"So Long Cass Tech", Bobb says...

[davewindsor]

And what does it cost to provide a security guard? It will cost you at least $150,000 a year to provide 24 hour security to this building. It requires at least 5 full time guards to provide one person on site for 24 hour security. That's about $20,000 per guard even if you only pay them mimimum wage. On top of that you need to provide supervision, accounting and government mandated services [[such as unemployment insurance) for these guards.

There are 8760 hours in a year. A full time employee works 2000. That's 5 people to cover 1 years worth of hours. At $10 per hour that's almost $90,000 in just guard wages.

Most security firms are going to charge you $20000 per month to provide one on site 24 hour guard protection. The cost is not negligible.

In the very least, they could have set up motion sensors connected to an alarm and a security guard company or Detroit Police via telephone dialer or long range radio to send someone down to investigate if the security was breached. This service has been around for a long time. What do they charge these days for that service? Around $100 a month?

[Lorax]

And what does it cost to provide a security guard? It will cost you at least $150,000 a year to provide 24 hour security to this building. It requires at least 5 full time guards to provide one person on site for 24 hour security. That's about $20,000 per guard even if you only pay them mimimum wage. On top of that you need to provide supervision, accounting and government mandated services [[such as unemployment insurance) for these guards.

There are 8760 hours in a year. A full time employee works 2000. That's 5 people to cover 1 years worth of hours. At $10 per hour that's almost $90,000 in just guard wages.

Most security firms are going to charge you $20000 per month to provide one on site 24 hour guard protection. The cost is not negligible.

But a better investment than spending millions on demolition. You're not winning the argument. It is far more cost effective to retain the built environment.

[Lorax]

Hi, my name is Lorax, and I don't care what sort of facts you present, I have my fingers in my ears and my head up my butt and I'm not going to listen! Ain't gonna do it, no how, no way!

That's quite the list of respectable building owners there. Too bad the majority of those buildings aren't even close to being mothballed. The Whitney's glass ceiling in the atrium is shattered by how many office chairs dropped from upper floors? It wouldn't surprise me if most of the marble is gone now, too.

Michael Higgins...hmmmm...yes, everyone should follow his method. Beal should charge an admission fee for all the urban explorers who are still to this day making the trip to the top of the Broderick.

The Book Cadillac did in fact have electrical service and a security guard after it was shuttered.

And your contention that the Statler was "salvageable" is misleading. Any building can be rebuilt. The issue is whether the activities needed to "save" the building will ultimately produce positive returns.

Using that analysis, which is the only analysis available for economic decisions, still leaves the feasibility of the Book's reopening uncertain.

Thanks for the bitchy, childish response.

You happen to be wrong. I know who owns those buildings, and passing judgement on them isn't what this thread is about.

The fact remains these buildings have been vacant for decades, and still stand. If they had security, they would be in even better shape for future use.

Just because Detroit is the only city in America that is apparently resigned to allowing this sort of demolition by neglect, doesn't make it right.

I've never met a bunch so consumed by hopelessness and the inevitability of their fate than those who profess to be in favor of saving the built environment, but throw up every roadblock imaginable to changing that fate.

With the millions this city has wasted on crap over the years, they have had more than enough money, whether their own, or borrowed, to put into security for city-owned properties. There are no other excuses other than apathy. Detroiters just decided not to give a shit at a point in time.

[R8RBOB]

Thanks for the bitchy, childish response.

You happen to be wrong. I know who owns those buildings, and passing judgement on them isn't what this thread is about.

The fact remains these buildings have been vacant for decades, and still stand. If they had security, they would be in even better shape for future use.

Just because Detroit is the only city in America that is apparently resigned to allowing this sort of demolition by neglect, doesn't make it right.

I've never met a bunch so consumed by hopelessness and the inevitability of their fate than those who profess to be in favor of saving the built environment, but throw up every roadblock imaginable to changing that fate.

With the millions this city has wasted on crap over the years, they have had more than enough money, whether their own, or borrowed, to put into security for city-owned properties. There are no other excuses other than apathy. Detroiters just decided not to give a shit at a point in time.

After reading the part about "city-owned properties" I had to comment.

You make it sound like the city of Detroit is openly acquiring vacant buildings to let them decay and rot instead of preserving them for future use. Since you mention the Statler, I go to buildingsofdetroit's website for this tibit.

"The end finally came on Oct. 15, 1975, after the hotel's utilities were cut off. At the time of its closure, the Heritage had racked up nearly $150,000 in back taxes, which eventually led to foreclosure in June 1979. At this point, the closed hotel became the property of the City of Detroit."

So the city got the building because the previous owner decided not to pay its taxes. I betcha most if not all of the vacant buildings currently owned by the city of Detroit is a result of someone not paying its taxes and yet you expect the city to spent millions of dollars to preserve the same buildings the owners just walked away from?

The city of Detroit is suppose to be a municipality, not a landlord. No wonder the city is broke. You had former city residents dumping their properties escaping the city and leaving the city with the bill.

[EastSider]

Thanks for the bitchy, childish response.

You happen to be wrong. I know who owns those buildings, and passing judgement on them isn't what this thread is about.

The fact remains these buildings have been vacant for decades, and still stand. If they had security, they would be in even better shape for future use.

Just because Detroit is the only city in America that is apparently resigned to allowing this sort of demolition by neglect, doesn't make it right.

I've never met a bunch so consumed by hopelessness and the inevitability of their fate than those who profess to be in favor of saving the built environment, but throw up every roadblock imaginable to changing that fate.

With the millions this city has wasted on crap over the years, they have had more than enough money, whether their own, or borrowed, to put into security for city-owned properties. There are no other excuses other than apathy. Detroiters just decided not to give a shit at a point in time.

Mothballing is more than just having a security guard to keep the scrappers and explorers out of the building. What part of that sentence is hard for you?

You don’t want to pass judgement on the building owners? Then who exactly is responsible for their current condition?

[detourdetroit]

Over the past few years, the all volunteer Historic Cass Tech Preservation Society has:

Engaged UDM SOA on a year long study/planning process of the building that did result in strategies and drawings and an existing conditions report [[which, admittedly has probably changed since this project was complete):
http://casstechhistoric.org/

Issued an RFP for the building which resulted in several letters of interest, including Artspace. Cost of acquisition and dealing with DPS on disposition has been problematic. The last figure DPS put out for purchase price was a ponderous $14 mil.
http://casstechhistoric.org/docs/RFPcasstech.pdf

We're currently in discussion with a known property owner who's been discussed on the forum and who's interested in acquiring the building. It may not be ideal, but in this market, it may be the element that will allow the building to be carried through.

It's true, we have been very frustrated by the situation from the onset since the building was not properly taken offline. Pipes were not winterized and burst. Dubious circumstances resulted in major electrical vandalism. The building was not cleared of classroom material, nor were the ceilings that dropped cleared as a result of the burst pipes. While the windows were boarded, ongoing security for the building was quite lax. Multiple break ins resulted in stripping and the fire of a couple of summers ago, which damaged several rooms on the 2nd Street side of the building.

It's interesting to compare the relative trajectories of buildings like the Argonaut and Cass Tech and how different views of stewardship can affect an outcome.

Structurally, the building is stable and in a healthy urban environment, potentially viable. Its loss would be another major blow in the pockmarking of our core's urban fabric. Demolishing the building would sever a major anchoring element in the lower corridor and be a monster mistake. Not like we haven't made those kinds of decisions before...

[Luckystrikes]

Perhaps this and future generations will learn from this and maintain buildings. One day the new Cass will be old and the class of 2075 will hold fundraisers to try to save the present bldg.

I had great times in that building. Back hallway and stairs. The roof. Those strange guys who were building planes on the 5th or 4th. Smoking on the side of the building near the automotive repair class and flirting with the bad boys. Underneath the stage. The track above the gym. Elevators. The greasy spoon a block away. Watching the men who lived in the apartment building across from Cass swig liquor at 9 a.m and throwing up out of their windows. Quickees Donuts. Downtown was our playground.

[bailey]

Structurally, the building is stable and in a healthy urban environment, potentially viable.

...but it's not in a healthy urban environment.

ts loss would be another major blow in the pockmarking of our core's urban fabric

How? It's an obsolete school and it's state of the art replacement [[with unusable football fields due to the awkward site) stands right next door.

Demolishing the building would sever a major anchoring element in the lower corridor and be a monster mistake. Not like we haven't made those kinds of decisions before...

as you noted in your post about the level of stewardship in vacant properties, perhaps placing blame where it is due would be a first course. The building, properly secured and mothballed from the beginning would not be the blight it is. Now, whatever fantasy one had for it's adaptive re-use is more expensive by many multiples because of ineptitude.

How about taking into account what the site would look like as green space and incorporated in to the new Cass Tech's campus? Hey, maybe the students at Cass deserve somethign better than going to school in the shadow of a decaying, rotting hulk of a building.

[detourdetroit]

...but it's not in a healthy urban environment.

Exactly! It's not the building's fault. So maybe our energies would be better spent on creating a healthy urban environment, and not by eviscerating the little urbanity we have left.

How? It's an obsolete school and it's state of the art replacement [[with unusable football fields due to the awkward site) stands right next door.

The building was made obsolete by public policy, not technology. A building like Brooklyn Tech of exactly the same vintage is still going strong and serving its constituency

as you noted in your post about the level of stewardship in vacant properties, perhaps placing blame where it is due would be a first course. The building, properly secured and mothballed from the beginning would not be the blight it is. Now, whatever fantasy one had for it's adaptive re-use is more expensive by many multiples because of ineptitude.

How about taking into account what the site would look like as green space and incorporated in to the new Cass Tech's campus? Hey, maybe the students at Cass deserve somethign better than going to school in the shadow of a decaying, rotting hulk of a building.

Yes, the status quo is not acceptable. But does that necessarily mean demolition? So how about using a much smaller percentage of the stimulus money that Bobb seems to be envisioning will be used to destroy the building and clear it out and mothball it. Who knows, the building may end up inspiring one of those students like it did the UDM students. How about first focusing on cleaning up Cass Park as a working green space, or focusing on any one of the other multitude of vacant lots first, before wasting money to demolish significant urban structures.

[bailey]

Exactly! It's not the building's fault. So maybe our energies would be better spent on creating a healthy urban environment, and not by eviscerating the little urbanity we have left.

It's wedged shape corner lot between the new Cass and an 8 lane road. That ship has sailed on this property.

The building was made obsolete by public policy, not technology. A building like Brooklyn Tech of exactly the same vintage is still going strong and serving its constituency

Still doesn't change the fact it's replacement is standing right next door. Not down the street or across town, but literally right next door. It's a new and allegedly state of the art building. Old Cass tech apparently has no use or function. it's sad, but it's just reality.

Yes, the status quo is not acceptable. But does that necessarily mean demolition? So how about using a much smaller percentage of the stimulus money that Bobb seems to be envisioning will be used to destroy the building and clear it out and mothball it.

it's the same debate that's been going on for 10 pages in the Lafayette thread. there is no market or use for the building. There likely never will be. How many decades will it stand empty and how many decades of decay will it take before anyone on this board admits that not every building can be saved?

Who knows, the building may end up inspiring one of those students like it did the UDM students. How about first focusing on cleaning up Cass Park as a working green space, [/

Because that would require someone to stand up to the social services agencies that insist on using Cass Park as a rally point for distribution of food and clothes to the homeless population that are responsible for making Cass Park and it's surroundings unusable. We can't be mean to our street folk, that is what makes Detroit so urban and gritty.

[R8RBOB]

Still doesn't change the fact it's replacement is standing right next door. Not down the street or across town, but literally right next door. It's a new and allegedly state of the art building. Old Cass tech apparently has no use or function. it's sad, but it's just reality. [/I]

This is the part that I am in agreement with you. It is not like Cass Tech closed up for business or moved away. They built an new building next door to the old building. There was no need to keep the old building standing. It should have been knocked down the day after the new building was opened.

[detourdetroit]

not every building. let's start with the ones worth saving. let's all agree once and for all that preservationists do not ply the mantra "let's save every old building..." it's ridiculous. please stop using that phrase. it's an insult to our collective intelligence. when there is no funded plan for a higher better use, then there's no reason to demolish. what Detroit needs is a plan for the retention of urban basis, sometimes known as urbanity 101.

[bailey]

not every building. let's start with the ones worth saving. let's all agree once and for all that preservationists do not ply the mantra "let's save every old building..." it's ridiculous. please stop using that phrase.

What building slated for demo has not resulted in a "Save the ____ building " letter writing and hand wringing campaign around here? Anytime even the mention of taking down a derelict, unoccupied for decades, wreck is even rumored to happen, it's Defcon 2 around here. In fact, has it ever been conceded here that any building in the CBD was rightfully torn down? Or was not the result of a criminal conspiracy between the DEGC and the local demo companies?

it's an insult to our collective intelligence. when there is no funded plan for a higher better use, then there's no reason to demolish.

But there is a reason to keep it barely up for 30 years and tear it down when it's too far gone to save? The insult to the intelligence comes from the side that seems to think that any building will ever be "mothballed" to the standard needed to preserve the building. It would be great if they were...and 30 years from now, they could be rehabbed, but the proven result is that they'll be left to rot like the layfayette, the metopolitan, the davids....and on and on.

what Detroit needs is a plan for the retention of urban basis, sometimes known as urbanity 101.

What detroit needs is a plan..period. It has none. Mothballing obsolete and unusable buildings for an undefined time and for some undefined adaptive re-use or an "urban basis" is just adding to the problem. It adds to the quite visible perception that detroit is an abandoned city full of abandoned wrecks. Imagine a what message would be sent by a manicured and landscaped Cass tech campus in place of derelict building? Imagine if we let the Detroit Conservancy run Cass park like they run Campus Martius [[ by that I mean zero tolerance for street prophets)--- Hey, it might project a perception that things are turning around...instead of continuing along the same desolate path to total collapse.

[detourdetroit]

yes, no plan. having a plan would be a start.

in terms of hand wringing, there's nary been a peep from the preservation community about the dismantling of dangerous housing in the neighborhoods. hundreds of less significant buildings get demo'ed and that's probably a good thing. target the money there! people get upset when there is significant urban fabric at stake when there is no funded plan for their replacement. can every building in the cbd be saved. probably not. but your definition of a wreck and coming to a reasonable conclusion based on a reasonable process may be two things. are these buildings unsalvageable in the sense that they are structurally compromised. that was likely the case with the the fine arts of late. it's too bad that was lost, but a compromise was reached by saving the facade. it's about long term public policy that values urban assets. places like minneapolis-st. paul have a no demo rule for national register properties, even if they're vacant [[even if they've been that way for years). so how do we shift decision making to assset management rather than scorched earth.

[EastSider]

Model D has a column that speaks directly to this issue.

http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/wattrick20309.aspx

[bailey]

so how do we shift decision making to assset management rather than scorched earth.

Never going to happen in this city until there is a reason to manage the asset. There is no penalty for any landowner to let his property fall apart and no repercussion on the city if city owned property is allowed to disintegrate.

But, further, there is no market for a building even if properly managed and preserved or re-habbed. until that changes, nothing will change.

I hate to use the hackneyed "cancer" example, but there is no cure for cancer, however there are ways to attack it and stop it's spread. you'll end up scarred, but you'll be alive. It's the same for the city. Detroit will never be the Detroit of yesteryear. 50 years of sprawl, reliance on a dying industry, and mass exodus has made that an impossibility But if we surgically remove the blight....save what makes sense, it could be pretty nice.

Model D has a column that speaks directly to this issue.

http://www.modeldmedia.com/features/wattrick20309.aspx

Geographically, Detroit has a lot to offer. There is no reason our city center cannot once again be one of the great cities of North America. But we have to get serious about fixing the underlying problems that continue to hold Detroit back before we tackle the bricks and mortar. So let's leave the bricks and mortar alone, for now. Like FDR's Bank Holiday, it will be an opportunity to assess honestly what is best in the long term.
.

I don't necessarily disagree, Detroit has sytemic problems. but how many decades do we wait for "detroit to get serious about fixing underlying problems"? How many generations of kids are going to have to walk past a decaying and crumbling Cass Tech? as any attempt to address systemic problems are met by the grape throwing masses hell bent to stop the tough choices tobe made. Bing says "1000 jobs have to go and 10% pay cut", unions say "Strike!". Bobb looks to revamp the schools, School board files a lawsuit to stop him.
Detroit is going to have to rise in spite of it's problems because Detroit will always have them.

[detourdetroit]

...and pretty flat.

i agree with your assessment of the problem--however the cancer's in our heads not on the street--the solution is wasteful.

[bailey]

ok, how long does it stand empty and un-secured before it's not wasteful?

[Detroitnerd]

Why, Bailey! Are you saying it should be secured?

[bailey]

Why, Bailey! Are you saying it should be secured?

I always have. However, they never are.

[wolverine]

What a shame to hear this is being demoed. Really wish it could be saved, but I really have no idea who would step forward to renovate/secure/mothball it or what it would be renovated into.

[detourdetroit]

A little birdie passed this note along...


"It's hard to not understand Robert Bobb's motivation here. He's dealing with a crisis situation and has an opportunity to use one-time money to clear a liability off the DPS balance sheet. So I guess if Cass Tech goes as part of this effort to bring DPS back from the brink, it's hard to shed that many tears.

However, focusing on this immediate decision misses the point. Why is a project for Cass Tech such a tough sell? The city's management of Cass Park has created a skid row in a neighborhood located in the midst of the "greater downtown" [[as the booster class likes to say). Aside from Cass Tech, the neighborhood includes the Masonic Temple, the Mariners Inn program, and great [[albeit decaying) old apartment houses along Second Avenue.

Much of it isn't fully viable because the city allows social service delivery in Cass Park. City and suburban churches - against the city's regulations - deliver food and clothing to the homeless in the park. That concentrates a potentially dangerous vagrant population in Cass Tech's backyard. Alleys are frequently used as toilets. It's isn't a particularly humane social service delivery system. And the neighborhood can't reach it's full potential because of it. As a former Cass Park resident, I'd like to ask holy-rollers Bishop Ellis if he'd let some of his Cass Park "flock" stay in the Greater Grace parking lot. Maybe the suburban churches can take a few schizophrenics to live in a Farmington Hills park.

Again, because of larger problems, it's impossible to accurately assess Cass Tech's true development value. If city officials didn't fetishize every scrap of city-owned real estate as "precious jewels" Cass Park could be turned over to a conservancy much like New York did with Bryant Park. No one will ever hold international fashion shows in Cass Park but a well-run privately-run public park with concessions and programming would be an asset rather than a liability to Cass Park's neighborhood. At the very least, it would a place where children could play rather than a place where junkies shoot up. And who knows what difference that would make to old Cass Tech's viability?"

Jeff T. Wattrick

[R8RBOB]

All this talk of securing buildings, hiring security guards, mothballing buildings is nonsense. I know some people have a respect for Detroit's ruins but I think it is time for everyone to come back to Earth. The empty buildings in Detroit is a result of the following:

1) Building was becoming outdated.
2) Businesses leasing space in said building left.
3) Corporation occupying building left for new suburban location.

All these reasons have one thing in common: money

Securing a building to prevent tresspassers cost money. Hiring a security company to guard the building cost money and mothballing a building cost money. The owners of these buildings before they lost them had no desire than to spend one dollar more than they had to for these buildings. They abandoned these properties because it would cost them more to maintain them even when not in use. To expect the city of Detroit to budget money for preserving empty buildings would have been ripped to shreds in council and the mayor would have coughed out a lung as he was signing the veto.

Detroit inherited these properties because the owners decided they were not going to spend anymore money on the properties, yet some people expected the city to budget millions to maintain the buildings. That's nonsense if the city had money to spend.

[Lorax]

How many millions were wasted on demolitions? How many millions were wasted in graft and corruption? Don't tell me the money doesn't or hasn't existed to establish a conservancy for city owned properties. That's complete bullshit, and everyone knows it.

Buildings get outdated from lack of maintenance and overuse. They can be retrofitted. DPS should have never spent the millions building the new Cass Tech in the first place. Renovating the older one to modern standards, even with an addition and the playfields would still have cost less, and given the school it's sense of history, which obviously means nothing to Detroiters.

[R8RBOB]

How many millions were wasted on demolitions? How many millions were wasted in graft and corruption? Don't tell me the money doesn't or hasn't existed to establish a conservancy for city owned properties. That's complete bullshit, and everyone knows it.

Buildings get outdated from lack of maintenance and overuse. They can be retrofitted. DPS should have never spent the millions building the new Cass Tech in the first place. Renovating the older one to modern standards, even with an addition and the playfields would still have cost less, and given the school it's sense of history, which obviously means nothing to Detroiters.

Channeling Ronald Ray-gun.....There you go again

City-owned properties is something you just won't let go. Let talk about city-owned properties. Here are some examples of city-owned properties.

Cobo Hall
The Detroit Zoo
The DIA
The Detroit Science Center
The Charles H. Wright African-American Museum
Belle Isle
Rouge Park
Detroit Public Library
Herman Keefer

These are "city-owned properties." Not empty buildings that sit empty.

BTW, you should visit http://buildingsofdetroit.com/places
A number of buildings that are empty in Detroit aren't owned by Detroit. You should direct your displeasure about the ruins being ruined to people like Ilitch and Moroun.