City Club Apartment Construction in Detroit
UPBEAT DETROIT PICTURES - WHY NOT? »

FUN THINGS TO DO IN DETROIT »



Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 131
  1. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
    Ooooooh, twisted-up glass box! How innovative!

    What a piece of uncreative crap.
    I agree, the designers to can better than that. If these building was started ( and it probably will) it will be called Gilbert's folly!
    Last edited by Danny; March-05-15 at 10:44 PM.

  2. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
    So what, in particular, about "melty glass box" says "Detroit"?
    What about four cylinders arranged around a center, larger cylinder says "Detroit"? Well, it is Detroit, therefore it is Detroit.

    Detroit is what we make it, and the amount of change that we've seen in the last five years along with the coming decade will have a huge impact on what Detroit is, and what Detroit will be.

    I'm skeptical about the building, but we've only seen fuzzy images of early renderings.

    The main thing I want from the building is 10 stories of streetwall, 10+ stories of building, first floor retail, and mixed use leaning toward residential.


    The fact that we're arguing over what new mid-rise construction should look like in downtown is awesome.

  3. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by canuck View Post
    Zaha Hadid, the London based Iranian architect has designed some pretty good buildings I haven't experience in situ but they are highly idiosyncratic. She did one in Michigan at MSU called the Eli and Edythe Broad Museum. It is hard to give an opinion on a buiding like that without experiencing it the way it is meant to be.

    Hadid is hit or miss but some of her buildings are amazing as will be the new Beijing Airport terminal which is in the same vein as the Liège train station. Likewise the Zagreb airport.
    There is a whole collectivce of these folks...Hadid, Gehry, Koolhaas, Philip Johnson, Michael Graves, I.M. Pei, SHoP...who practice this same type of repetitive self-indulgent cartoon architecture. Much like the world of professional sports franchises, desperate mayors (and universities) chase down these Brand Name architects in order to boost their civic reputations. It's a giant hoodwink that all kicked into high gear when tourists flocked to Gehry's Guggenheim in Bilbao. Suddenly, everywhere on earth just needed to have a "statement piece" to show how creative and clever their town was. Forget the Golden Ratio was ever discovered, so we can now have some innovative crap.

    Gehry admits that he's more interested in sculpture than the function of the building (Read about his debacle at MIT). Koolhaas has stated that he intends his designs to disorient people. As if that's somehow a desirable trait. It's like these folks earn a degree of smugness when they sell their poorly thought-out ideas to the public...as if they're all smarter than the rest of us.

    Some of the comments above are amusing: Letting natural light into the space? Yeah, because Louis Kahn never figured that one out. Mixed-use? Yeah, no one ever thought to put multiple functions in the same building. And better still--let's "wrap" (code for "hide") an important civic building behind three museums. What a way to serve the public, right?

    I might be a cranky traditionalist, but in the realm of modern architecture, the Emperor truly has no clothes. I'd love to see more work by Detroit's community of hard-working architects, who are professionally committed to functional buildings, than to see a piece of rehashed sculptural claptrap by some holier-than-thou Name architect..
    Last edited by ghettopalmetto; March-05-15 at 11:01 PM.

  4. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 48307 View Post
    Detroit is what we make it, and the amount of change that we've seen in the last five years along with the coming decade will have a huge impact on what Detroit is, and what Detroit will be.

    I'm skeptical about the building, but we've only seen fuzzy images of early renderings.

    The main thing I want from the building is 10 stories of streetwall, 10+ stories of building, first floor retail, and mixed use leaning toward residential.
    I don't disagree with you. But I do know that if Dan Gilbert puts one of these sculptures on Woodward, you're not going to have either 1) continuity in the streetwall or 2) ground level retail space. That much is a given.

  5. #80

    Default

    Hopefully it will include a movie theatre. Downtown needs a decent cinema.

  6. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
    I don't disagree with you. But I do know that if Dan Gilbert puts one of these sculptures on Woodward, you're not going to have either 1) continuity in the streetwall or 2) ground level retail space. That much is a given.
    if you saw the video before it was taken down the site does include ground floor retail and an interior public space. the streetwall is maintained throughout the block minus the southwest corner. i wonder if you even bother to look at the details of these things or maybe your too busy with your 10,000th post about how this building is just a blob and all modern architects are hacks.

  7. #82

    Default

    I wish I had popped some popcorn before reading this. I'm really enjoying the discussion.

    Does anyone have an example of existing buildings that are similar to what you'd like to see in this space as an alternative to the one proposed by sHop?

  8. #83

    Default

    Oh geez! It looks like a spaceship!
    Sorry, but Gilbert just doesn't have good taste.

  9. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
    There is a whole collectivce of these folks...Hadid, Gehry, Koolhaas, Philip Johnson, Michael Graves, I.M. Pei, SHoP...who practice this same type of repetitive self-indulgent cartoon architecture. Much like the world of professional sports franchises, desperate mayors (and universities) chase down these Brand Name architects in order to boost their civic reputations. It's a giant hoodwink that all kicked into high gear when tourists flocked to Gehry's Guggenheim in Bilbao. Suddenly, everywhere on earth just needed to have a "statement piece" to show how creative and clever their town was. Forget the Golden Ratio was ever discovered, so we can now have some innovative crap.

    Gehry admits that he's more interested in sculpture than the function of the building (Read about his debacle at MIT). Koolhaas has stated that he intends his designs to disorient people. As if that's somehow a desirable trait. It's like these folks earn a degree of smugness when they sell their poorly thought-out ideas to the public...as if they're all smarter than the rest of us.

    Some of the comments above are amusing: Letting natural light into the space? Yeah, because Louis Kahn never figured that one out. Mixed-use? Yeah, no one ever thought to put multiple functions in the same building. And better still--let's "wrap" (code for "hide") an important civic building behind three museums. What a way to serve the public, right?

    I might be a cranky traditionalist, but in the realm of modern architecture, the Emperor truly has no clothes. I'd love to see more work by Detroit's community of hard-working architects, who are professionally committed to functional buildings, than to see a piece of rehashed sculptural claptrap by some holier-than-thou Name architect..
    Ghetto, I must admit, there are a lot of times I don't agree with comments you make on here, but in this case I don't think anything truer could have been said.

    I'll wait to pass judgement on what is build, if this is truely in fact not the final design, but if this is the way were going, I'm not happy with it. I know were not going to be getting anymore art deco beauties built (no MGM Grand, you didn't accomplish it either), but something a little more traditional and a little less crumpled up paper ball design.

  10. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeg19 View Post
    Ghetto, I must admit, there are a lot of times I don't agree with comments you make on here, but in this case I don't think anything truer could have been said.

    I'll wait to pass judgement on what is build, if this is truely in fact not the final design, but if this is the way were going, I'm not happy with it. I know were not going to be getting anymore art deco beauties built (no MGM Grand, you didn't accomplish it either), but something a little more traditional and a little less crumpled up paper ball design.
    I agree. When I see something like the renderings shown, my first thought is that the architect is taking a piss on Detroit. It's a complete lack of disrespect for the city, it's history, it's culture, it's fabric, and it's people (who will bear the neural confusion of digesting and using this space). This thing would be like the petulant child of Woodward Avenue--LOOK AT ME!!! I'M MORE SPECIAL!!! You could plop this melty glass box down *anywhere* on earth--there's nothing "unique" about it.

    I would love to share your optimism, but from my experience, once an architect is married to a radical idea, they tend to only push it further into radicalism, versus making it into something more modest and appropriate. After all, SHoP is part of a whole subsect of architects whose bread-and-butter is to scream for attention.

    I'd rather a skilled architect install a massing and use materials that make sense on Woodward, than to say, "Look, it's WAVY!!!"

  11. #86

    Default

    You can't blame the architect as much as the individual they are contracted by. It now appears obvious from his statements that Gilbert wants something dramatic/radical to appeal to the young techie entrepreneurs he's trying to attract to the area. Maybe he should promote Detroit's classic side with a modern edge instead. In other words build on the downtown's unique strengths.

  12. #87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Danny View Post
    That glass building looks ugly! I was expecting a glass tower of babel structure that rival the Ren Cen.
    The Ernst and Young building at One Kennedy Square was considered ugly and out of place with it's surrounding. Now it is being admired. I think the trend is oddly shaped buildings especially glass buildings.

  13. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto View Post
    Actually, no, they don't. Just as you wouldn't design a building to a resist a tornado...you're talking about an *extremely rare* event. I don't know of any provisions in the building codes to address an airplane impacting a structure. The WTC collapse wasn't a building code problem anyway--the two towers fell exactly as they were designed to do, that is to say, without toppling over.
    So you are saying that if any event such as out of control fires the WTC were designed to just cave in on itself automatically and defy the law of gravity by not tipping over not even the antenna or are you a conspiracy nut who believe that bombs were planted in the buildings before hand

  14. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stasu1213 View Post
    So you are saying that if any event such as out of control fires the WTC were designed to just cave in on itself automatically and defy the law of gravity by not tipping over not even the antenna or are you a conspiracy nut who believe that bombs were planted in the buildings before hand
    The WTC towers withstood a freaking plane crash and barely budged sideways. They stood until the steel was weakened by the fires, and collapsed directly down.

    I think that's what he's trying to say.

  15. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stasu1213 View Post
    The Ernst and Young building at One Kennedy Square was considered ugly and out of place with it's surrounding. Now it is being admired. I think the trend is oddly shaped buildings especially glass buildings.
    I don't think E&Y or Compuware are "admired". Tolerated? accepted? not totally offensive? Both would be totally at home on Big Beaver or in Southfield surrounded by a moat of parking? sure.

    But "admired"? for what?

  16. #91

    Default

    Meh.

    Name:  hudson.jpg
Views: 462
Size:  38.2 KB


    I wish it were A LOT taller.

  17. #92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stasu1213 View Post
    So you are saying that if any event such as out of control fires the WTC were designed to just cave in on itself automatically and defy the law of gravity by not tipping over not even the antenna or are you a conspiracy nut who believe that bombs were planted in the buildings before hand
    I'm saying that you don't want a building drifting into--or falling on--another building. Your terms "out of control" and "automatically" are ambiguous here, so I'm not really sure what you're asking.

  18. #93

    Default

    We can all stop complaining about a lack of height right now. Nothing in that rendering depicts or suggests its height, and if anything I feel that it suggests a tower on the southern flank of the block. They gave us a limited screenshot and said 'this is not final.' So stop.

    I really like how it addresses Woodward with an elegant, arched wall of windows, limited setback, and plenty of entry points. That would be a win. I also like how it contrasts with Merchant's Row, offering those venerable historic structures the highest compliment/complement by not trying to mimick them. Put a residential/office spire on top of this and I will be overjoyed.

  19. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
    We can all stop complaining about a lack of height right now. Nothing in that rendering depicts or suggests its height, and if anything I feel that it suggests a tower on the southern flank of the block. They gave us a limited screenshot and said 'this is not final.' So stop.
    just an FYI, other renderings...that haven't been teased out...show the building in various configurations at about the height of compuware.

    yes, it's not near final form. yes, it could all be scrapped and replaced with something else....but from the stuff i've seen (and I'm not claiming any inside knowledge, just that I've seen more than what is out there) it does not appear the plan is to be tall. Which to me is just fine. It fits in the space nicely.
    Last edited by bailey; March-06-15 at 11:12 AM.

  20. #95

    Default

    I think this iconic, landmark or whatever they want to call it just isn't needed or necessary right now. What is needed immediately is more new residential apartments and quickly. What I would have done was build two long apartment towers one on Woodward the other on Library and ground floor retail for both. Center courtyard with a pool, some grills, outdoor space for residences. Build as many studios, 1 bedroom, 2 bedrooms that would vertically work. This should have been more then half done by now. It's just well located space ready for new construction, don't waste years thinking it needs to be "iconic" just start bringing in density ASAP.
    Last edited by ABetterDetroit; March-06-15 at 03:32 PM.

  21. #96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ABetterDetroit View Post
    I think this iconic, landmark or whatever they want to call it just isn't needed or necessary right now. What is needed immediately is more new residential apartments and quickly. What I would have done was build two long apartment towers one on woodword the other on library and ground floor retail for both. Center courtyard with a pool, some grills, outdoor space for residences. Build as many studios, 1 bedroom, 2 bedrooms that would vertically work. This should have been more then half done by now. It's just well located space ready for new construction, don't waste years thinking it needs to be "iconic" just start bringing in density ASAP.
    I think that's a fantastic plan.

  22. #97

  23. #98

    Default

    Don't really understand how the depicted building massing works if the space-eating uses like the proposed museums are now scrapped. Residential is generating the revenue right now in development downtown but massive full block floor plates are impractical for residential uses. Is there a market for 750k -1million sq. ft. of new Class A office space downtown? If so, then maybe a mid-rise full block building with an iconic design works there. If not, wouldn't a feasible plan that relies on revenue from residential uses require a tower(s) design? Speak up you developers out there.
    Last edited by swingline; March-06-15 at 03:38 PM.

  24. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bailey View Post
    I don't think E&Y or Compuware are "admired". Tolerated? accepted? not totally offensive? Both would be totally at home on Big Beaver or in Southfield surrounded by a moat of parking? sure.

    But "admired"? for what?
    yeah I agree, those buildings pretty much suck ass. Could totally see them on big beaver in troy. But glad that they're there nonetheless than...oh, say, an empty lot used for parking. Parking a damn car seems like the only thing we know how to do around here lol
    Last edited by Jayp213; March-06-15 at 05:26 PM.

  25. #100

    Default

    I like it too and I like it for where it is. I'm happy it is not tall. It will be a nice surprise that will elevate the buildings around it and make them look better. They will reflect on its surface and sunlight while continue to shine on them.

    It will be so much better than that behemoth Hudson's that darkened and isolated everything around it. And let's not forget that the hodgepodge of additions that became Hudson's was not exactly a crime against architecture when it vanished in a cloud. It's significance was memories not looks. I date the turn around point for downtown from the day.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Instagram
BEST ONLINE FORUM FOR
DETROIT-BASED DISCUSSION
DetroitYES Awarded BEST OF DETROIT 2015 - Detroit MetroTimes - Best Online Forum for Detroit-based Discussion 2015

ENJOY DETROITYES?


AND HAVE ADS REMOVED DETAILS »





Welcome to DetroitYES! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
DetroitYES! is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to DetroitYES! [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.