Post Number: 670
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 10:59 am: || |
hey there gang, whatever happened to this project:
it recieved $100,000 in Michigan Cool Cities money...
that article is from 2006, and still no sign of life, is there?
Post Number: 6965
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 11:19 am: || |
No jobs means less housing demand.
Post Number: 671
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 12:18 pm: || |
well, i got that part of the deal, but what of the $100,000 in state funding?
Post Number: 360
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 1:00 pm: || |
I'm hearing rumblings that it's been given new life with additional financing. It will live as rentals, not condos...
Post Number: 103
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 1:51 pm: || |
it's still on...if you really are curious, just go stop at the UCCA offices sometime and ask. but remember, you're dealing with a non-profit, so things move slooooowwwwwly.
and then go upstairs and say hi to detourdetroit.
Post Number: 304
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:02 pm: || |
http://www.detroitmidtown.com/ 05/image_lib/woodward_willis.j pg
Post Number: 11189
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:19 pm: || |
I can't wait for ACME to open shop.
Post Number: 312
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:22 pm: || |
That place comes in handy when you've got a roadrunner to kill.
Post Number: 4564
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:25 pm: || |
Best anvils around.
Post Number: 110
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:43 pm: || |
The project was one of many mentioned in this Detroit News article last Saturday: http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/B IZ/801050361&imw=Y
Something else, the Model D article, whose source was the UCCA, says it "will be constructed on four vacant lots on the northeast corner of Woodward and West Willis." That block is not vacant, but the northwest corner is--next to McDonalds.
Post Number: 1505
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 2:52 pm: || |
I applaud the UCCA for stepping up and taking a stand to create a better urban fabric along Woodward. It's refreshing to hear influential people say, "No, we need this type of building here" instead of just saying beggars can't be choosers. I am very happy they are pushing forward with this.
My only gripe is that it's only three stories tall. Something along Woodward should be taller and allow for more density. Don't get me wrong, this type of development is great. But do we have to settle for a small town downtown (three stories) building when something five or six stories would be more appropriate in a major city center along its main artery?
Post Number: 277
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 3:26 pm: || |
E_Hemingway, There's no demand for that many units. You could build it taller but you would double the construction costs and have a higher vacancy rate. I have a feeling the numbers on this project are about as thin as they get, and you should be happy to get three stories. The most profitable use for the site is probably a single-story drug store with parking, and the UCCA is right not to settle for that and push for something better.
So yes, we have to settle for something getting built vs. the site sitting vacant for another decade.
Post Number: 1506
|Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 4:13 pm: || |
It wouldn't surprise me if the numbers on this are thin at best, especially in today's economy. I wonder if a compromise could be reach, such as putting in footings strong enough to accommodate a couple more stories further down the road if and when the numbers work. Such a project is being done now in downtown Birmingham now:
Briggs Building expansion in downtown Birmingham fully leased