Activity at the Fyfe Building

[Van Dyke Brown]

It appears as if renovations are underway to the uninviting street level facade of the Fyfe Building. The perimeter is surrounded by construction fence and workers are removing the old awnings. New storefront window frames were seen being delivered last week.

Does anyone have any further details? Look of the new facade? A new tenant?

Either way, this is a welcome improvement to a highly visible and busy corner at Woodward and Grand Circus Park.

[Danny]

Make way for supercondos for the Fyfe Building and higher rents and no poor folks to live in.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

I love the Fyfe Building.

[SammyS]

Make way for supercondos for the Fyfe Building and higher rents and no poor folks to live in.

Hate to sound like a prick but why should such a prominent building in prime location accommodate folks who can't afford to live there? Really sends a bad message to potential developers and those wanting to lift Detroit out of its grave. Personally, I'm in full support of meeting all demands of high end residents in and around the city over having them look elsewhere like Royal Oak, Birmingham or even out of state. Detroit needs to compete for population and tax payers without reservation.

PS. Read that this building was slated for demolition back in the 90's. If it can be fully occupied with high $ residents living, working and spending in the city, then that's one hell of a major success story.

[Jerry Van]

Hate to sound like a prick but why should such a prominent building in prime location accommodate folks who can't afford to live there? Really sends a bad message to potential developers and those wanting to lift Detroit out of its grave. Personally, I'm in full support of meeting all demands of high end residents in and around the city over having them look elsewhere like Royal Oak, Birmingham or even out of state. Detroit needs to compete for population and tax payers without reservation.

PS. Read that this building was slated for demolition back in the 90's. If it can be fully occupied with high $ residents living, working and spending in the city, then that's one hell of a major success story.

I totally agree! Thanks for having the guts to say it. When the City has more residents who can pay their taxes, their rent, their water bill, etc., then the citizens of lesser income will also ultimately be better served, by a City that can now PAY THEIR OWN BILLS, rather then go bankrupt again! Water and other city services are not a right! Somebody has to pay for them! My heart goes out to the poor, but all the compassion in the world will not finance the operation of a viable city.

[Jerry Van]

Make way for supercondos for the Fyfe Building and higher rents and no poor folks to live in.

Danny,

I don't know how much money you've got, but let's say it's enough to buy your own downtown apartment building. Will you rent it out to people who can't pay their rent, or will you prefer to have paying clients? Will you also maybe want to make a small profit for the effort and for putting your investment money at risk? It's always easy to spend other people's money isn't it.

[Gistok]

Let me remind people of the "50 posts and half a brain" rule about arguing with Danny over any subject. Once you've been here longer... you'll understand...

[Honky Tonk]

Really sends a bad message to potential developers and those wanting to lift Detroit out of its grave. Personally, I'm in full support of meeting all demands of high end residents in and around the city over having them look elsewhere like Royal Oak, Birmingham or even out of state. Detroit needs to compete for population and tax payers without reservation.

First of all, no one wants to "lift Detroit out of it's grave". Developers are investing in the City because of generous subsidies and tax incentives, and because they're taking a chance that they can turn a fast buck on their investment. Residents are moving in because it's currently the IN thing to do. If they really wanted to "lift Detroit out of it's grave", they would claim residency and start ponying up City taxes.

[Eber Brock Ward]

Heard from someone that it's going to be a party store, which is sorely needed with Jazz and the one in Capitol Park closed, the one on Broadway burning down, and the one in Trolley Plaza/DCA keeping weird hours.

[Meddle]

I don't know how much money you've got, but let's say it's enough to buy your own downtown apartment building. Will you rent it out to people who can't pay their rent, or will you prefer to have paying clients?

How about moderately priced living spaces that working people can afford? The city employees, the service people that make the restaurants and stores work, the construction grunts, the delivery workers, etc?

How about not turning on them in favor of $500,000.00 condos?

[SammyS]

First of all, no one wants to "lift Detroit out of it's grave". Developers are investing in the City because of generous subsidies and tax incentives, and because they're taking a chance that they can turn a fast buck on their investment. Residents are moving in because it's currently the IN thing to do. If they really wanted to "lift Detroit out of it's grave", they would claim residency and start ponying up City taxes.

Every dollar [[multi-millions in this case) that pours into the city is likely to have a more positive outcome over dereliction, abandonment or lack of maintenance. The motivation of investors is inconsequential. So what if they're motivated by money and profits. The fact that these investors are considering Detroit should be celebrated and encouraged rather than looked upon with suspicion. If it means the city offers concessions and teasers, why not? Government offers every home owner with an incentive through homesteading and mortgage interest tax relieve but no one complains about that. NEZ has lured more otherwise non residents in. That's a success, no?
Besides all that, if this building remains rent only like Kales, David Whitney or The Albert, then the investment is long term, not a quick flip.

[SammyS]

How about moderately priced living spaces that working people can afford? The city employees, the service people that make the restaurants and stores work, the construction grunts, the delivery workers, etc?

How about not turning on them in favor of $500,000.00 condos?

Why downtown? Shouldn't those willing and able to lay down that much decide where they live? With >130 sq miles, I'm sure we can figure out a place within reasonable proximity for lower income folks to reside. 3 or 4 miles outside of downtown in just about any direction is very affordable. That's an unintended consequence Detroit finds itself in today that no other major city can boast about.

[Junjie]

How about moderately priced living spaces that working people can afford? The city employees, the service people that make the restaurants and stores work, the construction grunts, the delivery workers, etc?

How about not turning on them in favor of $500,000.00 condos?

What happened to the affordable housing ordinance?

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...ing-in-detroit

In general, I think requiring a share of units to be affordable housing is the least-bad solution. A large fraction of developments provide some affordable housing while the rest of their units are market rate. But the issue also highlights the need for better regional transit so that people can easily live in cheap places and commute to work in expensive places. We're never going to have a flat distribution of property values/rents/home prices.

Anyway, I'm glad for the renovations to the Fyfe Building, whatever its eventual status. Now let's get the Hudson site built and those long-promised Ilitch developments on the lots immediately west of Comerica [[yeah right...), and suddenly Woodward is looking pretty good from the river to 75.

[SammyS]

....suddenly Woodward is looking pretty good from the river to 75.

Already looking good all the way up to New Center. What a difference 5 years has made. 😎

[Meddle]

Why downtown?

Why not? Why should they have to commute instead of being able to walk to work?

I'm not into the whole separation of classes thing. The Worker Bees should be able to live in the same areas [[maybe even the same buildings) and enjoy the same surroundings as the Hoity Toities.

[southen]

I totally agree! Thanks for having the guts to say it. When the City has more residents who can pay their taxes, their rent, their water bill, etc., then the citizens of lesser income will also ultimately be better served, by a City that can now PAY THEIR OWN BILLS, rather then go bankrupt again! Water and other city services are not a right! Somebody has to pay for them! My heart goes out to the poor, but all the compassion in the world will not finance the operation of a viable city.

Amen. It takes guts and boldness to kick out the poor people who have been living downtown for decades. Sure we care about them, but we just don't want to see them, amirite?

I want development and luxury towers built in the city, but Detroit has an opportunity for renewal that provides equity for those who have stuck it out here. Including affordable housing helps to keep diversity in the core of the city, something that benefits Detroit more than an exclusive tower for suburbanites who now find the city to be hip.

But yeah, great idea moving the poor 3-4 miles away. I can see the heart you have for them...

[Honky Tonk]

Every dollar [[multi-millions in this case) that pours into the city is likely to have a more positive outcome over dereliction, abandonment or lack of maintenance. The motivation of investors is inconsequential. So what if they're motivated by money and profits. The fact that these investors are considering Detroit should be celebrated and encouraged rather than looked upon with suspicion. If it means the city offers concessions and teasers, why not? Government offers every home owner with an incentive through homesteading and mortgage interest tax relieve but no one complains about that. NEZ has lured more otherwise non residents in. That's a success, no?
Besides all that, if this building remains rent only like Kales, David Whitney or The Albert, then the investment is long term, not a quick flip.

You're right, so what if they're motivated by money and profits? Nothing, as long as it isn't my dime that's being used to profit someone else.

[SammyS]

You're right, so what if they're motivated by money and profits? Nothing, as long as it isn't my dime that's being used to profit someone else.

But it's OK for my dime to be used to support someone else's unsustainable lifestyle which BTW discriminates against those who have earned, saved and willing to lay down hundreds of thousands of $ into a city where only a few years ago would have likely gone to the suburbs? Detroit cannot afford to be too liberal with its social spending or expect potential investors to subsidize its social obligations beyond their own financial sustainability. That would drive further investment away when the city needs it most.

Anyway, are we absolutely sure The Fyfe is subsidized by the city? If not, then we have no argument. Let the developers do what they choose. If it is, then I'd agree, a certain portion, within reason of course, must be allocated for affordable living or provide a service in which the city can be reimbursed. Pay city back with interest may be an amicable solution.

But this thread has been railroaded, admittedly thanks to my contributions too, and resulted in what's leading to a Social Justice vs Capitalism discussion. I'm sure that was not the intent of the OP.

Whatever the outcome, I just hope it results in more growth, more population and greater financial sustainability for the city.

[DetroiterOnTheWestCoast]

Is there any word to the effect that anything is taking place at the Fyfe other then renovating the retail spaces? Somehow everyone seems to be speculating on mass gentrification based on Danny's post.

In any case, it seems to me that the city is doing quite a decent job so far of requiring a substantial portion of affordable units in the recent developments.

I bought a pair of Florsheim shoes back in the early 1980's, from a shoe store that I think was in that building. But it might have been further up Woodward.

[SammyS]

Is there any word to the effect that anything is taking place at the Fyfe other then renovating the retail spaces? Somehow everyone seems to be speculating on mass gentrification based on Danny's post.

In any case, it seems to me that the city is doing quite a decent job so far of requiring a substantial portion of affordable units in the recent developments.

I bought a pair of Florsheim shoes back in the early 1980's, from a shoe store that I think was in that building.

Good point and thanks for reeling it back in.

Yes, also read that Fyfe was the largest shoe company in the US when it opened back in 1919. Hah, and i'd never heard of them before this thread.

[Neilr]

Good point and thanks for reeling it back in.

Yes, also read that Fyfe was the largest shoe company in the US when it opened back in 1919. Hah, and i'd never heard of them before this thread.

The next time you walk by the Fyfe Building take a good look at the gargoyles that are laboring between the 4th and 5th floors.

[archfan]

...
Anyway, are we absolutely sure The Fyfe is subsidized by the city? If not, then we have no argument. Let the developers do what they choose. If it is, then I'd agree, a certain portion, within reason of course, must be allocated for affordable living or provide a service in which the city can be reimbursed. Pay city back with interest may be an amicable solution.
...

If I understand it right, developers can get a tax credit from the Federal government if they agree to set aside a certain percentage of units for affordable housing. They can then sell that future tax credit to get the money they need to develop the building. The state administers the Federal program, but it doesn't look like the city gets involved.

Look up the Low Income Housing Tax Credit [[LIHTC).

[1953]

I do believe there was a shoe store in the space in the 80's...was it Florsheim or Payless though?

[Gistok]

The Fyfe Building opened in 1919 as the Fyfe's Shoe Store, a 14 story shoe store.... back then it was the Imelda Marcos of shoe emporiums.... supposedly the largest in the world...

https://www.loc.gov/resource/det.4a25744/

[gnome]

I do believe there was a shoe store in the space in the 80's...was it Florsheim or Payless though?

Sibley's Shoes