  Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 767 Registered: 11-2003 |
Do we know this rumor to be true? No one has come forward with any proof. | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 469 Registered: 11-2007 |
quote: It may have been headed on that path, but I don't think that path exists anymore; it was blocked by the financial landslide. Perhaps a better metaphor would be a ship becalmed at sea without charts and people starting to recycle their urine. When the wind comes up again, it will go somewhere, but I'm guessing nowhere near Phoenix or Houston. | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 2369 Registered: 03-2008 |
DR, patience is pointless without persistent action. Hey, can we just go ahead and add the Book Building to the demolition list? That way the support will come rolling in while it still can be saved. (Message edited by Sean_of_Detroit on December 09, 2008) | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1078 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote:Hey, maybe the silver lining in all this is that Capitol Park will finally start to smell better. | ||
Ltdave Member Username: Ltdave Post Number: 315 Registered: 09-2006 |
""The Lafayette is the HUGE building kitty-corner from the BC. Graffitti in windows, dark slate facade on the lower level, occasional barricades on the street to prevent things that fall from it from hitting people. "" yes but what did it USED be? i.e. who built it and what was its purpose? | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 455 Registered: 10-2003 |
i hear you. i'm frustrated too. everyday...because i know that it's in us...i know that love, that spark so many of us have inside. i know how heartbroken so many feel when we see the city in the state that it's in. i know the pain and the anger so many feel at the antipathy of those who would just as soon erase detroit and pretend all its problems will go away. i agree patience is a virtue, but i'm beginning to think (more often of late!) that the region has become so deluded to think that the mere idea of viable city is simply beyond our grasp...that detroit can't possibly be a healthy place. ever. and there is always an excuse. did martians land here and do this to us? NO, WE DID IT TO OURSELVES. and we can change it. it's way past time to become furious, not with anger or venom or spite, but with a righteous indignation that the status quo is so far beyond acceptable at this point...not only in politics (inner and inter city and state), but in business, education and possibly most important, in the ways in which we interact with each other and our environment. what is so exciting about detroit. right now. is that it could become one of the most progressive places on the face of the planet if it wanted to be. overnight. right now. yes, amidst the doom and gloom and talk show joke butts detroit has the tools, the infrastructure and the smarts to help shape the world for the next hundred years, just like it did a century ago when but a few souls and a twice failed 45 year old tinkerer set a new course in a small loft building off a streetcar line and changed the world forever. | ||
Dan Member Username: Dan Post Number: 1590 Registered: 10-2003 |
Wow. Great post Francis! I am with you. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 6517 Registered: 10-2003 |
Hold up. Has anyone been able to independently confirm that it is the building that is to be demolished? When people make post like this, I'd expect many more people to call bullshit than have done so so far. BTW, as someone else said, "demolition" can mean interior demolition, which would simply mean stripping the interior to prep it for future redevelopment of demolition. The B-C, Fort Shelby, etc...all had to undergo interior demolition work before they could start redevelopment, and the ones that have fallen also had to go through this prelim work. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 1566 Registered: 11-2005 |
"what was in the Lafeyette building originally? " I did a somewhat exhaustive history of the Lafayette Building a little ways back. Read it here: http://www.buildingsofdetroit. com/places/lafayette | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1883 Registered: 11-2004 |
Cockrell is on the verge of losing my vote not only for short-term backwards thinking like knocking down the Lafayette (if that is indeed his plan) but for saying doing the opposite would be a cornerstone of his administration. Demolition is one of the most environmentally harmful things we do. There is little to no redeeming value in it. But here Cockrell comes claiming the mantle of the environmental mayor. How sustainability is a virtue Detroiters must strive for to better their lives and economic well being. All things I completely agree with and gave him credit for taking a stand on when issues like crime are more pressing. But then I see some of his actions. He starts to say that we might have to keep the incinerator burning for a few more years. Oh yeah he was all for shutting it down when he was on City Council but now when he gets in a position of power to do something about it he starts hedging. He wants to spend something like 2/3 to 3/4 of federal foreclosure funds on demolition and the rest on renovating properties. Those numbers should be reversed so the burnt out shells are razed and more vacant properties are put back on the tax rolls. But doing that would take a modicum of political courage in Detroit, a trait he has yet to exhibit in his policy decisions. His inaugural speech put me in his camp. For once I thought we had a real progressive leader who could start thinking in the long-term for Detroit. I have been steadily disappointed since. So much so that I am ready to vote for someone else. Someone who won't say one thing and then do the opposite. Trying to raze the Lafayette will be the third strike for me as far as Cockrell is concerned, and there are enough quality candidates out there that I won't feel like I am choosing the lesser of evils. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 1571 Registered: 11-2005 |
What I don't understand is how people can volunteer to sign waivers releasing the city of liability of injury, offer to go in and fell the roof trees and clean the windows, and the city refuses. Isn't that the kind of proactive volunteerism the city needs? I mean, without a waiver, I understand, but with one? What's the city got to lose but a beautiful landmark. Granted, its history, as I found when researching it, isn't as illustrious as I first thought. | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1083 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote:Which other candidates do you think are "quality" and why? | ||
Eastsidedame Member Username: Eastsidedame Post Number: 668 Registered: 12-2006 |
I got chills reading that, Detourdetroit. Also remember that 45 year old tinkerer was a small businessman. I firmly believe it will be small businesses will be key to Detroit's resurgence. I do not agree that only a rich person can save this, or any other, building...or this, or any other city, for that matter. The Internet has changed activism to the point where almost anything can be accomplished. There will be a new (supposedly sympathetic) administration in Washington soon. Leave no stone unturned to find good, honest, and decent leaders who are into Public Service instead of Self Service. Just do not give into despair or bitterness, under any circumstances. I just don't see the logic is disassembling the former "Paris of the West", one piece at a time. I live in Houston and much of it is butt ugly, don't kid yourself. A lot of it's got that deconstructivism/brutalism look, or worse, a sea of pre-fab deja-vus that exists in most new construction today. It's cheap, tacky and vapid. The Heights, Meyerland and the East End are some of the interesting places I like, filled with character and charm. Do you really want Detroit have a few pockets of character amid the pre-fab forest? Ick. If first the people go, then the buildings and houses....you might as well change the name, because it's not Detroit anymore. At this rate of demolitions, we'll be half way there very soon. Anybody can love LA or NY. It takes real soul to love a place like Detroit right down to your very bones. | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 1498 Registered: 11-2003 |
As with any office, until you get there, you may not know all the realities of the situation. It's way easier to advocate for X or Y when you may not know all the facts. Now, I'm not 100% happy with Cockrel myself, but there's a difference between the job of council president and mayor. The city simply can't afford to mothball these places and carry it on their books year after year. At what point, what, a decade or two, do you fold your cards when that money could be used towards many other arguably more important things, like police. If someone else is going to pay for their demolition, and take a liability off the books, it could be considered by many fiscally irresponsible to not pull the trigger on a lot of these properties which cost the city to stay vacant, especially when many in the business community as well as community organizations in those neighborhoods would be made very happy by seeing the Lafayette and other vacant buildings go. The other fact is, having worked on rehabilitation in Detroit neighborhoods first-hand, that it's simply not practical to rehab most of the stock. Almost no one is interested. Many if most of the houses and the like are too small for modern standards, or if rehabbed have very little chance of selling (or selling at a price that's worth it). Also, I commonly see two lots having to be combined to make one modern-sized house with the spacing that today's home buyers want between houses. And they need to be modern-sized to sell. The apartment buildings would be prohibitively expensive to rehab because of how low the market is, even without the recent collapse. It's simply not worth it if you can only charge $300-$500 a month in rent. This is an economics question, more than anything. The city is broke, and so you have to prioritize and decide to get rid of the empty structures that are not only not providing revenue but sucking it by providing havens for illegal activity which lowers the quality of life for citizens and... costs money to protect. | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1085 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: quote:Which is it? | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 1086 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote:Don't give in to despair, bitterness, or moving to Texas. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 6519 Registered: 10-2003 |
Rhymeswithrawk, Thanks for the link. That is one amazing story, and by amazing I mean the most terrible and sad story I've heard in a long time. It's eerie how closely its story resembles the Book Tower & Building. Hopefully, that story turns out better. | ||
Staticstate Member Username: Staticstate Post Number: 12 Registered: 07-2008 |
Rhymeswithrawk, great story. I'd not only sign a waiver to help clean that building up, I'd drive the 6 hours to assist. Detroit has some fabulous buildings that I'm really drawn to. The fact that they sit in such a state is quite sad. | ||
Detmsp Member Username: Detmsp Post Number: 40 Registered: 08-2008 |
I think all this aggression is misplaced. You're all pissed off about the symptoms.... but treating the symptoms doesn't cure the disease. Maybe your anger should be directed at the root problems that cause companies to say "renovate a building in Detroit? screw that, we'll go to Atlanta". Until those root problems are fixed, all the bitching, moaning and protesting in the world will only succeed in keeping those buildings around to deteriorate even further. It won't get those buildings fixed up. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3681 Registered: 04-2006 |
>It's headed straight on the Houston/Phoenix path. You have that backwards. Houston/Phoenix are on the path to be Detroit. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3683 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: Really, is this Detroit's response to everything? Immediate gain over long term vision. This is exactly why the rest of the country was so cool on bailing out the auto industry. "Throwing good money after bad" is how they termed it. Allowing good resources to be destroyed by lack of vision is a more apt description of it. Does Detroit suffer from intellectual laziness? | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 1499 Registered: 11-2003 |
I won't argue, IHD, that there are some issues, and it's going to take another 4-10 years with good leadership to fix them. But like with the auto industry, there are realities that people don't know. There IS NOT THE MONEY. I don't know if you out-of-towners realize this, but the city can't even afford copy toner. I have had friends in the city who have had to pool their personal money to go buy it. We're what, 2000+ officers under where we should be for protection. Ask your mayors what their priorities would be if you had what, 40% less cops than you needed to protect the city? Or how about the 14% unemployment? Politically, and morally, impossible. Explain to an average city resident that we're going to spend what it costs a year on a cop to mothball a building few if any with the dollars to do anything want when they're getting robbed every other month and there's drug dealers on the corner. I love architecture, but it almost sickens me that it seems some people love the buildings more than the people. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5325 Registered: 10-2003 |
So if the city doesn't have money for copy toner, how can they justify spending millions on building demolitions? | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 1500 Registered: 11-2003 |
Because in general, it's not the city's to decide what to do with it. Many times this is programmed federal money or state (sometimes with a minor local match that's palatable) that can't be spent on other things. There's a lot of rules like that. For instance, in Michigan for schools, if you raise a local millage or bond, you cannot spend it on teachers or day-to-day operations. That MUST come from your state-mandated funds, and you must use your local money ONLY for buildings and hard infrastructure, not people. So that's why many times there will be a multi-million bond raised and teachers cut. It's asinine. There also may have been a financial analysis done, and they may realize that from a liability or cost perspective, that the building would cost the city more up than to take it down. Remember, the city is self-insured; this means any lawsuits for almost any reason from a sidewalk trip to a bus diver problem to a police issues come out of the general fund here, straight from taxpayers and operating expenses, immediately. That is also a large motivator for demolition, as demo'd buildings intrinsically have less liability. | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 456 Registered: 10-2003 |
you're right about state and fed dollars dv... it's sad but an understandable stance by the city...yet it goes fundamentally to earlier posts: how does demoing the lafayette reposition the city in the long run? when are we going to knock down the last crack house? are detroiters today in any measurable way better off than they were when the first wrecking ball swung at a building because there was no higher, better use for the land it was sitting on than as a parking lot or as nothing in particular? well maybe the city wasn't liable anymore, but does erasing urban fabric for a zero sum gain really make the city more viable...for people or business? we have decades of track record and thousands and thousands of vacant lots to prove that business as usual is not the answer...yes, it is an economic response no doubt to current conditions. but we should know by now that the basic economic framework that we shackle ourselves to is not the answer for a sustainable city...it's not the answer at the local level, and no more the answer at the regional, state or federal levels, which are complicit in the sickness. i would hazard that the people who love great architecture see how its waste diminishes the quality of people's lives. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1884 Registered: 11-2004 |
I agree with you on one point DV, it is all about economics. And Detroit can simply not afford to go on a bulldozing spree. There are too many other pressing things that money should be put toward. Let's take the Lafayette for example. It will cost well over $1 million to turn it into a blighted, weed-choked, gravel lot. That money would be better spent securing the building and putting out an RFP for it. What comes back could probably surprise some folks. Take the GAR building for instance. That's also a beautiful historic building that has been boarded up, neglected and basically falling apart for decades. Because of the triangular lot it's on, it age and lack of parking it's considered obsolete by modern standards. Despite all of that a local creative-economy firm is about to sink a lot of money into rehabbing it very soon. Yes, even in this economy. Why can't the same thing be done with the Lafayette? It's not that much bigger than the GAR, is surrounded by parking and is within sight of Campus Martius, the Book Cadillac and the proposed Woodward streetcar line. Also keep in mind that if a company or a developer takes it over, they don't have to use the whole thing all at once. It could easily be made viable if the ground floor or second floor is redone at first, the exterior secured, the roof repaired and the upper floors are sealed off. This would create tax base, jobs and economic opportunity in a city begging for it. It would be hailed as a home run for a politician that helped make it happen. It may not be the stereotypical exurban office space design that Oakland County craves, but I bet a lot of people in creative-class firms or start-ups would love to have an office or an apartment there in the center of downtown. The same goes with the housing stock. Just because its not what they're building in Sticks Township doesn't mean its undesirable. One would think in this stage of foreclosure mania people would want to have a crack at house they could improve for $1 or slightly more. This happens all of the time with immigrants. For instance, there was an abandoned, boarded up house on my little brother's block for years. This place was a blight in the middle of an otherwise solid residential block just outside of Mexicantown. A few months ago a couple of Latinos picked this place up for a song, renovated it, live in it and now it's once again a positive part of the neighborhood. This happens all of the time in Southwest with both single family homes and apartment buildings. Southwest Solutions has done an incredible job preserving its apartment buildings. The Whitdell Apartments in Hubbard Farms is a great example of this. Don't tell me Detroit's building stock is undesirable. People love a deal, and if short-sighted city bureaucrats in the pockets of the likes of Bobby Ferguson would get out of their way and help them such things would happen much more often here. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1885 Registered: 11-2004 |
Also you really can't compare mothballing to demo costs. It would cost a few thousand dollars to properly seal that building up and make it safe for pedestrians to walk past. It would cost more than million dollars easily to raze it. And even then the city still needs to insure the property, which means any idiot can still trip on the sidewalk in front of the empty, weed-choked lot and sue the city. | ||
Warrenite84 Member Username: Warrenite84 Post Number: 449 Registered: 01-2007 |
With Dan Gilbert still having development rights to the Lafyette, and two other sites near/on Broadway, let's see if he has plans for these sites. Detroit cannot touch the Lafyette unless his option on it has been rescinded, unless it is structurally unsound. My hope is that the Light Rail Plans are voted in, and Mr.Gilbert agrees to pay to secure and mothball the Lafyette for the near future. WHEN the economy turns around, its secured condition and location to the Book Cadillac would be enough justification to renovate it. We have discussed in the past at length about its lack of parking was one of the shortfalls to the Lafyette's revival. With the hoped for LRT system, parking requirements could be revised down to make several properties Downtown feasible. That certainly would be the best outcome. LRT becoming the catalyst for renovating and filling our older structures, while Quicken Loans brings its business and partners downtown. This outcome is not out of line to what we could reasonably expect in increased development due to investment in LRT. There has been a proven $4-$8 return on investment in infrastructure when LRT was put in other cities. But I digress. Since I can't vote in Detroit, those who can should press candidates on preservationist issues. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 7594 Registered: 08-2004 |
Good posts all. I agree that the building should be mothballed... cheaper than demo. The Lafayette Building is one of C. Howard Cranes nicer office buildings in Detroit. Not as fanciful as the Fox Building (office tower) or the Francis Palms Building (State/Filmore Theatre building), it is however nicer than the Crane's United Artists Building or his Orchestra Hall facade. I would like to remind the pro-demo folks that the building has only been empty for 11 years... not the 35 years that United Artists Building has been empty, or the 25+ years that the Book Cadillac, Fort Shelby and other buildings have been empty. So lets not jump the gun just because the nice Book Cadillac has been fixed up. That would be cutting off our collective noses to spite our face! As far as buildings go, the Lafayette is very reminiscent to Albert Kahn's old GM Headquarters in New Center. It also has that classic beauty found in many of the government buildings found in Washington's Federal Triangle. Just because the B-C open next door, doesn't mean that we have to go on a demolition derby of everything within a few blocks of it. That really defeats the purpose of historic preservation, doesn't it? As Lmichigan and others have said... where's the proof that this is coming down? Let's not "man the barricades" just yet. As has been mentioned... Dan Gilbert still has an option on it... and until we hear otherwise, that's what I'm going by. | ||
Digitalvision Member Username: Digitalvision Post Number: 1501 Registered: 11-2003 |
I hope he takes that option, Gistok. I'm not too positive on that happening, but that would be wonderful and much preferable to him building new. It would instantly extend the Campus Martius progress and make for a brand new commercial strip. I would dislike greatly for them to demo Lafayette and then build new on the site (which is also a possibility) without some numbers/backup showing that it's economically and practically a bad idea. Which throws a whole new wrench - what if Gilbert (*speculation pulling this out my ass alert*) IS exercising his option and has chosen to demolish it and build new? Is he still the saviour so many on here claim him to be? |
