even beautifully renovated, wouldn't even sell for half that. Metro Detroit rents don't support that kind of investment.

We know that,so if you did not spend a dime on the building and just added parking then you have added value,to the building but at what cost to the city as a whole.

They took a gamble a very risky one at that and bet on a dysfunctional city,they did not take into account that those days are over and that is why they lost.

Now they have to figure out highest and best use after the fact just like the Silverdome and the city now has to maybe worry about yet another speculator letting a building rot.

Detroit was built around horse and buggy then adapted to automobiles and now maybe it is time to adapt to the concept of a walkable,bike-able,street car riding city that co-mingles with the automobile,but that is happening already,is it not?

10 years from now who needs parking lots and what major city has perfect easy accessible parking,I have not seen any.

[Bham1982]

They knew when they bought the building that it had no dedicated parking,they bought the bank without looking at it because there was no need to as the plan was to demo from the start.

Yes, obviously, and what is your point? Since they bought a crappy, low-rent building, they shouldn't try and make it a better building?

You buy a building knowing full well it has no parking then cry because it has no parking,the city is broke but maybe we can do a collection for a box of Kleenex to dry those tears.

I don't understand what "the city is broke" has to do with this. Are you saying that downtown property owners should just abandon all their buildings and there's no hope?

You look at a undervalued building and say,what can I do to add value,if adding dedicated parking to a building that has never had it and is coming out of a time where it could have vanished over the weekend with a few well placed cash envelopes,odds are it is not going to happen now.

I don't even know what this means. Obviously Penobscot didn't originally have dedicated parking; no building built in the 20's had dedicated parking. It wasn't needed then. They didn't have internet either back then either.

The point is that now, every downtown 20's era office building that isn't abandoned, or massively struggling, has dedicated parking. It's an absolute must for your tenants.

Sometimes I wonder if I'm living in the same planet based on some of these comments. Who would have thunk that law firm partners would want a place to park? In Michigan of all places? What a radical, wacky concept! Who the hell drives a car around these parts?

[ggcanfield]

Bham, among the speakers opposing the demolition of the State Savings Bank were Rick Ruffner, head of Avanti Press, whose offices are quite close to the SSB, David Carleton of Mindfield and the GAR building [[among others), several businessmen whose companies had moved out of the Penobscot NOT because of parking but because of building management and maintenance issues, someone who lives in a condo in the Book Cadillac, someone who lives in Brush Park, a couple of people who live in Midtown, etc. etc. [[I took notes.) The vast majority of the 20 or so people who spoke either live in and/or own property in the city, some of it office buildings. They may not have a direct financial interest in the Penobscot, but they do have skin in the game when it comes to the financial health of the city. They also seemed to think that it was possible to be pro-development and pro-preservation.

Several commercial developers I've spoken to have an abysmal view of Apop - his penchant for grandiose plans without the financing or know-how to execute them, his "success" with the Silverdome, his poor management of the Penobscot.

Connected folks within the soccer community are extremely skeptical of his jail site proposal for a soccer stadium based on his track record, as well.

[Bham1982]

GGcanfield, I have no idea if the building owners are crappy or not. I don't see the relevance. If they're crappy, then we should really be sure the building goes to hell? To me, this is a totally separate issue.

I will say that the Penobscot has been a dog of a property for a long time, and I'm not surprised the owners aren't exactly blue-chip.

And I don't get the relevance of the property interests of those opposed to dedicated parking. The only point I was making is that they don't have a financial interest in the Penobscot.

I don't want to say you are the spokesperson for the "preservation community", but was the general contention that dedicated parking is not a necessary condition for successful office space in the region? Dedicated parking is very important for most commercial space users, not just in SE Michigan, but throughout most of the country, even in the vast majority of CBDs.