Shoeless George Jackson Resigns!

[motz]

Neither Tiger Stadium nor the Statler had a future life in them. The Statler was no Book-Cadillac. Sad when old things pass, but sometimes they do need to be torn down.

Yep that dirt lot they put in the Statler's place is just amazing and is helping revitalize downtown, and specifically the GCP area, in grand fashion.

Good riddance to bad rubbish! Bye George!

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Yep that dirt lot they put in the Statler's place is just amazing and is helping revitalize downtown, and specifically the GCP area, in grand fashion.

Good riddance to bad rubbish! Bye George!

The Statler was never going to be redeveloped. It would have been a very expensive redo for a building that was never as nice as the B-C [[the most comparable project downtown). Unless someone was willing to just lose money forever on it [[and no one would do that, including anyone on this site, even if they had the money), it just wasn't in the cards. It is easier to one day build on a dirt lot with a clear title than deal with a decrepit eyesore looming over GCP. Since you can't save and renovate every building, you need to be choosy about what to save. The Statler didn't merit saving. Same thing with Tiger Stadium. Sure, there were lots of pretend plans to save it. In reality, there wasn't any realistic way to save it. All the "plans" lacked an ability to pay for the condos/retail/restaurants/baseball museums/ballfields they contained. Gilbert has the right idea: save the buildings that can have a useful future at a reasonable price. Save the dramatic efforts for the one or two most important buildings. I would put MCS on that list [[although, as noted in other threads, not as a train station). George Jackson may have made his share of mistakes, but he has also left a lot of places available for development that were not beforehand. I shudder to think where economic growth would be in this city if some of those on this board had their way. We would still be figuring out how to reopen Hudson's [[world's largest check cashing store?). Sepia-toned memories of old buildings does not a sensible economic policy make. Ironically, uber-preservations do their cause harm. It renders neighborhoods empty and decaying, preventing entrepreneurs from wanting to redevelop the odd project that would otherwise make sense.

[ghettopalmetto]

The Statler was never going to be redeveloped. It would have been a very expensive redo for a building that was never as nice as the B-C [[the most comparable project downtown).

And you know the cost of such a "redo", how? To my knowledge, no condition assessments or feasibility studies were ever conducted by DEGC prior to demolition. George Jackson merely deemed it "structurally unsound", despite the building remaining standing for a number of decades, and despite George Jackson not having the professional qualifications to make such a determination. If you have numbers, please share with the rest of the community.

Unless someone was willing to just lose money forever on it [[and no one would do that, including anyone on this site, even if they had the money), it just wasn't in the cards.

The demolition was pre-ordained. See above: Lack of Objective Information.

It is easier to one day build on a dirt lot with a clear title than deal with a decrepit eyesore looming over GCP. Since you can't save and renovate every building, you need to be choosy about what to save.

The Statler didn't merit saving. Same thing with Tiger Stadium. Sure, there were lots of pretend plans to save it. In reality, there wasn't any realistic way to save it.

And you know this from your extensive engineering and construction experience? Or perhaps you're just guessing? Maybe you're just not remembering the millions of public dollars it cost to *create* that empty lot.
See above: Lack of Objective Information.

[motz]

The Statler was never going to be redeveloped. It would have been a very expensive redo for a building that was never as nice as the B-C [[the most comparable project downtown). Unless someone was willing to just lose money forever on it [[and no one would do that, including anyone on this site, even if they had the money), it just wasn't in the cards. It is easier to one day build on a dirt lot with a clear title than deal with a decrepit eyesore looming over GCP. Since you can't save and renovate every building, you need to be choosy about what to save. The Statler didn't merit saving. Same thing with Tiger Stadium. Sure, there were lots of pretend plans to save it. In reality, there wasn't any realistic way to save it. All the "plans" lacked an ability to pay for the condos/retail/restaurants/baseball museums/ballfields they contained. Gilbert has the right idea: save the buildings that can have a useful future at a reasonable price. Save the dramatic efforts for the one or two most important buildings. I would put MCS on that list [[although, as noted in other threads, not as a train station). George Jackson may have made his share of mistakes, but he has also left a lot of places available for development that were not beforehand. I shudder to think where economic growth would be in this city if some of those on this board had their way. We would still be figuring out how to reopen Hudson's [[world's largest check cashing store?). Sepia-toned memories of old buildings does not a sensible economic policy make. Ironically, uber-preservations do their cause harm. It renders neighborhoods empty and decaying, preventing entrepreneurs from wanting to redevelop the odd project that would otherwise make sense.

So not entertaining any suggestions from groups that want to save historic structures [[see: Tiger Stadium, Lafayette Building) is totally acceptable because they don't sound feasible? They had come up with some plans to allow parts of Tiger Stadium to stand, which wouldn't affect anyone because nothing is going to happen on that site any time soon, as well as evaluate the Lafayette Building on someone else's dime. But it's fine that George Jackson rushed through demolition so that we have a giant empty field and community gardens instead of structures that could've been used as part of future developments? Let's be realistic, the empty lots aren't going to be developed any time soon. Look at how long it has taken the Hudson's site to even have offers on it.

[ghettopalmetto]

Let's be realistic, the empty lots aren't going to be developed any time soon. Look at how long it has taken the Hudson's site to even have offers on it.

And Hudson's has on-site parking, bought-and-paid for by the City of Detroit. If anything, that's the FIRST empty lot I expect to see developed.

But hey--it's only been 15 years since Hudsons was demolished and jump-started the ensuing development boom. Give it time.

[Danny]

Bump!............................

[trstar]

The Statler was never going to be redeveloped. It would have been a very expensive redo for a building that was never as nice as the B-C [[the most comparable project downtown). Unless someone was willing to just lose money forever on it [[and no one would do that, including anyone on this site, even if they had the money), it just wasn't in the cards. It is easier to one day build on a dirt lot with a clear title than deal with a decrepit eyesore looming over GCP. Since you can't save and renovate every building, you need to be choosy about what to save. The Statler didn't merit saving. Same thing with Tiger Stadium. Sure, there were lots of pretend plans to save it. In reality, there wasn't any realistic way to save it. All the "plans" lacked an ability to pay for the condos/retail/restaurants/baseball museums/ballfields they contained. Gilbert has the right idea: save the buildings that can have a useful future at a reasonable price. Save the dramatic efforts for the one or two most important buildings. I would put MCS on that list [[although, as noted in other threads, not as a train station). George Jackson may have made his share of mistakes, but he has also left a lot of places available for development that were not beforehand. I shudder to think where economic growth would be in this city if some of those on this board had their way. We would still be figuring out how to reopen Hudson's [[world's largest check cashing store?). Sepia-toned memories of old buildings does not a sensible economic policy make. Ironically, uber-preservations do their cause harm. It renders neighborhoods empty and decaying, preventing entrepreneurs from wanting to redevelop the odd project that would otherwise make sense.

I believe your analysis is spot on. Except for Tiger Stadium. I think it could have been downsized to an earlier version of Briggs Field.

I am glad those "development of the week" plans are over for Tiger Stadium. Plus I'm tired of the ruin porn video of non-viable hulking structures. Take you pictures, say a prayer, tear it down, and rebuild.

[Hermod]

I believe your analysis is spot on. Except for Tiger Stadium. I think it could have been downsized to an earlier version of Briggs Field.

I am glad those "development of the week" plans are over for Tiger Stadium. Plus I'm tired of the ruin porn video of non-viable hulking structures. Take you pictures, say a prayer, tear it down, and rebuild.

Navin Field, then Briggs Stadium, and only then Tiger Stadium


George Kell, Hoot Evers, Hal Newhauser, Dizzy Trout.......

[ghettopalmetto]

I believe your analysis is spot on. Except for Tiger Stadium. I think it could have been downsized to an earlier version of Briggs Field.

I am glad those "development of the week" plans are over for Tiger Stadium. Plus I'm tired of the ruin porn video of non-viable hulking structures. Take you pictures, say a prayer, tear it down, and rebuild.

Great thought. Except for that nasty little "rebuild" part--it doesn't happen. The hurdles of brand new construction are too high.

The reality is that new development has taken place in the Book-Cadillac, Fort-Shelby, Kales, David Whitney, and so forth. At one time or another, all of these buildings were written off as "dinosaurs". The Compuware building is the only brand-new, constructed-on-an-empty lot downtown building I can recall. And even that lot was vacant for decades.

Still waiting on Hudson's [[with its already-completed on-site parking) to take root after 15 years.

[Khorasaurus]

Great thought. Except for that nasty little "rebuild" part--it doesn't happen. The hurdles of brand new construction are too high.

The reality is that new development has taken place in the Book-Cadillac, Fort-Shelby, Kales, David Whitney, and so forth. At one time or another, all of these buildings were written off as "dinosaurs". The Compuware building is the only brand-new, constructed-on-an-empty lot downtown building I can recall. And even that lot was vacant for decades.

Still waiting on Hudson's [[with its already-completed on-site parking) to take root after 15 years.

I actually don't disagree, but I find it ironic that you posted this on the day that a serious proposal for the Statler site was announced. And I am pretty confident Gilbert will build something on the Hudson's site in the next few years.

But in general, like I said, I agree. The list of renovated buildings is long and getting longer. The list of new construction after speculative demolition is short.

If we demolish buildings, it should be because they are extremely unsafe/blighting their neighbors or because there is a definite plan in place to build on the lot immediately following the demolition [[like the Hammer building in Midtown).

[Huggybear]

The Compuware building is the only brand-new, constructed-on-an-empty lot downtown building I can recall.

One Kennedy Square, the Greektown Casino Hotel, the MGM Grand complex, the Boll YMCA, Gilbert's Z-Lot retail component; the office space built by the Opera House; the office building off of Ford Field, and Book Cadillac annex.

You're right. Not a damn thing has been built on an empty lot since the Compuware Building.

HB

[ghettopalmetto]

One Kennedy Square, the Greektown Casino Hotel, the MGM Grand complex, the Boll YMCA, Gilbert's Z-Lot retail component; the office space built by the Opera House; the office building off of Ford Field, and Book Cadillac annex.

You're right. Not a damn thing has been built on an empty lot since the Compuware Building.

HB

Ah yeah, I forgot about One Kennedy Square. My bad. I think the casinos were special cases--there just weren't any suitable buildings that could have housed those operations [[although it's worth noting that Motor City went into a renovated building). The office building at Ford Field was the old Hudson's warehouse, was it not?

So yes, I may have exaggerated a bit. I'll concede that. But where a renovation project of a downtown high-rise structure would have been completely unthinkable 10 years ago, they are actually happening. One might think that this indicates a paradigm shift, and thus, stop relying on demolition to somehow "jump start" magic that causes miraculous new development to appear [[I'm *still* not sure how this mechanism is supposed to work.).

But, like you said, Huggybear. You get the skill sets that you breed. And as you've aptly noted, there isn't a strong preservation or adaptive-reuse culture or cadre of professionals in Detroit. The demolition contractors, of course, are in abundance, because they've been the ones to make a buck.

Now, the Lewand-Duggan-Gilbert complex may not be perfect. But I'd have to imagine that, not hiding behind the guise of an unaccountable quasi-public agency, that they might conduct more due diligence and be more forthcoming with information than Detroit's Michael Bay of Real Estate Development.