AMC headquarters [[PROC) may be headed to demolition

[GMan]

That's my point. Tearing it down when there's no demand for property in that area in the foreseeable future is stupid.

I remember this gem. It was one of the landmarks I looked for on the way to my grandma's house.
I hope the city can hold onto it's manufacturing heritage and re-purpose this building.
Hey the Packard plant still stands!

[1953]

The Packard still stands because a small neutron bomb couldn't bring it down.

[GMan]

The Packard still stands because a small neutron bomb couldn't bring it down.

Yeah I know the cost of bringing it down is prohibitive, but my point was a dreamer with some money behind it has a plan. Seems the same could happen here.
I hate the fact we tear down our history in the U.S. to make way for what? Shopping malls and parking lots!

[drjeff]

When was the last time you were in the area? I found plenty of non-dead activity taking place.

Within the past 3 months. I drive that stretch of PLymouth occasionally. If you count a few random people walking around as "activity," then I guess we will have to agree to disagree. There aren't many viable businesses in the area. But the point is that placing some large business of any kind where the AMC headquarters currently stand is not feasible.

[MSUguy]

Not feasible? I would disagree, industrial properties of that size are hard to find in the city. And Detroit landed a number auto supplier and logistics businesses within the last year or so.

http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...park/21685905/

http://michiganradio.org/post/sakthi...enter#stream/0

http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...ment/70141842/

http://www.freep.com/story/money/bus...roit/84852508/

[Oddz313]

Within the past 3 months. I drive that stretch of PLymouth occasionally. If you count a few random people walking around as "activity," then I guess we will have to agree to disagree. There aren't many viable businesses in the area. But the point is that placing some large business of any kind where the AMC headquarters currently stand is not feasible.

The area has declined a lot in the last 7+ years

[archfan]

I read the Metropolitan Building thread right before this one. The Metropolitan may be the best argument for mothballing the Kelvinator building. Five years ago, it was hard to picture a good outcome for the Metropolitan; soon, it will be a Starwood Hotel.

[Wesley Mouch]

I could not agree more. Why persist in the "if we tear it down they will come" fantasy? With all of the vacant land available already, there is no need to create more. Mothball the irreplaceable structure and look for a creative reuse.

I don't think its the 'tear it down and they will come' fantasy. I believe its simpler. New is easy to understand. It isn't complex. You get exactly what you want, where you want it. No dead white male legacy either. And a larger percentage of work goes to purchasing supplies like windows, curtain walls, steel rather than to local trades. That's the true problem with new construction. It involves more out-of-area purchases rather than local contractors. Restoration might be more appealing if municipalities didn't have to pay artificially inflated wages, while the suppliers in rural Indiana don't.

[emu steve]

I don't think its the 'tear it down and they will come' fantasy. I believe its simpler. New is easy to understand. It isn't complex. You get exactly what you want, where you want it. No dead white male legacy either. And a larger percentage of work goes to purchasing supplies like windows, curtain walls, steel rather than to local trades. That's the true problem with new construction. It involves more out-of-area purchases rather than local contractors. Restoration might be more appealing if municipalities didn't have to pay artificially inflated wages, while the suppliers in rural Indiana don't.

Location, location, location...

Folks don't want, right or wrong, that location.

No one tears that building down and build a new building there.

The real question could be buildings be re-purposed by the PUBLIC sector [[because the private sector has no interest in the building or the land.).

I think we have tossed out a lot of possible usages, e.g., senior housing, police usage, homeless shelter, college building, etc.

This situation is parallel to the residential building out on W. Grand. Lee Plaza? [[is that the name). Namely, can a building with good bones be saved if it is in undesirable location.

[canuck]

I don't think its the 'tear it down and they will come' fantasy. I believe its simpler. New is easy to understand. It isn't complex. You get exactly what you want, where you want it. No dead white male legacy either. And a larger percentage of work goes to purchasing supplies like windows, curtain walls, steel rather than to local trades. That's the true problem with new construction. It involves more out-of-area purchases rather than local contractors. Restoration might be more appealing if municipalities didn't have to pay artificially inflated wages, while the suppliers in rural Indiana don't.

Yes, I understand the "easy part". I don't think this mentality has enabled better practices in urban development in our cities. Detroit has Lost à lot on that count. The industrial Heritage is not always pretty architectural speaking, but in cases where it is, it is worth the effort to rehab and reuse.

[GMan]

I don't think its the 'tear it down and they will come' fantasy. I believe its simpler. New is easy to understand. It isn't complex. You get exactly what you want, where you want it. No dead white male legacy either. And a larger percentage of work goes to purchasing supplies like windows, curtain walls, steel rather than to local trades. That's the true problem with new construction. It involves more out-of-area purchases rather than local contractors. Restoration might be more appealing if municipalities didn't have to pay artificially inflated wages, while the suppliers in rural Indiana don't.

I understand the New vs Old. New is cheaper [[on clean land ) vs renovation of old. Floor plans are to suite instead of compromised adaptations of renovated. New is easier to to wire for today's computer dependent society etc. What I don't get is the comment " No dead white male legacy." Somebody built a building that made a statement to the community in the 40's ,adding a touch of aesthetics to make it look pleasing. How is it any less relevant to the community today. It's woven into the fabric of the community. It has shared the success and failures of the community. The community is already lamenting the potential loss of the building and yet the comment to tear it down because it was built by a white man? It's no wonder the city can't move forward on a grand scale.
Okay tear it down. Have a weed infested lot to stare at instead of a relic of the past to spur imagination Tear it down and have a vacant promise instead of a bold building that represents what can be achieved when many people come together. Oh btw modern buildings do not come close to the brick and mortar type for employing large number of craftsman. Those same craftsman then went on to build the neighborhoods for their families. Don't see a lot of steel framed / panel covered homes around do you?
The modern cookie cutter society dulls the mind!

[p69rrh51]

Within the past 3 months. I drive that stretch of PLymouth occasionally. If you count a few random people walking around as "activity," then I guess we will have to agree to disagree. There aren't many viable businesses in the area. But the point is that placing some large business of any kind where the AMC headquarters currently stand is not feasible.

I have been driving the area quite often as I have found many houses to photograph. I have been driving the area on weekends and every time I have to turn onto Plymouth I have to wait several minutes for all of the automobile and pedestrian traffic. I see more people doing "non-activity" in this area than the majority of the city the I cover on a weekly basis.