Lafayette Building Demolition

MIRepublic · August-16-09, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by EastSider

Wasn't that garage created to support another building? It's not just public parking, right?

Are we talking about the same structure? I'm talking about the one on Lafayette. I do not recall the expansion being built to support another building. The B-C's new garage, however, was built to support floors above it.

BTW, this expansion wasn't for the Dime, I don't think. The Dime renovation had been completed two years earlier, so they'd already found parking elsewhere. I believe that the Kennedy Garage was the parking for the Dime.

Speaking of parking near the area, who owns the two surface lots directly west of the Lafaytte at Lafayette & Shelby [[across from the courthouse) and Lafayette & Washington [[across from Freep Building)? There is so much parking in this area of town.

**kraig** · August-16-09, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Novine

"BTW, does anyone know where I could look, or who I could call, to inquire about the Detroit DDA? I'm interested to know who sits on it, what specific powers it's granted, how I can find meeting minutes, etc...?"

Look on the city of Detroit web site. Surely they'll have that information on there. They spends millions of taxpayer dollars every year. There must be some accountability?

If you believe that, I heard that Demolition Jackson has a building he wants to see restored.

For granted powers, Chapter 14 of the Detroit City Code is something that can be looked at. It also points to the enabling legislation from the state. For the more membership information, just contact the DEGC or the City Clerk's office. The law requires that all of the Board Members get sworn in by the City Clerk before they can officially act as Board Members.

Now, how many of you are wishing you thought of that before the rest of Tiger Stadium was torn down. Because, guess what? The majority of the members that voted for the stadium to come down had not been officially sworn in. Hell, the motion itself may have been invalid.

At some point all of you geniuses may want to stop arguing with me and start listening to me. But I understand, complaining with righteous indignation is more important than actually accomplishing your goals for most of the posters on this thread.

**Fnemecek** · August-17-09, 02:14 AM

Originally Posted by kraig

Now, how many of you are wishing you thought of that before the rest of Tiger Stadium was torn down. Because, guess what? The majority of the members that voted for the stadium to come down had not been officially sworn in. Hell, the motion itself may have been invalid.

I know that the OTSC and its attorneys looked a variety of issues. I don't know if that was one of the ones they identified in their litigation or not.

I can, however, tell you that when a TRO to stop demolition is openly defied by the DEGC and its contractor and the Court does not want to institute any sanctions for said actions, even the most brilliant of legal arguments becomes a moot point quickly.

MIRepublic · August-17-09, 02:19 AM

Originally Posted by kraig

At some point all of you geniuses may want to stop arguing with me and start listening to me. But I understand, complaining with righteous indignation is more important than actually accomplishing your goals for most of the posters on this thread.

Did you do that, or are you just being a dick, as usual? Hell, you don't have to choose; it could be both.

**kraig** · August-17-09, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by MIRepublic

Did you do that, or are you just being a dick, as usual? Hell, you don't have to choose; it could be both.

I tried to steer people in the right direction. You have to understand, there was a potential conflict of interest at that time, so I couldn't come right out and say anything.

But, better to be a dick than a dickhead. Instead of arguing with me, has it occurred to you, that the demolition vote for the Lafayette happened pretty much at the same time as the Stadium vote?

I know it's a foreign concept for you. But try looking at the forest and not just a tree for a change.

**kraig** · August-17-09, 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by Fnemecek

I know that the OTSC and its attorneys looked a variety of issues. I don't know if that was one of the ones they identified in their litigation or not.

I can, however, tell you that when a TRO to stop demolition is openly defied by the DEGC and its contractor and the Court does not want to institute any sanctions for said actions, even the most brilliant of legal arguments becomes a moot point quickly.

Then fight. Sometimes that's the only way. Like anyone else, the DEGC, or anyone else for that matter, is going to try to get away with that which you allow them to get away with.

A good dogfight will give them to pause to think whether it's worth the trouble in the future.

DEGC decides.
Same people complain.
DEGC demolishes.
Same people complain and whine, then give up.

Break that pattern.

**masterblaster** · August-17-09, 08:39 AM

You get the impression from the Free Press article that the DEGC was not willing to work with that developer at all, that nothing was going to change its mind, and that its mindset is to demolish the building no matter what. Doesn't that seem kind of non-sensical? WHAT IS THE FREAKIN' HURRY to demolish this building!

**masterblaster** · August-17-09, 10:44 AM

Kraig, did you get my message? Were you talking about the DDA members not being sworn in by the City Clerk, or the DEGC?

**R8RBOB** · August-17-09, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by masterblaster

You get the impression from the Free Press article that the DEGC was not willing to work with that developer at all, that nothing was going to change its mind, and that its mindset is to demolish the building no matter what. Doesn't that seem kind of non-sensical? WHAT IS THE FREAKIN' HURRY to demolish this building!

The freakin hurry is that the building is a hazard and no one wants it. Did you read the article about Detroit's abandoned buildings? The city offered the Lafayette to Quicken Loans for a dollar and they passed. The building has reached its end of life and it is time start anew.

**kraig** · August-17-09, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by masterblaster

Kraig, did you get my message? Were you talking about the DDA members not being sworn in by the City Clerk, or the DEGC?

City Clerk. I sent you a reply.

**digitalvision** · August-17-09, 11:32 AM

The reality there are a lot of pressures in the city to demolish, most of which are not comprehended on this board which is no where near reflective of the average Detroiter. I'm not a fan of demolition, but I think that demolition needs to come with a bona-fide activation plan, and parks aren't activation. They're sad excuses for fillers of gaping teeth. Even a two or three-story storefront building with lofts upstairs would be better than a park and inexpensive to put up.

But some key points on the reasons for demolition:

1) Legal is on the city's a$$ on a constant basis over these buildings. The city is self insured, and one bad problem and there's a major budget hole and people get laid off. Mothballing is not an option, as you still retain liability at a very high [[comparably) maintenance cost.

2) Perceptionwise, outside of the elite, there is little love for those buildings. I'm going to be very frank - until the preservation community starts looking like the general city community, there will not traction with politicians. In short, preservationists are viewed by most city officials as roadblocking, what was the word used in another thread - yo-yos - who are all talk and no action and want the city to put up these dollars that when they go to the neighborhoods they can't justify financially or politically. Why secure the Lafayette when there's whole neighborhoods that aren't secure? To many residents, and I've talked to more than the average bear due to research assignments, preservation is a first-world problem in a third-world city. As I was told by a politician, it's hard to respect someone who after a few drinks goes and hugs Tiger stadium but doesn't get involved in the nitty-gritty the rest of the city has to deal with. That's a blanket statement, but perception is reality.

3) Biggest key: There is no market [[even subsidized) and will not be for a long time. Troy moves more office space than Detroit every year. Novi, at a sliver of the size, has double the economic output.

**Detroitnerd** · August-17-09, 12:05 PM

Detroit has more office space than any other Michigan city. Southfield is second. Novi is third.

Could be they don't want the competition.

**Novine** · August-17-09, 12:22 PM

"There is no market [[even subsidized) and will not be for a long time."

Everyone knows this. It means you have two options. One, demolish everything. Two, save some of the old buildings for the future when there might be a market. If the argument for demolition is based on market demand, everything not currently occupied will be demolished in time. What kind of downtown do you have then? A dead one.

PQZ · August-17-09, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by MIRepublic

Are we talking about the same structure? I'm talking about the one on Lafayette. I do not recall the expansion being built to support another building. The B-C's new garage, however, was built to support floors above it.

BTW, this expansion wasn't for the Dime, I don't think. The Dime renovation had been completed two years earlier, so they'd already found parking elsewhere. I believe that the Kennedy Garage was the parking for the Dime.

Speaking of parking near the area, who owns the two surface lots directly west of the Lafaytte at Lafayette & Shelby [[across from the courthouse) and Lafayette & Washington [[across from Freep Building)? There is so much parking in this area of town.

The Grand Trunk Buidling demolition was in order to expand the Financial Disitrict Garage, which is on the corner of Shelby and Lafayette. It was done by BOSC Group to make parking available for the Dime Building. There is an aerial bridgeway that connects the garage annex to the Dime.The Dime was struggling to get suffucuent parking to attract tenants and needed more parking. As they owned the Fiancnail District Garage it only made sense to look to expand the deck.. Without the deck annex the Dime would have gone in to foreclosure by now. They explored the potential for keeping the facade and even after the tax credits were factored in, keeping the facade added 30% more to costs and they could not justify it to their lenders. [For those without critical thinking skills, that meant the keeping the facade added about 50-55% more to the cost of the deck]

The old Kennedy Square Garage was owned by the City and used by some tenants of the Dime prior to Bosc Group purchasing the Dime and prior or the DDA taking control of the deck to facilitate the construction of Campus Martius. Monthly lease spaces in the 1 Kennedy deck are for the tenants of 1 Kennedy.

The lot between Lafayette, Fort, Shelby and Washington is owned by the federal courts. Unsure who owns the one across from the Freep, I believe it to be private IIRC. The Fed refuses to sell, lease or partner on their lot as they plan on a new building there - some day. Ferchill & the DDA looked at that lot and the Freep lot for a parking deck the BC and could not pry it out of the hands of the Feds and private owners. Ditto for Peebles and Ferchill when they were looking at the Lafayette.

**ghettopalmetto** · August-17-09, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by PQZ

The Grand Trunk Buidling demolition was in order to expand the Financial Disitrict Garage, which is on the corner of Shelby and Lafayette. It was done by BOSC Group to make parking available for the Dime Building. There is an aerial bridgeway that connects the garage annex to the Dime.The Dime was struggling to get suffucuent parking to attract tenants and needed more parking. As they owned the Fiancnail District Garage it only made sense to look to expand the deck.. Without the deck annex the Dime would have gone in to foreclosure by now. They explored the potential for keeping the facade and even after the tax credits were factored in, keeping the facade added 30% more to costs and they could not justify it to their lenders. [For those without critical thinking skills, that meant the keeping the facade added about 50-55% more to the cost of the deck]

Only in Detroit does it make financial sense to spend $20,000 per garage parking spot in order to keep a project solvent. Walk a couple blocks? Hell no! Not when we can spend money on something of which we already have plenty!

Does anyone really wonder why buildings don't get redeveloped in Detroit?

**R8RBOB** · August-17-09, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Does anyone really wonder why buildings don't get redeveloped in Detroit?

Sure we wonder and some of us have an answer. Here is my answer. Money or lack of money. That and the conditions of these buildings.

**kraig** · August-17-09, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Only in Detroit does it make financial sense to spend $20,000 per garage parking spot in order to keep a project solvent. Walk a couple blocks? Hell no! Not when we can spend money on something of which we already have plenty!

Does anyone really wonder why buildings don't get redeveloped in Detroit?

An occupied building taking priority over an abandoned building isn't just in Detroit. That's the norm.

Also, have you ever stayed at a hotel where you had to park blocks away? If so, was that City's market anything like Detroit's?

Do you have to park two blocks away in Novi, Southfield or Big Beaver Rd? Detroit has to do things to make itself more competitive. No matter how anyone feels about them, the people at the DEGC understand that.

PQZ · August-17-09, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Only in Detroit does it make financial sense to spend $20,000 per garage parking spot in order to keep a project solvent.

True. In Chicago they would spend $100,000 per space.

**ghettopalmetto** · August-17-09, 01:59 PM

Well, clowns have been making excuses for Detroit for sixty years now. Look where it's got ya.

There will never be any improvement until the way of thinking changes, and people stop throwing bad money away unnecessarily.

But hey, you guys have it all figured out, so I'll just keep my naive comments to myself. As you were--proceed with the moonscaping.

Haikoont · August-17-09, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

But hey, you guys have it all figured out, so I'll just keep my naive comments to myself.

As if we could ever be so lucky Dan.

**ghettopalmetto** · August-17-09, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Haikoont

As if we could ever be so lucky Dan.

Hey, you guys are the geniuses that know exactly what you're talking about. I mean, when you can get a house for a buck and a half, who am I to argue about the success of Detroit's urban redevelopment policies?

We just have to trust the all-knowing and omnipotent George Jackson. Just a few more publicly-funded multi-million dollar demolitions, and downtown Detroit will be magically reborn, like a flower garden on a dewy spring day.

Step 1: Demolish
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Profit

It's so easy!

**bailey** · August-17-09, 02:10 PM

.I mean, when you can get a house for a buck and a half, who am I to argue about the success of Detroit's urban redevelopment policies?

because putting some plywood over the windows of a decades long derelict building is going to spur development?

I guess we'll have to trust the all knowing, arm chair urban planners here to get us to that new dawn.

Step 1: Don't demolish
Step 2: ?????
Step 3: Profit

Detroit Rises!!

**iheartthed** · August-17-09, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by PQZ

True. In Chicago they would spend $100,000 per space.

In Chicago they don't need a dedicated parking lot for every project that is proposed.

**iheartthed** · August-17-09, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

Just a few more publicly-funded multi-million dollar demolitions, and downtown Detroit will be magically reborn, like a flower garden on a dewy spring day.

Eh, they tell you that it's for the purposes of re-birthing downtown, but I'm not convinced. I'm seriously starting to believe that their objective is to demolish what's left of Detroit.

**ghettopalmetto** · August-17-09, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

I guess we'll have to trust the all knowing, arm chair urban planners here to get us to that new dawn.

Armchair, my hairy ass. Your all-knowing ego is remiss in that the "armchair preservationists" on this board consist of numerous professionals who have been engaged in many more multi-million dollar renovation projects than you ever will.

But, yeah, keep on guessing. You sound so smart and engaged when you make shit up off-the-cuff.