  Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 594 Registered: 09-2004 |
The previous few posts here... well written and thought out! The claim that it'll be cheaper to demo rather than mothball is just not true! And have we yet seen any proof that the city is intending to demolish the Lafayette? I mean written proof posted or published somewhere? The part about securing the building... it's just true. If you secure the structure, remove the greenery on the roof and perhaps affix temporary glass over the windows, it won't be near as costly as demolishing and abating the whole structure. Then we need to KEEP the building secure... windows on the top floor don't just break by themselves, they break because people get inside. I would say the Lafayette Bldg is an important piece of the puzzle along Michigan Avenue downtown. It may not be a cornerstone like the Book Cadillac is, but it is an important and uniquely-shaped piece. I too vote for a good and solid mothball plan, whether the alternative be demo or further languish. That would be most responsible on the part of the city at this time. As someone said just a short ways up, an incremental reuse plan would be best here. If they can get ground floor and perhaps the first one or two above that abated and reused, that'll be some return on investment and will spark interest in the remaining part of the structure, which could be rehabbed later. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1886 Registered: 11-2004 |
The Gilbert option is the real wild card in the situation. There are certain things that make me think the Lafayette is not coming down. First, the fencing around it doesn't take up the whole sidewalk. If the fencing was for demo it would take up 100 percent of the sidewalk. Second, Gilbert has options on three largely vacant lots to build on in the Statler site, Hudson site and the Library lot. If he has grand plans to build new I think he would capitalize on those first if anything because its easier. Third, Gilbert is a big proponent of the Creative Corridor initiative. Part of that calls for creating a start-up incubator in the downtown area. Lafayette would seem to be a logical place for this because of its location and availability. Remember TechTown was built from a largely abandoned building stock. Ann Arbor SPARK is doing the same thing with its east incubator in downtown Ypsilanti. Fourth, it's much cheaper to rehab than to build something comparably new. In this economy I wouldn't be surprised if Gilbert decides to renovate and rebrand a historic building, claim the green mantle for a few years before building his new home at the Statler or Hudson sites. Fifth, the original post was about just demolition, very vague. Danindc pointed out it could be just for interior demolition, which is something much different than razing the building. No matter what happens to the Lafayette, the interior needs to be demoed first. | ||
Registeredguest Member Username: Registeredguest Post Number: 452 Registered: 10-2003 |
Good lord. Gilbert won't build anything until the credit markets shore up. Buildings won't be renovated until there is a demand. There won't be a demand until those who preach the tenants of urbanism from Ferndale, Royal Oak and elsewhere move to the city. Those who preach those tenants of urbanism from their perch in RO and Ferndale won't move until streets are safe, streets are clean, taxes are low, city workers do something other than drive around the city all day escaping any real work and the schools are acceptable. Of course, tearing down the building is the easy solution for our leaders and protesting the tear down is the easy solution for the peanut gallery. Tear it down (or protest it) and move on. Addressing the issues of an entitled, un-skilled workforce, an unreasonable and unbearable tax load, a corrupt city government, petty crime, aggressive panhandling and a dysfunctional school board - we'll leave those to the next administration. | ||
Sharmaal Member Username: Sharmaal Post Number: 1402 Registered: 09-2004 |
E_hemingway - Not a bad thought as a location for the Creative Corridor Incubator, but I do not believe that a physical location is one of their priorities right now. But Gilbert may just give up on building or rehabbing and move into 1001. Maybe he already has? | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 3987 Registered: 09-2007 |
BTW, I'm surprised no one caught this, but the original poster spelled Lafayette wrong. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1887 Registered: 11-2004 |
Hold on Registeredguest. I have been one of the loudest voices here for saving the Lafayette and I am not the Oakland County suburbanite waiting for Detroit to correct its problems. I live in the city. Have done so for years. My business is here, too. My little bother I mentioned in an earlier post is through Big Brothers Big Sisters. He has plenty of problems not of his own creation to deal with besides trying to make his way through the morass of DPS and a neighborhood he doesn't feel completely safe in. To say that myself or others here who have advocated for the Lafayette's preservation are just building huggers ignoring the city's deeply rooted real problems is far from accurate. In fact its irresponsible as citizens actively engaged in improving their community to ignore something like the Lafayette or razing a vacant home in our neighborhood. There are several empty homes and apartment building in my neighborhood. I don't want any of them razed. Those are homes for people to live in or potential places to start a new business. They make up an important part of the fabric of our community. An empty, weed-choked lot takes away from it. Now your post might be aimed at a more macro look of Metro Detroit. That's fine. I actually agree with a number of those points on a macro level. I just don't want the preservation-minded folks here, myself included, lumped into some sort of starry-eyed group only interested in suburban quarter backing from far away. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1888 Registered: 11-2004 |
Yeah, I could definitely see the incubator going into 1001. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the plan. Hey, I would be fine with it if that was the plan. I'd love to see it go forward in the 1001. | ||
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj Post Number: 770 Registered: 11-2003 |
I noticed that Detroitrise. I also noticed that the original poster updated the wikipedia page for this building at the same time of posting. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 3988 Registered: 09-2007 |
In fact, while we're all going into deep discussion, the original poster deleted & practically gave up on this thread. | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 457 Registered: 10-2003 |
very interesting...maybe a handle from the city testing the waters to see how a lafayette demo w/federal dollars will fly? or maybe one of those martians? | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1889 Registered: 11-2004 |
Or a handle from one of the demo companies. | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 596 Registered: 09-2004 |
I doubt they'd be using federal dollars. If so, they'd have to go through Section 106 Review, which would probably stop them dead in their tracks... http://michigan.gov/hal/0,1607 ,7-160-17449_18638_21819-57476 --,00.html Although the Lafayette Building is not on the National Register, I believe it would be considered National Register eligible, and is therefore subject to review. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 460 Registered: 10-2003 |
Wow, over a hundred posts of meandering speculation based on a prank by a troll. Nice work. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1890 Registered: 11-2004 |
Yeah, but it has been one of the more interesting threads on this forum in a while. | ||
Staticstate Member Username: Staticstate Post Number: 13 Registered: 07-2008 |
so would they arrest you if you went down there with a scrubber and started cleaning it or what? That would make an interesting news story... "Man arrested for cleaning blight" | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5328 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I think it would be more like, "Naive Do-Gooder Seriously Injured in Vacant Building, Arrested for Trespassing". Rb336, this thread's creator, is one of the more thoughtful posters on these forums. I'm surprised that some of you think he could be trolling. | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 458 Registered: 10-2003 |
sorry, no disrespect Rb. what do i know about anything??? i'm just sorry you're gone. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 461 Registered: 10-2003 |
Quote: "so would they arrest you if you went down there with a scrubber and started cleaning it or what? That would make an interesting news story... "Man arrested for cleaning blight" Do you really think it's simply a matter of some dust that needs "scrubbing" that's holding the building back from being used? That developers in the city have not moved to use the building because they can't find someone to sweep the place? | ||
Staticstate Member Username: Staticstate Post Number: 14 Registered: 07-2008 |
Hockey_Player, that's not at all what I'm saying. I was making a general statement in regards to the concept of making it look better unused as an alternative to just knocking it down. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 462 Registered: 10-2003 |
If it is to be demolished, it's not because the windows need scrubbing and there's a tree on the roof. It's because it would take tens of millions of dollars to gut and renovate, not to mention there needs to be a market for more office space in a downtown with plenty of office vacancies already. It's not that someone's saying "This is ugly, let's get rid of it." It's because there's zero interest in developing it, and city officials don't care for people in the new Book Cadillac having to stare at an abandoned building in the center of downtown for years to come. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5329 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: The City would much rather have the residents and guests of the Book Cadillac stare at an empty gravel lot, populated by rats, pheasants, and "Detroit palm" trees. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 3884 Registered: 07-2004 |
HP: That's a wee bit disingenuous. Why would the latter statement be true (city officials don't care for people in the new Book Cadillac having to stare at an abandoned building in the center of downtown for years to come) unless the former were true too (someone's saying "This is ugly, let's get rid of it.") | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 463 Registered: 10-2003 |
If you lived here, you could ask city officials that question as I have, and find out that it's actually true. Though in real life in Detroit, it would be an active parking lot, and not some movie stereotype of Detroit with rats and pheasants and trees in it. But why deal in reality when we can be ridiculous? | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 3885 Registered: 07-2004 |
Haha. OOOOH! An *active* parking lot. How URBAN.  | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 7597 Registered: 08-2004 |
Hockey_player... I have to respectfully disagree with you... because according to your logic... the Detroit Free Press Building, the Book Building and Book Tower, the United Artists Building, the Wurlitzer Building, the Metropolitan Building, 1001 Building and dozens of others (that could possibly be viewed as empty buildings from the 33 story Book Cadillac) should be torn down... because right now in our bad economy... there's zero interest in any of them! No no no no no...... | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5330 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I guess my eyes only see movie stereotypes, then. Is this parking lot going to be landscaped and lighted, as well as active? Because that would be sweet--$5 all-day parking right in the middle of downtown. Of course, it wouldn't need to be a parking lot for long. Once the building is demolished, it won't block out so much of the sunlight, and developers will rush to fill it in with a brand new steel-and-glass high-rise. Fucking Throwaway Culture and Planned Obsolescence--invented and still living well in Detroit! Hockey_player, might I suggest a move to Charlotte or Atlanta? You might find it more to your liking. There's no pesky old historical building stock or sense of place to get in the way of all the shiny new skyscrapers. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1917 Registered: 11-2003 |
I would say the United Artists Building is next in line to be endangered. It is in the hands of Illich who has no need for another theater, or office building for that matter. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5332 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^and of course, the City will hand Ilitch millions of dollars to tear it down, since the price of plywood, 6-mil poly sheathing, and a padlock is just astronomical anymore.... | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 464 Registered: 10-2003 |
Danindc - "I guess my eyes only see movie stereotypes, then." They must, since you don't live here and don't have a clue what actually goes on here. DN- Do you really think that city officials decided that cosmetic issues like broken or dirty windows and a tree on the roof justify tearing down a historic skyscraper? It's not a matter simply of it being ugly and needing some goofballs to sweep it out. It's a matter of them looking into the future and seeing no realistic redevelopment of it in a city with plenty of office space already. I like the building. I wish and hope it stays. But since I don't have $50 million to fix it, I really don't have much say in it, now do I? I could rant and rave like Dan and make myself somehow feel relevant, but that does nothing to salvage the building. Gistok - the Freep, etc. doesn't have pieces falling to the street, doesn't have hazardous materials blowing out the windows, doesn't have colonies of pigeons living on every floor. Again, I'm all for saving the building. If you are so serious about it, then people can get some investors together and fix it instead of demanding that others do so just so you can stare at it and say how neat it is. (Message edited by hockey_player on December 10, 2008) | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 3886 Registered: 07-2004 |
HP: I think civic leaders look at these buildings and are humiliated by them. Demolition companies exploit their vanity and promise to get rid of those haunting reminders that things used to be much better before they took office. (Message edited by detroitnerd on December 10, 2008) |
