$4.7M HQ for the Pension Board?

**Genesyxx** · August-19-09, 08:04 AM

DETROIT [[AP) - Detroit's two embattled public pension funds are planning to build a $7.4 million headquarters along the Detroit River.
The three-story, 33,400-square-foot building would be built between the UAW's headquarters and the River Towers Apartments on vacant land zoned for high-rise residential. It would house the pension funds' administrative, accounting and legal operations, with room for 100 parking spaces.
The Detroit Free Press says officials at the General Retirement System for the City of Detroit, the pension plan for retired city workers, and the Detroit Police & Fire Pension Fund have submitted plans.
The City Planning Commission will vote Sept. 17.

**Gannon** · August-19-09, 08:11 AM

Wow, what crassness.

In a city FULL of empty buildings...

**ejames01** · August-19-09, 08:37 AM

These people are shameless.

**Detroitnerd** · August-19-09, 09:26 AM

I'm getting angry.

**Detwa** · August-19-09, 09:35 AM

Wait - they want the money to build a better office building FOR THEMSELVES???? Is this a joke????

**Blueidone** · August-19-09, 09:51 AM

Absolutely ridiculous IMHO. Gannon is right...there is plenty of available space in the current buildings. Spend money rehabbing an old building.

**gnome** · August-19-09, 09:52 AM

The only real surprise is that they are planning on building in Detroit and not in Hawaii.

**digitalvision** · August-19-09, 10:12 AM

Thoughts...

1) This is a waste of money. Even more so when you think about the fact that at one point 1001 Woodward was invested in by various pension funds, and it sits virtually empty and has connected parking. 60 people do not need a new building, let alone a 4.7 million dollar one.

2) This also shows an example of the suburban-preferred layout of many so-called "leaders" and others involved in the city.

3) Regardless of the layout, this is a total waste of money that Bing needs to be vocally be against. There's no need, and frankly, if they want a suburban style office building outside of downtown proper, there's plenty that exist.

**mjb3** · August-19-09, 10:32 AM

Pensions are unfunded, unsustainable and bankrupting all forms of govt.

Why are they still around? Why can't they do what the private sector did and convert them all to 401K's, like the rest of us get?

Buy American · August-19-09, 10:37 AM

The City of Detroit retirees earned their pensions. 25, 30, 40 or more years of service to the City entitles the retiree to a pension under agreements with Detroit.

**bailey** · August-19-09, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Genesyxx

DETROIT [[AP) - Detroit's two embattled public pension funds are planning to build a $7.4 million headquarters along the Detroit River.
The three-story, 33,400-square-foot building would be built between the UAW's headquarters and the River Towers Apartments on vacant land zoned for high-rise residential. It would house the pension funds' administrative, accounting and legal operations, with room for 100 parking spaces.
The Detroit Free Press says officials at the General Retirement System for the City of Detroit, the pension plan for retired city workers, and the Detroit Police & Fire Pension Fund have submitted plans.
The City Planning Commission will vote Sept. 17.

Is it 7.4 mil or 4.7?

Post this over on the Lafayette thread. Development of empty lots CAN happen!

**heedus** · August-19-09, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by digitalvision

Thoughts...

1) This is a waste of money. Even more so when you think about the fact that at one point 1001 Woodward was invested in by various pension funds, and it sits virtually empty and has connected parking. 60 people do not need a new building, let alone a 4.7 million dollar one.

2) This also shows an example of the suburban-preferred layout of many so-called "leaders" and others involved in the city.

3) Regardless of the layout, this is a total waste of money that Bing needs to be vocally be against. There's no need, and frankly, if they want a suburban style office building outside of downtown proper, there's plenty that exist.

Agreed on all three points, except I don't think either of Detroit's two pension funds were in on those deals. Regardless, didn't Papas buy that entire building for $5.4 million last year? I bet he'd be willing to unload it to the two pension funds for a cool $2 million profit [[the Freep story says the new construction would cost $7.4 million, not $4.7 million). I know that a building of that size requires a lot of maintenance and the pension boards would only occupy a couple of floors, but they would have attached parking and their choice of offices overlooking the city. What is wrong with these people? Someone needs to step up and display some real leadership by calling these organizations out. Bing? Granholm? Anybody?

**Trumpeteer** · August-19-09, 05:00 PM

Is the old Broadhead Naval Armory on Jefferson still empty? If so, wouldn't that possibly make a good home for them and make use of a great building with the Art Deco murals inside?

MIRepublic · August-19-09, 05:08 PM

There was already a thread on this.

**davewindsor** · August-19-09, 09:14 PM

Originally Posted by heedus

didn't Papas buy that entire building for $5.4 million last year? I bet he'd be willing to unload it to the two pension funds for a cool $2 million profit [[the Freep story says the new construction would cost $7.4 million, not $4.7 million).

Try $19.5 million for 1001 Woodward in 2008. The attached 12-storey parking garage, which had a secured $14million bank loan was assumed to make the deal work. The $5.5million cash he paid was just for the value of the building itself that was 90% vacant. I don't even think the city bylaw would allow you to buy a huge 330,000 square foot building like 1001 without a parking garage or even sever the parking garage from a transaction. $19.5m - $7.4m is a $12.1 million loss. http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article.../SUB/802250335

**EastsideAl** · August-20-09, 12:47 AM

A terrible waste of city worker's money, and a very inappropriate location = BAD IDEA.

**jt1** · August-20-09, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Genesyxx

DETROIT [[AP) - Detroit's two embattled public pension funds are planning to build a $7.4 million headquarters along the Detroit River.
The three-story, 33,400-square-foot building would be built between the UAW's headquarters and the River Towers Apartments on vacant land zoned for high-rise residential. It would house the pension funds' administrative, accounting and legal operations, with room for 100 parking spaces.
The Detroit Free Press says officials at the General Retirement System for the City of Detroit, the pension plan for retired city workers, and the Detroit Police & Fire Pension Fund have submitted plans.
The City Planning Commission will vote Sept. 17.

Just appalling.

**heedus** · August-20-09, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

Try $19.5 million for 1001 Woodward in 2008. The attached 12-storey parking garage, which had a secured $14million bank loan was assumed to make the deal work. The $5.5million cash he paid was just for the value of the building itself that was 90% vacant. I don't even think the city bylaw would allow you to buy a huge 330,000 square foot building like 1001 without a parking garage or even sever the parking garage from a transaction. $19.5m - $7.4m is a $12.1 million loss. http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article.../SUB/802250335

When I mentioned the $5.4 million, I was referring specifically to the building, not the attached parking garage. In my fairy tale plan, I kinda figured that Papas would want to hold onto the parking garage as a future reveune generator and that the pension funds could offset their parking expenses using rent proceeds from the 10% of the building that is occupied [[or that a 60 parking space easement could be part of the puchase agreement for the building). Not that any of this really matters but what bylaw are you referring to?

**davewindsor** · August-20-09, 09:01 AM

Originally Posted by heedus

When I mentioned the $5.4 million, I was referring specifically to the building, not the attached parking garage. In my fairy tale plan, I kinda figured that Papas would want to hold onto the parking garage as a future reveune generator and that the pension funds could offset their parking expenses using rent proceeds from the 10% of the building that is occupied [[or that a 60 parking space easement could be part of the puchase agreement for the building). Not that any of this really matters but what bylaw are you referring to?

I don't know the specific section, but across the river in downtown Windsor I own an apartment building several years newer than 1001 Woodward with a main floor parking garage that I wanted to turn into a commercial store and apartments. The Planning Department told me absolutely not and gave me a copy of the bylaw which stated I needed one parking spot per apartment unless it was a grandfathered in like you'd with a much older building that never had parking. They had a by-law on office/retail space, but I forget what it was. I asked if I could could buy a vacant lot half a block down the street and use that as parking for it. Again, they told me absolutely not, it has to be a parking lot adjacent or I can't convert the garage. Now, I'm sure a much larger city like Detroit has a similar by-law on the books and I'm guessing that that attached garage to 1001 Woodward was required by the planning department before they issued a building permit for 1001 Woodward. Those parking garages and spots are a package deal with the building and I doubt they would get built if the city didn't require it.

Stosh · August-20-09, 06:36 PM

One would hope that there would be some opposition to this at the planning board meeting. seeing as this is a rezoning, it's probably going to have to come before the City Council as well for approval. That's 2 opportunities to make some noise. Where's BAMN and the Unions at on this one? You would think that this would be just as if not more important than their latest dustup.

MIRepublic · August-20-09, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

I don't know the specific section, but across the river in downtown Windsor I own an apartment building several years newer than 1001 Woodward with a main floor parking garage that I wanted to turn into a commercial store and apartments. The Planning Department told me absolutely not and gave me a copy of the bylaw which stated I needed one parking spot per apartment unless it was a grandfathered in like you'd with a much older building that never had parking. They had a by-law on office/retail space, but I forget what it was. I asked if I could could buy a vacant lot half a block down the street and use that as parking for it. Again, they told me absolutely not, it has to be a parking lot adjacent or I can't convert the garage. Now, I'm sure a much larger city like Detroit has a similar by-law on the books and I'm guessing that that attached garage to 1001 Woodward was required by the planning department before they issued a building permit for 1001 Woodward. Those parking garages and spots are a package deal with the building and I doubt they would get built if the city didn't require it.

Windsor doesn't have any residential zoning classifications that preclude a parking requirement? I'm surprised. There are a lot of cities [[and the club is growing) with residential zoning classifications where there is no parking requirement.

**stasu1213** · August-20-09, 09:28 PM

I think the pension fund should be left alone or put in an account, draw intrest and be there when the city employees retired and need it for themselves. It shouldn't be used for people like Monica Conyers or anyone else to misuse it without a vote from the pension holders which are the city employees.

**davewindsor** · August-20-09, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by MIRepublic

Windsor doesn't have any residential zoning classifications that preclude a parking requirement? I'm surprised. There are a lot of cities [[and the club is growing) with residential zoning classifications where there is no parking requirement.

What you said makes no sense. Who's gonna build and maintain the parking garages then? The city? I can rent out a parking spot in the garage in downtown for $35 a month. Based on the units above, I can turn every two parking spots into a one-bedroom apt. and rent it out for $600 a month. Why would anyone build a parking garage in downtown then? Parking garages are always money losers. No one would build them if it wasn't required.

MIRepublic · August-20-09, 09:56 PM

Huh? What are you talking about? I simply asked if Windsor has any zoning classifications that don't include a parking requirement.

DetroitDad · August-20-09, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by davewindsor

What you said makes no sense. Who's gonna build and maintain the parking garages then? The city? I can rent out a parking spot in the garage in downtown for $35 a month. Based on the units above, I can turn every two parking spots into a one-bedroom apt. and rent it out for $600 a month. Why would anyone build a parking garage in downtown then? Parking garages are always money losers. No one would build them if it wasn't required.

Sadly true. This is one of the problems that really makes our society as a whole unsustainable. Good urbanism is basically impossible through bad policies and poor decisions.

Anyway, this decision is appalling. The Riverwalk needs residential. These guys belong Downtown.