 
E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1480
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 5:57 pm: |    |
So the city should spend millions of dollars on demolition to prevent liability and create a parking lot that generates a few thousand dollars at best, lowers surrounding property values and still leaves the city liable for far more money than a parking lot would ever generate? This line of thinking makes sense to you? |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 1265
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 6:01 pm: | |
Actually, E_h, according to most real estate people I know and have talked to about this, they believe a Lafayette parking lot will increase the values.
We live in bizarro world in Detroit.
The urbanists on here have to realize that what Detroit finds valuable and what the rest of the country does is different. I have a good friend who's in real estate, and he has done deals across the country as he throws out all the rules when he does deals in the Detroit region. |
Gencinjay
Member
Username: Gencinjay
Post Number: 85
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 7:10 pm: | |
"This line of thinking makes sense to you?"
A lot would bring in much more than a few thousand dollars, it's easier to maintain than a rotting building and would have less likelyhood of ever costing the city anything in a liability case.
But like I said. I don't want to see a parking lot there. There is already a glut of parking in the area with the only real hope of development in the next couple of years being the old Federal Reserve Building and another lot would only hurt me. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 913
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 7:15 pm: | |
"The urbanists on here have to realize that what Detroit finds valuable and what the rest of the country does is different."
Let's see, Detroit is going down the tubes and other cities in the US have been prospering (before our latest economic downtown). Who's doing things right and who's doing things wrong? Anyone? |
Detourdetroit
Member
Username: Detourdetroit
Post Number: 329
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 7:30 pm: | |
AMEN novine.
you'd think we'd get a freaking clue. why do we keep doing the same thing over and over and over again and wonder why our city's in the can?
basic city building principle...
only replace what you erase with higher better use.
parking/week choked lots are as much a blight/scourge on the landscape as anything else and are simple not appropriate for cbd's |
E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1481
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 11, 2008 - 9:54 pm: | |
Surface lot parking in that part of town is in the area of $3 to $5 per car for a full day. You could fit maybe 50 cars in there total, but who is going to park in some crappy lot that is flanked by two parking garages that are nicer, safer and will probably have the option of validating. So the Lafayette lot would be lucky to be consistently half full on workdays. Take out a few weeks for holidays and that lot will gross about $30,000 per year. So considering that it will cost between $1 million and $2 million per year to raze, it would take between 35 and 70 years to recoup those costs.
That is if you were able to keep the gross revenue. However, that lot will probably have to be a landscaped lot, like the one that replaced the Madison Lennox. That takes a significant capital expenditure just to put in the curbs, sewer connections, asphalt, fence, trees and bushes and shelter for the ticket taker. You can wave goodbye to at least the first couple of years of gross profits to pay for that.
Then it needs to be staffed and guarded. Since it's a city lot it will probably have to be a union job. That's $20,000 gone each year easy. Add in benefits and its pretty much all of your gross profits.
And then there are maintenance costs on top of that. Each year the asphalt needs to be seal coated, fences painted, mulch added, bushes and trees trimmed, snow plowed, sidewalks shoveled, salt sprinkled. All together that's much more than $10,000 per year.
So right now the city is operating a parking lot several thousands of dollars in the red just on its operating budget. By the way, the city will be spending that much money but you can pretty much bank that it won't look like it.
Now you have your cash drain of a parking lot sitting there and some idiot walks by and trips on a crack in a sidewalk. The city, since its self insured, has to pay either the settlement (worth tens of thousands dollars) or the judgement (worth even more). Plus that keeps at least one more lawyer from the city's legal department (probably paid a six-figure salary) busy doing BS defense work that gives nothing back to taxpayers.
And that's if the city uses it as a parking lot. The lot where the Statler Hotel once stood is just a fenced off, weed-choked lot that's used as a giant bathroom once a year during the marathon. One big blight for the whole world to see every Tiger game with an island of burned building in the middle of it. Oh yeah, the Lafayette demo folks will probably drop something into the adjacent Arcade Bar building and set it on fire. Then you'll have a burned out, boarded up hulk sitting there that won't be touched because it's in private hands. Not mention it will be tied up in litigation, costing the city gobs and gobs more money in legal costs.
Yeah, demolition is the prudent thing to do. It's the type of project that will make the taxpayers proud. |
Russix
Member
Username: Russix
Post Number: 156
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 12:24 am: | |
Preservation Tax on parking surface lots, discourage poor land use practices and flow the income into saving buildings. Remember the old motown building on woodward, what a waste. thanks kk |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1542
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 12:39 am: | |
I'm buying as many Mega Millions tickets as I can afford (I'm looking at a layoff on Tuesday, so can't get too crazy) and will take the building off the city's hands for $1 (like the Book-Caddy) and fix it up. I'd buy the Freep at 321 W. Lafeyette, too, though Farbman probably won't let it go for less than $1.5 mil.
There, problem solved! Now all I gotta do is win that jackpot. Piece o' cake. |
Gencinjay
Member
Username: Gencinjay
Post Number: 88
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 2:33 am: | |
Parking in that area is actually $6-$10 for the lots $12-$18 for the garages which is one reason people park in the lots instead. Even with your $5 estimate a 50 car lot would gross closer to $60k a year. The lots on that stretch of Lafayette have no problem staying full.
As far as some idiot tripping on a crack, that could happen right now. At least with a lot you wouldn't have to worry about things falling on peoples heads and killing them. That would be much more expensive.
A lot of that size has no need of security. If done correctly they would make it an automated lot which would cut payroll to almost nothing. It would of course mean a large chunk of change added to the start up costs though.
You're absolutely right about the other start up costs though which is why there probably won't be a parking lot there any time soon. |
Leannam1989
Member
Username: Leannam1989
Post Number: 135
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 2:36 am: | |
Why doesn't a developer buy up the building and use the Historic tax credits?
Or is it just not worth it? |
Gencinjay
Member
Username: Gencinjay
Post Number: 89
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 2:39 am: | |
Does the building have Historical status? I know the Fed building just got it and had to go through a lot of red tape to get it. |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 3876
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 2:45 am: | |
No, it doesn't.
Leannam, do you know anyone that could move around 234,000 square feet of space, office use or otherwise, in this market, right now? If it was that easy, it wouldn't still be empty.
The only visible hope for this building is a Quicken renovation, which doesn't seem very likely, right now. |
Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed
Post Number: 3605
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 8:54 am: | |
quote:Actually, E_h, according to most real estate people I know and have talked to about this, they believe a Lafayette parking lot will increase the values.
In the short term. Would surrounding property values increase more with a renovated Lafayette building or a parking lot? |
E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1482
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 9:52 am: | |
That's only if it were to fill up every work day. I go past those blighted parking lots several times a day and they are rarely full. And their prices recently went down to the about $5 average when the Book Cadillac garage opened. Add another blighted surface lot to the mix and it floods the market with even more parking spots, forcing the price of parking down. Plus the Lafayette isn't near any of downtown's major venues, so it won't be able to cash in on major events like Tiger games or concerts. It won't become an automated lot either. The city's unions will demand that it be staffed by one of their own, and it will happen because that's the way politics works in this city. Creating a parking lot there would be one giant financial boondoggle.
And that's only if they decide to create a parking lot there. They will probably fence it off with some ugly, rusted, falling apart chain link and let giant weeds grow there that will never be cut. They might even put up a sign saying future space for development that will be quickly covered in tags and soon after start to fall down. It will be just left there as urban prairie one block from Campus Martius. Look over at the Statler block if you want to see what the Lafayette block will look like after demolition. And people think this will raise property values? |
Gencinjay
Member
Username: Gencinjay
Post Number: 90
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 11:05 am: | |
I haven't done a market survey since the BC garage opened so you may be right about their prices coming down. I know the BC garage was only charging $5 it's first month to attract people and cash in on all those wanting to see the building. These lots live and die with the court though. If court is in session they are packed. When it's not they aren't.
The city does already have an automated lot so it's not inconceivable that they'd be able to make this one unmanned also. The teamsters would certainly threaten something, but the city wouldn't have to fight too hard to keep them out. As long as it's a union member from the MPD doing the collections, the other unions will be happy.
While I wouldn't say a parking lot would increase the property value, I think it would make the property much easier to sell. It would be nice if they made it a small park instead although that would attract the bums so maybe not. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4043
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 11:08 am: | |
People write as if there's a demand for more parking in downtown Detroit.
quote:While I wouldn't say a parking lot would increase the property value, I think it would make the property much easier to sell.
Do you know how many times this same argument has been used to justify the demolition of other buildings? Are you aware of the results? |
Gencinjay
Member
Username: Gencinjay
Post Number: 92
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 11:19 am: | |
Actually if you look above you'll see that I said there is already a glut of parking in that area. We don't need more parking, but I would have to think an open lot would sell better than a rotting building. |
E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway
Post Number: 1483
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 11:28 am: | |
No, a vacant lot only means that it's easier for the city to hold onto and forget about. The city owns plenty of blighted surface lots in the downtown and around the city at large. Yet it doesn't sell them. They just sit there as a liability to the tax payers, contributing no tax revenue, creating more blight and dragging down property values. Demolition is a fool's errand in regard to the Lafayette. The city needs to put out an open-ended request for proposals so it can sell it and get it back on the tax rolls. |
Novine
Member
Username: Novine
Post Number: 935
Registered: 07-2007
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 2:38 pm: | |
"We don't need more parking, but I would have to think an open lot would sell better than a rotting building."
Examples please? If this was such a good strategy, surely there are examples of the wisdom of this. |
Russix
Member
Username: Russix
Post Number: 157
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Friday, December 12, 2008 - 5:57 pm: | |
COMING SOON: NOTHING! |
Rjlj
Member
Username: Rjlj
Post Number: 724
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 10:24 am: | |
It is true, the DDA has issued an RFP for demo of the Lafayette Building. I saw a copy of the RFP and it can be obtained at the DEGC.
"A MANDATORY pre-proposal meting will be held at the DDA offices, 500 Griswold, Suite 2200, Detroit, MI on Tuesday, December 16, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. "
I guess the city has not learned from the newly restored Book or the Fort Shelby.
(Message edited by rjlj on December 13, 2008) |
Leannam1989
Member
Username: Leannam1989
Post Number: 140
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 11:39 am: | |
I guess Wednesday is Lafayette's day in court. |
Digitalvision
Member
Username: Digitalvision
Post Number: 1271
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 12:36 pm: | |
Here's my major bone with how things are done in Detroit.
The government does what the business community should do, and the business community (i.e. Clean Downtown, etc) does what government should do.
Bass Ackwards if I've ever seen it. |
Warrenite84
Member
Username: Warrenite84
Post Number: 450
Registered: 01-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 12:44 pm: | |
Doesn't Dan Gilbert still have development rights to this property? Then how can the city push for its removal? |
Sean_of_detroit
Member
Username: Sean_of_detroit
Post Number: 2077
Registered: 03-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 3:21 pm: | |
^Until the end of this month. |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1559
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 6:08 pm: | |
A friend of mine with connections sent me the RFP proposal. It says the Lafayette's day in court is Tuesday:
A MANDATORY pre-proposal meting will be held at the DDA offices, 500 Griswold, Suite 2200, Detroit, MI on Tuesday, December 16, 2008 at 10:00 a.m.
Unfortunately, I have to go into work Tuesday to learn whether or not I'll be laid off, so I can't make it. Can anyone else go to urge the city to just clean the damn place up instead of tearing the damn place down? |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1560
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, December 13, 2008 - 6:10 pm: | |
By the way, there is no question the city plans to raze it, by the way. The RFP's wording:
"Scope of Work:
Project will consist of environmental consulting services for preperation of an abatement plan, oversight of asbestos and hazardous materials abatement and general oversight of the demolition of the Lafayette Building." |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 3896
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 14, 2008 - 2:21 am: | |
Rhymes,
You think you could email the RFP to those interested in reading it for themselves? I'll post my email if that is the case. |
Eastsidedame
Member
Username: Eastsidedame
Post Number: 658
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, December 14, 2008 - 4:34 am: | |
Hey, Bearinabox, FYI: I was born, raised and educated in Detroit, as were many other forum readers and writers. There is no residency requirement for caring about Detroit and what happens there.
Two weeks before my parents dragged me to Texas, I was crying in the unemployment line. Two weeks after I moved, I was talking to John Travolta about marketing his new movie, "Urban Cowboy". We do what we have to do.
So stick it. |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1570
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, December 14, 2008 - 5:01 pm: | |
I can, but I've been asked by my source to redact a couple of names that are on it. |