 
Busterwmu
Member
Username: Busterwmu
Post Number: 583
Registered: 09-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 10:31 pm: |    |
Gistok, nice editing work there.... I wouldn't complain if that were the case!
For much of it's history, the shirt building on the very wedge of the triangle (Michigan/Lafayette/Griswold, where American Coney currently is) was once at least 3 stories taller than it currently is.
Don't forget, the city spent $350,000.00 to clear the title and gain ownership of the Lafayette Building in 2004. Clearly there was motivation to spend all that money. Now we're to waste those six figures and more by negating the whole thing just a few years later, AFTER there has been at least some serious interest in the property? |
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1088
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 10:54 pm: | |
Gistok, that is brilliant! I wish I had the ability to do that (on the computer AND in real life!).
I wonder how a more modern attachment would look - something with a lot of glass but not completely clashing with the original structure. Perhaps another atrium? That blank wall could be turned into a waterfall, like the one in Trump's building in New York. Of course, the two Coney Islands would be relocated into the Lafayette Building. The atrium could be a large dining area. The possibilities... If only I could win the MegaMillions about five times! |
Lmichigan
Member
Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 4338
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 28, 2009 - 10:58 pm: | |
quote:The problem with that is, the City of Detroit doesn't commission feasibility studies for buildings it demolishes. If there were a report somewhere from an architect and structural engineer enumerating the work required for renovation, and a cost estimate provided by a general contractor, there wouldn't be so much of an argument. George Jackson isn't making an objective decision--he's GUESSING. AGAIN.
To me, this is the perfect argument for saving this for those that aren't necessarily "bleeding heart" preservationists. I mean, if Jackson would "show us the money" in terms of how unfeasible a renovation would be, we could all start on the same page. At the moment, he's winging an argument for demolition, and when you wing an argument for demolition of an irreplaceable property, well, you lose and the preservationists argument, no matter how weak it is, itself, wins by default.
In other words, it's incumbent upon Jackson to make a superior argument as to why a building needs demolition, not the preservationist to make an argument to save. He's in the position of power and thus has responsibilities. |
Staticstate
Member
Username: Staticstate
Post Number: 37
Registered: 07-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 12:34 am: | |
I'd like to see a Times Square-esque LCD screen on the back side of that building as was stated above somewhere. Someone with some photoshop skills should try that one out! |
3rdworldcity
Member
Username: 3rdworldcity
Post Number: 1390
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 11:19 am: | |
Danindc, believe it or not, I'm not singling out your comments for criticism. However, you state you think Ferchill is very happy Jackson was not able to demolish the BC as he tried to do. I don't believe you can assume that.
While it's true that he made a lot of fees on the deal, the jury is still out on whether his "ownership" in the deal will ever be worth anything.
That deal, reputed to be a $178 million project, probably went quite a bit over that. I's be surprised if it didn't. Anyway, it's the most complex real estate deal I've ever analyzed. Ferchill made a direct $3 million investment in the project. His legal fees paid to Butzel Long exceeded that amount, for sure.
Ferchill also borrowed $20 million and put it into the deal. That investment is subject to many claims. It is specifically subject to claims of MSDA for its condo construction loan (Ferchill applied for a grant for the condos but it was rejected. Instead, MSHDA's participation was structured as a loan, basically unsecured in the minds of most because it's only a claim on Ferchill's equity in the deal and there isn't any. I don't know how many sales have closed, or on what possibly revised terms, but I'm told it's a huge bust. So are MGM's Vegas real estates projects and many, many others. The country's financial debacle is primarily the blame.)
When I was in Detroit after the BC opened, I visited the place and was very impressed with what I saw. (I represented 2 of 6 banks which participated in a $6 million loan to Bank of the Commonwealth, which then owned it after foreclosing on a previous owner in the '70s. Like pissing into the ocean for all that loan did to keep the doors open. The loan was 90% guaranteed by the govt by the way. Based on its condition in the 70s I'm surprised at what got accomplished.)
The BC was indirectly financed by 17 layers of federal, state and city money - taxpayer's dollars. No one I know expects the project to be financially successful. If it's not, that's a shame.
It would be interesting to get a candid answer from Ferchill as to whether he'd do the deal if he knew then what he knows now. |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3830
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 11:21 am: | |
quote:I'd like to see a Times Square-esque LCD screen on the back side of that building as was stated above somewhere. Someone with some photoshop skills should try that one out!
I don't have Gistok's Photoshop skills but this gives some indication what it would look like
|
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 6277
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 12:39 pm: | |
Nice job Thejesus!
I'm especially glad you didn't use whales! 
I bet that using banner advertisement (such as on the Broderick Tower) could have generated enough income (especially since it's such a large surface, and has views from Campus Martius) to help with funds to pay for mothballing the building.
Geeze, I wonder what 5 years of advertising dollars on that empty side of the building could have generated?
I don't know if DEGC generating some of their own income is not allowable, or if they don't "think outside the box". But having a dedicated revenue stream sure would have been helpful in mothballing the Lafayette Building before it got to its' current sad state....
(Message edited by Gistok on March 29, 2009) |
Russix
Member
Username: Russix
Post Number: 229
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 12:46 pm: | |
Wasn't there some ad about retirement savings? or health care? |
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1101
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:08 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1102
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:13 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1103
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:17 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1104
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:23 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1105
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:26 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1106
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:31 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1107
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:36 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1108
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:45 pm: | |
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1109
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Sunday, March 29, 2009 - 8:48 pm: | |
|
Reddog289
Member
Username: Reddog289
Post Number: 1018
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 12:56 am: | |
Although I haven't read every word in this thread.I would be wondering if they removed the tiles covering up the old exterior would make a difference in marketing this building to developers? I love the photoshop of the FlatIron Building version. But the LCD SIGNS also look good. In my opinion this is not the time to spend the money to tear this building down.Government money is so screwy sometimes. |
Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek
Post Number: 1993
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 10:13 am: | |
quote:Although I haven't read every word in this thread.I would be wondering if they removed the tiles covering up the old exterior would make a difference in marketing this building to developers?
In the current real estate market, it would not make a difference. Market conditions are so bad at the moment that almost nothing is selling.
However, those tiles should be removed anyway. They've been falling off, aren't a part of the architect's vision for the building and, in my opinion, don't contribute anything to the building or the surrounding area. |
Russix
Member
Username: Russix
Post Number: 234
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 10:37 am: | |
Reddog989, did you sign the petition? http://www.petitiononline.com/ Lafayett/petition.html |
Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus
Post Number: 3831
Registered: 06-2008
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 10:58 am: | |
boy, it sure would look different without all that graffiti and broken glass
...
|
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1112
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 12:52 pm: | |
Wow, Thejesus, it s amazing how something so simple can change the appearance so drastically. I agree with Reddog289 on those gray tiles; they are absolutely hideous. Those lower floors present a real renovation challenge. I can only hope they weren't original. I've searched for original pics, to no avail.
After spending time photographing the building and reviewing those photos, I have to admit that the architectural value of this building is limited. That doesn't lesson my wish to see it renovated, though.
The best architectural detail - and the building's saving grace in my amateur opinion - is the cornice, especially the uppermost "crown":
The fleur de lise I can understand, given the building is named after a Frenchman. But the people looking through binoculars with their mouths ajar and their hair standing on end will make me think twice the next time I disrobe with the curtains drawn open! (Actually, clearer pictures are available, showing a quite nice design).
One has to wonder why the original building did not extend to the "point" of the block. If the building occupied the whole block, it would add to its grandeur. Incorporating that point in a renovation would seem an obvious choice. Unfortunately, the Coney Islands are a greater appeal to that block than a restored Lafayette Bvilding would be (notice the "v"?)! It would probably be a greater crime to nostalgia to tear those eateries down than to tear down their big sister! |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1895
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Monday, March 30, 2009 - 5:58 pm: | |
Three days and counting till the building's fate is sealed by the DDA. |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 6281
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 1:20 am: | |
Retroit....
How's this for a pic without the hideous panels...
I have to disagree with you on the Coney's.... they could be moved to any other building and still be a "cullinary" institution. But the loss of at least 150 potential residential units would be worse... |
Detroitnerd
Member
Username: Detroitnerd
Post Number: 3762
Registered: 07-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 9:05 am: | |
What about that weird basement toilet? You wouldn't have that if Lafayette moved to another place. I think my point is that these old environments really do have something that our modern, ADA-compliant, air-conditioned, frosted glass-type structures don't. Put the Lafayette in a newer space and it'd likely be just like American or National. |
Retroit
Member
Username: Retroit
Post Number: 1117
Registered: 04-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 9:43 am: | |
Thanks Gistok. Who in their right mind would ever consider covering up all those windows?!...with ugly gray paneling no less. Those windows are huge. That would make some nice offices with window views, or a nice restaurant(s) to accomodate the hotel guests in the area.
Also interesting from that picture is that the cornice in the left side is missing the two pieces even way back then (1970's?). So it is not like the building has suddenly started falling apart as the "demolitionists" have claimed. |
Buckster1986
Member
Username: Buckster1986
Post Number: 32
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 9:47 am: | |
I agree with you Detroitnerd. The building adds so much to Lafayette. Here is another picture of what the building should look like without the panels.
See building to left. |
Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok
Post Number: 6284
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 11:55 am: | |
Thanks for the pic Buckster1986!
We also get to see some of the buildings at the triangular corner without being covered up. Although they do look very old, they don't appear architecturally significant. |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 1369
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 2:19 am: | |
It's interesting how the Lafayette and American buildings in the middle of the block have three rows of windows in two floors' worth of space. Those must be extremely cramped upper stories. I wonder if those floors are still accessible and in use. |
Fury13
Member
Username: Fury13
Post Number: 2154
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 7:43 am: | |
Looks like the building on the corner has been reduced in height, as well. |
Xd_brklyn
Member
Username: Xd_brklyn
Post Number: 383
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 9:19 am: | |
Is that the Anchor Bar with the half circle window? Or is it to the left of that business? |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 1371
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:28 am: | |
quote:Looks like the building on the corner has been reduced in height, as well. Or it's a whole new building. That's what I was thinking. |
Buckster1986
Member
Username: Buckster1986
Post Number: 33
Registered: 08-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:32 am: | |
No, From Left to Right.
Lafayette Building. Then the Arcade Bar. Then State Coney Island (Now a Party Store I beleive). Then Lafayette Coney Island. Then American Coney Island. Then United Shirt (American now occupys). |
Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox
Post Number: 1372
Registered: 04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:32 am: | |
quote:Is that the Anchor Bar with the half circle window? Or is it to the left of that business? The Anchor Bar is on Fort and First. This picture is looking east along Lafayette toward Griswold. |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1900
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:37 am: | |
"Or it's a whole new building. That's what I was thinking"
No, it's the same building. The owners reduced its height because the city taxed (or still does) based on square footage. It was a neat building. A real shame. |
Xd_brklyn
Member
Username: Xd_brklyn
Post Number: 384
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:40 am: | |
Yes meant to say Arcade Bar, not Anchor. Thanks for the store lineup. |
Rhymeswithrawk
Member
Username: Rhymeswithrawk
Post Number: 1902
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:40 am: | |
WDET is going to discuss the Lafayette fight at 1 p.m. on "Detroit Today."
To those who wrote the mayor and signed the petition, thanks for trying. C. Howard Crane thanks you, as do I.
It appears that this mayor can't make a sensible decision for himself. So long, Lafayette. Sorry you had to fall to the same nonsensical decision like so many others in this town. |
Xd_brklyn
Member
Username: Xd_brklyn
Post Number: 385
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 01, 2009 - 10:57 am: | |
Of course, it is mistake to tear down the Lafayette. Sorry to hear it's going to be history.
One of my favorite views downtown is(was) looking north on Shelby from around Congress. Remember it as a classic American metropolis tableau with the Lafayette in front of the Book Cadillac. Could have been the backdrop for an old B&W Superman clip. Will have to get a photo of it this weekend to confirm my impression.
Yet another sad day for Detroit. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.