  Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 1250 Registered: 01-2004 |
Does anyone have a rendering of what the Ponchartrain is supposed to look like when the renovation is complete? I just drove past and saw several beams being constructed on the outside of the actual hotel. Were there plans to actually expand on the hotel? (Message edited by tetsua on July 03, 2007) | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 1059 Registered: 11-2003 |
Maybe the steel is to make a covered patio? I can only give a wild guess since I haven't seen it. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 880 Registered: 11-2004 |
Where are the beams located? I remember hearing that they wanted to connect it to Cobo. Anyone have a clue when they make the switch to Sheraton? (Message edited by eric on July 03, 2007) | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 71 Registered: 06-2007 |
OK people! Start bustin out the digital cameras for all the stuff we see going on around the block! I should of thought of snappin a pic of some guy in a really expensive looking hummer sitting under the lobby canopy. with all the cameras pointed at us in downtown, i say we get some paybacks! Or not...ya know...whatever. I'm just really bummed about the $30 million lawsuit upheld by the supreme court against the City for taking back the riverfront. Today is a dark day! If these assholes feel it's their right to hold on to these properties infinitum, they deserve to get screwed. There should be a DetroitYes 'HAaaallll of SHAME!!!!' | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 1060 Registered: 11-2003 |
Huh? | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 72 Registered: 06-2007 |
Burnsie, don't even try to understand that one. BTW, the City is expected to pay somewhere along the lines of $30 million to the Detroit Plaza partnership (or something). Because, according to NPR, they were someday going to do something with the property. I don't know the details, just thought it was another example of the City getting itself into trouble by allowing itself to be strong armed into a situation they should know better than to be involved with... Is this considered threadjacking? I think it is. I digress. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1254 Registered: 10-2006 |
Yeah. Anyways. Maybe it is just a new structure for the drop off or something. Guess it depends which side "the new structure" is on. | ||
Cmubryan Member Username: Cmubryan Post Number: 445 Registered: 11-2003 |
It definitely cannot be an expansion unless they were going to expand over Jefferson and the Lodge, lol. It's going to be part of the entry to the hotel on the Jefferson side, probably just a covered walkway. BTW, this is the slowest moving renovation I can ever remember. It seems like this hotel has been under renovation for a couple years. I mean it was supposed to be done Fall of 06 then moved back to December 06, then Spring 07. Still, if you walk in the place is a construction zone. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1560 Registered: 06-2006 |
Just to clarify JB3's comments... The city was ordered to pay "just compensation" in the amount of $25 million, because that's what the DPLP could have gotten for the land on the open market...Detroit tried to buy the land, but when the DPLP rejected their offer, the city condemned the land and paid them well below market value...the power of eminent domain requires you pay the owner of the property its market value...thus, the $25 million the city was ordered to pay was not a penalty for taking back the riverfront, but rather what they should have paid for the land in the first place... and I don't believe the case ever went to the Supreme Court...the trial court order the city to pay the $25 million, the city then lost on appeal, and the Supreme Court refused to hear the case as they didn't belive the court of appeals decision was erroneous... | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 765 Registered: 01-2005 |
The law has changed radically in the past couple of years. However, I'm sure Jerry Pesick took the case on a contingent fee basis (standard practice), probably 33% of the increased amount of the value of the property (over what was paid) at the time of taking. Accordingly, I believe the City is also obligated to pay the property owner's legal fees calculated on the difference between the price the property owner rejected and what was ultimately determined to be just compensation. Serves the City right. This is just another in a long line of condemnation cases the City has lost over the years, costing the City well over $100,000,000. It appears the City routinely turns these cases over to the newest legal dept hire, w/o supervision. Disgraceful. I believe the current law requires the municipality/state to pay a property owner 125% of FMV when condemning one's property. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 1254 Registered: 01-2004 |
Just passed the Ponch again, and got a much better look at the metal structure. It doesn't look like it's for an expansion at all, but it looks like they are just going to construct some signage on Jefferson or something. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 1258 Registered: 10-2006 |
Ah now I get it http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/ cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=6th&n avby=case&no=02a0217p, but what does it have to do with anything? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4742 Registered: 08-2004 |
Wow, thanks for the info Charlottepaul. I stood up with Jerry Luptak's daughter in his nieces wedding (in the Savoyard Club) about 20 years ago. Beztak (Harold Beznos & Jerry Luptak) used to own the Buhl Building back then but for some reason they let it go into foreclosure (in the 1990's), and lost it. Beztak also own Muirwoods Apartment development in Farmington Hills and also many properties in Arizona and Florida. |
