  Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 330 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 35.11.210.161 |
KDG created this for a developer it's only a concept, but it gives an good idea the sites potential. Overall, I love the design the only I don't like is the open plaza facing Woodward http://www.thekraemeredge.com Our Work> Consulting> Woodward Block | ||
Mikeydbn Member Username: Mikeydbn Post Number: 290 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 35.11.141.32 |
That's cool. The plaza is a nice feature because it allows small events to happen there without closing the street. It also gives more frontage space for retail stores. | ||
Thewack Member Username: Thewack Post Number: 195 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 71.125.246.158 |
That looks really slick. Too bad the ML plan did not come to fruition. | ||
Arab_guyumich Member Username: Arab_guyumich Post Number: 745 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 141.215.68.39 |
It looks very Chicago-y...I like it! | ||
Arab_guyumich Member Username: Arab_guyumich Post Number: 746 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 141.215.68.39 |
What's the "ML Plan"? | ||
Dsmith Member Username: Dsmith Post Number: 85 Registered: 07-2005 Posted From: 68.41.202.23 |
What's the "ML Plan"? -------------------- http://www.thekraemeredge.com/ our_work/consulting/madison_le nox/pdfs/MadisonLenox.pdf | ||
Mikeydbn Member Username: Mikeydbn Post Number: 291 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 35.11.141.32 |
There could be a similar plan done for the Statler/UA site. Or maybe something like Las Ramblas (Message edited by mikeydbn on February 12, 2006) | ||
Arab_guyumich Member Username: Arab_guyumich Post Number: 747 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 141.215.68.39 |
Thanks | ||
Shark Member Username: Shark Post Number: 186 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 64.109.213.46 |
Love those rooftop pools! Always remind me of Dirty Harry though. | ||
Adamjab19 Member Username: Adamjab19 Post Number: 614 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 24.192.148.148 |
Very nice indeed! | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 632 Registered: 06-2004 Posted From: 68.41.160.200 |
Sweet! | ||
623kraw Member Username: 623kraw Post Number: 769 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.224.200 |
Beats the hell out of what's there now. Here's the proposal that got shot down a few years back:  | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3518 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
Actually that proposal ^^^^^^ did get built and people stopped using it and let it fall apart. | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 198 Registered: 09-2004 Posted From: 24.247.221.241 |
I like Kraemer's proposal, but I almost think it would be cooler to have it reversed, with the two seperate towers facing Library, and the long one on Woodward, thereby not inturrupting the line of facades along Detroit's Main Street. Whatever way it is, it looks great! | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 680 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 209.104.146.146 |
They should build a 90 story tower on the Hudson's block. | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 520 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 69.246.5.196 |
Why stop at 90, they should build it ... at least 150.  kidding | ||
Gumby Member Username: Gumby Post Number: 870 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 204.39.225.104 |
What is the obsession with building so tall? Wouldn't you rather have a walkable environment filled with smaller more functional buildings? | ||
Detroitkev Member Username: Detroitkev Post Number: 37 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 66.178.218.40 |
Also, keep in mind that the concept is just that...we may end up with something totally different...although I am hoping we end up something close to the concept. | ||
Marcnbyr Member Username: Marcnbyr Post Number: 625 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.43.13.13 |
..."But it doesn't fit in with the surrounding Art Deco architechture".... Seriously...that is a cool design. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 191 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
Could someone cut and paste the KDG design? Unfortunately, no flash for me at work.... | ||
L_b_patterson Member Username: L_b_patterson Post Number: 282 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.72.202.13 |
we could always end up with louisville's new proposed tallest | ||
Wilus1mj Member Username: Wilus1mj Post Number: 32 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 216.111.89.3 |
Don't you need companies, small businesses, and people to work, live, and shop, before you have designs?? Is this city owned land? | ||
Archy Member Username: Archy Post Number: 21 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 63.242.134.66 |
Wilus1mj- Yes the woodward (hudson) block is city owned. It is also a renissance tax zone. I have heard that the plan KDG did was to have a luxurious residential tower, a hotel tower and later a small office tower. The plaza was to have a feature reastuarant or something. I beileve the plaza is quite small and has access to both farmer and woodward streets. | ||
Chris_rohn Member Username: Chris_rohn Post Number: 189 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 68.77.160.147 |
    | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 192 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
Thanks! | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1504 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 70.227.84.119 |
I look at those towers and can't help but think how good they'd look with a Rock Financial logo on them. Hmm... | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 335 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.221.79.80 |
Help me out. Is this directly behind Compuware (Where they had the Sprint stage during winter blast)? Or one block further north? | ||
Nellonfury Member Username: Nellonfury Post Number: 93 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 68.43.156.135 |
About time someone has an idea about the Woodward block.This looks outstanding!!!! I hope is project goes through!! The city can't turn this one down!!! | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3519 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
Simmer down people, simmer down, especially you Nellon. The City CAN and DID and SHOULD have turned that one down. The City has received numerous proposals for the site and has been dillgent and careful to select a project that makes best sense for the City. The renderings above are from a proposal that KDG did for a client that submitted a proposal to the City after the City was already in discussion with Redico. I really like the renderings and I think KDG did a superb job in NOT falling into the monolith design trap that so many others have fallen into with that block. Furthermore, I think they did an excellent job with open space design. But no matter how pretty the design is, if it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense. The proposal did not move forward for a number of reasons. 1. The City was already in deep discussions with Redico. 2. The proposal was phased over about a 7 year plan and was subject to many, many "escape clauses" The only thing the developer was willing to fully commit to in the next five years was the residential portion, which is the ell shaped piece to the north. 3. The hotel to the east and office tower to the south would have required massive subsidy beyond the standard tax abatements, subsidy money the DDA and the City simply do not have. BTW, the subsuidy would have been about what would have been necessary for the subsidy on the Statler Hilton, so those who think the City hates old buildings can rest assured that new builds don't get treatment different from rehabs. 4. The site is a Renaissance Zone and is primarily geared for jobs, not residential. (Message edited by skulker on February 13, 2006) | ||
Gogo Member Username: Gogo Post Number: 1210 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.240.133.93 |
So if this isn't going to be built, what is? | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 486 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.42.176.123 |
It looks pretty, but I'm glad it's not what the city is going with. First off, it's not tall enough. By my count its tallest tower is only 15 stories high. I would hope whatever goes there would be 20-plus stories tall. Those towers also look a little too spread out, especially on the Woodward side. When I go to a big city's downtown, I love the canyon feel that comes from skyscraper after skyscraper lined up next to each other. The First few blocks of Griswold are a great example of this. I hope it's not just one big monolith design, but too much open space gives it a suburban, read Troy, feel that doesn't necessarily fit in downtown. Something special once stood proudly on that block. Something special should replace it. | ||
Hamtramck_steve Member Username: Hamtramck_steve Post Number: 2717 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 136.181.195.17 |
That's about the highest the site can hold, Mr. Hemingway (awesome stories, btw), unless the company reengineers the parking structure underneath. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 333 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 35.8.218.32 |
I don't think it can support a building over 15 stories. Secondly, I disagree that it's too short the main block of Hudson's was 15 stories so if reverse it it'd have the same effect along the streetwall. | ||
Chris_rohn Member Username: Chris_rohn Post Number: 190 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 68.77.160.147 |
As someone said earlier, I don't understand what the obsession is with tall buildings. Yes, tall buildings make a nice looking skyline, but in reality Detroit is just starting see recovery in its downtown office market, and building a gigantic skyscraper with nobody to fill it isnt going to do us any good. The proposed building is pretty remarkable in its context. It's just as tall or a bit taller than all of its surrounding development, including as tall or a little taller than Compuware. It frames out most of the site very well - and that site is a monster. It's nicely divided with a courtyard that allows people to walk between the new structures from Farmer Street to Woodward, and when you sit in that courtyard you're able to lean back and gaze at the historical architecture of Merchant's Row. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 193 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
For what its worth, the City needs to start filling in the large number of holes rather than concentrate on building high towers. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6707 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
Skulker conveniently forgets to mention the overriding reason. Skulker hates buildings. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 1198 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 141.213.173.94 |
Irish Mafia, it's directly north of Compuware between Gratiot and Grand River...Merchants row is opposite on Woodward and the Library to the east. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3523 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
The Historicectomy 3000, a giant laser that will be used to vaporize old buildings. Seriously though, Redico has until June 31 to complete due diligence and leasing for a residential and office complex. No renderings yet.
Its not about design, its about fiscal realities.
20 + stories is out of context and is shitload of real estate to consume. The foundations are engineered to hold up to 16 stories.
And the piece that fills in the hole on Griswold is 240,000 square feet, which was a tough sell in the SE MI fiancne market. A monolith to fill in ala Compuware would be 1MM + square feet, a nearly impossible sell in the SE MI market right now, without a major anchor tenant. I personally like the open space. It opens up a Rockerfeller Plaza like area, to provide a human scale for the City. | ||
Gogo Member Username: Gogo Post Number: 1211 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.240.133.93 |
Read: It will be cheap and ugly. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6709 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
Skulker likes his buildings like he likes his women. | ||
Gogo Member Username: Gogo Post Number: 1212 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.240.133.93 |
A wreck? | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1505 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 70.227.84.119 |
Okay - I've beaten up on Skulker a few times, but even I have to say that one was uncalled for. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6711 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
No offense to any of Skulker's exs. | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 773 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.215.247.169 |
the inclusion of a courtyard like that is a nice touch-very thoughtful. however, i would like to see that courtyard open onto library/farmer st. instead of woodward. i would much rather see the streetscape of lower woodward preserved/restored. it's detroit's main street and (in my opinion) should appear the most dense. it would also create a much better urban environment: walking down the "canyon" of buildings anchored on either end by large parks/openings. you wouldn't really need a midpoint park to create interest. the triangle on the other side, however, already somewhat creates this feeling of an opening by way of the street layout. the courtyard on this side would emphasize this, and make the "back" of the building a more desireable "node". you would create a busy, desireable woodward AND a new neighborhood (like harmonie and capitol park areas). i think i'm rambling, so i'll stop there... | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 774 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.215.247.169 |
the three tenets of a building project: 1.) it can come in on time/schedule 2.) it can come in on budget 3.) it can be designed well you can always accomplish two out of the three, but it's very difficult/almost impossible to have all three. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3525 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
As usual, a glib pronouncement from Gogo that doesn't explore realities and subtleties. The residential portion of the project in the concept for KDGs client easily paid for itself. The other two buildings in the proposal, a boutique hotel and a very high end office tower required massive subsidy, not because of cost of design issues, but because of market issues. The same factors mitigating against the Four Seasons proposal floated by Karmanos and Taubman played out in KDGs client's proposal. To whit, massive cash subsidies. The cost of subsidy was simnply too great. Again, the subsidy was market, not design cost driven. Now, if a large master tenant were to commit, the economics for a large office tower changes. That is the anlge Redico is working with the rumor mill cranking out the Rock Fiancial angle. | ||
Marcnbyr Member Username: Marcnbyr Post Number: 627 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 204.39.56.130 |
"Read: It will be cheap and ugly." No, read it wasn't a good deal for the city: "The only thing the developer was willing to fully commit to in the next five years was the residential portion... ...The hotel to the east and office tower to the south would have required massive subsidy beyond the standard tax abatements, subsidy money the DDA and the City simply do not have" Since the developer would have only been committed on the residential, if I'm reading between the lines properly, then they could walk away from the project as a whole at any time leaving very awkward looking stand-alone residential tower on only half of the site...leaving the city holding the bag on the rest of it. | ||
Chris_rohn Member Username: Chris_rohn Post Number: 191 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 68.77.160.147 |
Mr Rockstarchitect sir ;) I initially thought the same as you with regard to the street wall and the courtyard, but then I thought about the library, the people mover tracks and the setting that can be created within that wedge - if you flipped the site you'd have a courtyard that wasnt open to the majority of passing traffic, creating a dead courtyard. On top of that, there would be a major dividing line from the courtyard and farmer street due to the people mover tracks. Also, the quaint nature of that little sitting area on the north side of the library would be greatly diminished with a huge courtyard across the street. I think the library/farmer wedge would be much greater served by a street wall, while the courtyard would be greater served by the foot traffic along woodward. The design as is makes much more sense. | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 487 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.42.176.123 |
I think Skulker just wants to see ugly buildings built so it'll be easier for him to knock down later. | ||
Pam Member Username: Pam Post Number: 70 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 67.107.47.65 |
Some sort of Freudian phallic symbol thing? | ||
Chris_rohn Member Username: Chris_rohn Post Number: 192 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 68.77.160.147 |
Apparently so. | ||
Gaia Member Username: Gaia Post Number: 6 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 24.221.88.202 |
There are plenty of empty lots downtown on which really tall buildings could be built at a later date - once density requires it. I like the Woodward courtyard and suggest leaving that. I suppose a little courtyard along Library St. could also be added. | ||
Irish_mafia Member Username: Irish_mafia Post Number: 337 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.221.79.80 |
Thanks Mackinaw! | ||
Jz_detroit Member Username: Jz_detroit Post Number: 5 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 12.19.128.172 |
Rumor is Rock Financial will move there headquarters on this block and Redico is in talks with them. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1244 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I'm not a particularly big fan of the spatial arrangement of the buildings, for the following reasons: 1) Plaza on Woodward is failed opportunity to better define the streetwall. Keep in mind there is a very well-defined public space just one block away. This is more of a "private" open space, which is confusing--is it for public use, or is it trespassing? 2) By my rough back-of-the-envelope calcs, the existing columns are sufficient to support a 14-story office building (Skulker said the foundations--I assumed piles or caissons--were designed to support 16 stories). Failure to achieve full build-out on the lot wastes expensive foundation work and installation of the column stubs at the west side of the lot. Those columns weigh nearly 300 lbs per lineal foot. Given the current price of steel (the lowest I've seen lately is $0.50/lb, but as a not readily-available shape, these are probably higher), this is a big waste of money in steel costs alone. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a full build-out with more leasable space? 3) The various elements of the project look like they were each plopped onto the lot from outer space. Their relationship to each other doesn't seem well-defined, i.e. the lines don't really seem to transition cleanly from one element to another. 4) This is designed completely out of context from its environment. Note that none of the adjoining buildings are rendered. How do we know this project would respect and complement the existing architecture of the surrounding blocks? I think these are reasonable questions that deserve honest answers, regardless of what eventually gets built on the site. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6715 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
I think they shoudl cut the steel and go with 3 single family homes with separate yards on that space. | ||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 130 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 68.2.191.57 |
Those roofs -- do the curves serve any practical purpose or are they only for aesthetics? Just curious. | ||
Mcnamara Member Username: Mcnamara Post Number: 27 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 204.22.230.98 |
jz_detroit hit the nail on the head, we should see an annoucement relatively soon... | ||
Motorcitymayor2026 Member Username: Motorcitymayor2026 Post Number: 507 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 70.236.169.228 |
I think it would fit in with Compuware's design. This certainly looks better than the cookie-cutter office buildings weve otherwise seen. i can understand your point about the plaza. But i think it is kind of neat that the buildings dont all seem to be together, make it look like seperate developments instead of one large complex | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1245 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I can go along with that. Bear in mind, however, that Compuware isn't the only building around there.
A little TOO separate, if you ask me. This could have been designed in such a way so that the buildings remain distinct, but enjoy harmony without being so isolated on the site. This seems a bit suburban to me. I suppose this entire thread is academic, but as Detroit rebuilds, it's important to not accept whatever crumbs are thrown. It all depends on the kind of place you want to create, and the design professionals deserve to be challenged to create the best possible built environment. | ||
Motorcitymayor2026 Member Username: Motorcitymayor2026 Post Number: 509 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 70.236.169.228 |
Well this proposal hasnt been sugar-coated by anyone. I think people find it fairly well designed. Better than some proposals seen for the site. Also, I dont think detroit is accepting anything and everything. Lots of people complained about the new One Kennedy Square building (which IMO has turned out better than expected). I jst wish something could have been incorporated with the back of the building, retail or just an entrance | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3529 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 141.217.55.41 |
The site was designed to hold up to 16 stories and total of 1.3 million square feet. Or roughly 81,000 square feet per floor. More capacity could be developed on the site if a developer wants to take on the expense of retro fitting the existing structures. While DaninDC is correct in noting that anything short of a full build out would maximize the potential of the in place infrastructure, the odds of getting a full build out of the site are not very good. (Recall the infrastucture was planned and started pre 9/11 and pre looming automotive bankruptcies) If a developer were only able to finance 800,000 square feet of build out that ate the whole site, the City would have to carefully consider that given the local office market. Its is clearly a case of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good while ensuring mediocre is not accepted. A fine balance with many many variables that the vast majority of us don't have access to know. | ||
Kraemerdesigngroup Member Username: Kraemerdesigngroup Post Number: 30 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 70.225.216.119 |
Danindc – in response to your “I think these are reasonable questions that deserve honest answers, regardless of what eventually gets built on the site.” KDG offers the following response: 1) As for your confusing public space, we disagree. Our strategy was to create a relatively small plaza (100 x 75). All three internal sides of the plaza would be faced with retail and the hotel’s restaurant – purely public. Keep in mind that the existing entrance to the garage is inboard of the edge of the structure, thus people parking would exit onto the plaza. 2) The foundation is actually a MAT, neither caissons nor piles. The existing steel frame inside the garage was designed for retail on several floors (mall) with three parallel towers perpendicular to Woodward. The steel structure is not equal in all locations. Furthermore, residential, hotel, and office all call for different loading requirements. Therefore, you cannot do a back of the envelope calculation. More importantly, the parking structure frame was designed based on a specific lateral framing design (earthquake and wind resistance) that any new design would have to work around – the most difficult part of any new design. Based on your analysis, it appears that you would suggest a 16 story over the entire size of the site would be the best use of the framing – I do not know of too many building 220’ deep that work in today’s world. The developers program called for a luxury residential tower, a limited service hotel, and either a small office tower or second residential tower. Each building type calls for a certain depth or thickness. Hotels are usually 55-70’ in depth, residential a bit thicker. Anything thicker is not efficient and results in a lack of windows per unit. Office buildings can support the largest floor plates. 3) I find your comments of “plopped” in from outer space the most interesting. I wonder how you determined this from screen shots no bigger than 6” x 8”. Keep in mind, KDG was the architect for Merchants Row, facilitated the design of the Merchants Row parking garage, and redesigned the façade of 1401 Woodward. We most definitely understand the regulating lines of Woodward Avenue. Look closely, the regulating pattern of Woodward exists in all three primary structures. Further, although you may not like the contemporary style, there is a clear palette of elements in al three diverse buildings. Keep in mind, there are three different uses. 4) Again, we disagree. The complex of buildings was most certainly respectful of the context. Keep in mind that the four bordering sides of the site are different. The Woodward side certainly is not equal to the Library side. Neither is the Compuware side similar to the northern side. Our design respectfully holds all four urban corners. Appropriately massed to the historic context (typical size and shape). It is our opinion that this site is at the edge of the financial district, perception of true high-rise and the mid-rise former retail section of Woodward. Our structures act as the transition between the two distinct contextual shapes. | ||
Rust Member Username: Rust Post Number: 91 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 68.43.180.171 |
KDG, Good design! I like the scale and massing, it creates a lot of visual interest. I also like the styling and hope it makes it thru to the final design. I am concerned about the plaza. It does seem to break up streetscape of Woodward. I would prefer to see a at least a two story retail structure fill the space. | ||
Kraemerdesigngroup Member Username: Kraemerdesigngroup Post Number: 31 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 70.225.216.119 |
I hope this image illustrates the excitement of the proposed plaza.  | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 63 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 68.60.133.115 |
I LIKE IT ALOT!!!!! When do you believe that there will be a set plan and what are the chances of this design being used? | ||
Arab_guyumich Member Username: Arab_guyumich Post Number: 749 Registered: 12-2004 Posted From: 141.217.98.126 |
So what's the final status on this proposal? If Redico does not secure tenants by the deadline, could this proposal be resumbitted? (Message edited by Arab_guyumich on February 13, 2006) | ||
Kraemerdesigngroup Member Username: Kraemerdesigngroup Post Number: 33 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 70.225.216.119 |
Skulker is correct, the developer we were working for was not selected by the powers to be to develop the site. Redico was given the tentative development rights. Personally, we do hope that Redico would be able to bring in a Rock type customer with 3 to 4k jobs. If not, I am sure our client would be happy to develop the site. | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 492 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.240.205.61 |
Mcnamara and Jz_detroit, are your comments based on media speculation, or do you have INSIDER info? I really like the proposed design by KDG for the block. The plaza would really differentiate the block as an urban space as opposed to a suburban one. And just wondering, would Rock Financial want to create an iconic, well designed headquarters or would they settle for a boring glass box? KDG, could your client who wants to fully commit to a residential tower on the site, be directed to the Monroe block or even the Statler site? Or is it the valuable underground parking garage that is attracting interest? Oh yeah, ALL HAIL ROCK FINANCIAL | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3178 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.172.95.197 |
I'm with the other's that said that a plaza along Farmer would be great, but Woodward is the main street with a square just a block down at Campus Martius. Not only is the plaza not needed, but would hurt Woodward's canyon effect. I would alter an alternative. Why not just make an indoor plaza, of sorts, but stretching a retail arcade throughout the building having a vaulted arcade from Woodward to Farmer, and from north-to-south, which would not only accomplish opening up the building for retail, but would save the Woodward streetscape? (Message edited by lmichigan on February 13, 2006) | ||
Alexei289 Member Username: Alexei289 Post Number: 1030 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.61.183.223 |
ya im going to have to agree with that.... I think that opening in the facade pretty much creates the "suburban" effect that just about every one of us turns to Detroit for to get away from... I REALLY would feel betrayed if Detroit started to look like Troy or Auburn hills.... and the opening on the mainstreet goes a long way toward that... ALSO, remember that Michigan's weather only permits outdoor foot travel about 6 months out of the year before people are simply going to be using that plaza to pile up snow to get to the doorway... Enclosing that area, and allowing some box store type retail would being some much needed shopping to the city center... and establish its presence... as well as keep the Woodward Front well civilized. I like the idea... but this is alot of what we want to get away from... that suburban "pod" design. Instead of going to the community outdoor square of Campus Martius... just use the one at the front of the building. Easy fix tho... if it was just enclosed... then you would atleast have a place to hang out in peace during the winter... and still be motivated to travel outside your complex during the summer | ||
Alexei289 Member Username: Alexei289 Post Number: 1031 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.61.183.223 |
ya im going to have to agree with that.... I think that opening in the facade pretty much creates the "suburban" effect that just about every one of us turns to Detroit for to get away from... I REALLY would feel betrayed if Detroit started to look like Troy or Auburn hills.... and the opening on the mainstreet goes a long way toward that... ALSO, remember that Michigan's weather only permits outdoor foot travel about 6 months out of the year before people are simply going to be using that plaza to pile up snow to get to the doorway... Enclosing that area, and allowing some box store type retail would being some much needed shopping to the city center... and establish its presence... as well as keep the Woodward Front well civilized. I like the idea... but this is alot of what we want to get away from... that suburban "pod" design. Instead of going to the community outdoor square of Campus Martius... just use the one at the front of the building. Easy fix tho... if it was just enclosed... then you would atleast have a place to hang out in peace during the winter... and still be motivated to travel outside your complex during the summer | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 493 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.240.205.61 |
I disagree regarding the public plaza. How many places in Troy or Auburn Hills have a public plaza surrounded on 3 sides by multi story structures and not a sea of parking? And yes, the plaza may be a disincentive for people working at the site to walk down to Cmart park, but IMO, other nodes of activity need to be created downtown. Cmart park is already extremely crowded during nice summer week days and with 1KS opening soon it will be even more intense and bustling. Hopefully spillover from cmart park will make Cadillac Square bustling too. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 3179 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.172.95.197 |
No one says that there shouldn't be a plaza, just that Lower Woodward needs to be kept a solid, uninterrupted wall for as far as it can, thus requiring the plaza to be moved to any of the three other sides, that is all. Woodward doesn't need a plaza at that area, regardless of whether or not it looks inviting or nice. A plaza would even work on Washington or Broadway or...but Lower Woodward is the main street that needs as few breaks in the streetscape as possible. It is the only street where this is even possible, and any extra indentation is not plus, but a minus for Lower Woodward. It's just no needed. Plazas and the like are much more effective off of main streets in urban areas. Hopefully, Redico is going to put together a plan for the site that keeps the Woodward facade of whatever development goes there in tact. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 334 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 35.11.210.161 |
Good idea though I think the Monroe block being geared more toward office space. The Statler or the Tuller/UA sites the City/Ilitch Holdings are going to market would be perfect if the developer is comfortable with the residential portion, this is someone the City/IH should be contacting. Parking shouldn't be an issue either site large enough for the building and for an above ground garage | ||
Rusty Member Username: Rusty Post Number: 378 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 71.194.127.158 |
I'm with Lmich, I'd like to see a continuous wall on both sides of Woodward. Nice design KDG but I do not believe that complex is best for that area. If I was an owner of a building/business on that street, I would hope that any new development would fit in with the wall that has already been created (except for this lone area). Knock one signle building out from that corridor and you'd notice a big difference. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1246 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
The problem with this "public" plaza is that it is only fronted by one street. It is not abundantly clear to the pedestrian that this plaza is public space, considering that it is hemmed in on three sides by very much privately owned buildings. KDG, you can feel free to step up the competence of your response to a fellow design professional. I have visually measured the existing steel columns on-site, and have plenty of background to do back of the envelope calculations. I'm fairly well-versed in the different loading requirements between office and residential. My assumptions were for office space (80+20 LL). I presume that since any future development on the site was speculative at the time of design of the garage, the mat foundation was designed to accommodate the maximum axial capacity of all columns. Thus, the foundation design is moot. I just worry, like other posters here, that an oversized plaza, especially given the proximity of both Campus Martius and Grand Circus, will turn downtown Detroit into a suburban moonscape. There was once a time (and there still is, in suburban areas) when "open space" = "good", no matter what the quality of the space. While I think the rendering you posted most recently gives a truer idea of the space, I would hate to see a trend where every new building downtown has a massive setback from the street--otherwise, you might as well be in Troy. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3530 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
< - - - Rolls eyes that I am the one considered arrogant on this forum..... I disagree with the statement
The site plan called for retail along all frontages of the plaza with a canopied entry way coming off Farmer. The site plan shows a curved glass feature facing over the plaza which was to house a restaurant. In a programming sense the space is very much a public space, with a hotel entrance directly facing the plaza. Were all towers designed to be office towerrs with entrances and lobbies only facing out to the plaza I could perhaps understand the beef, but the space was intended to be very public and very active.
Considering the last four new major buildings in downtown have NOT been built in such a manner, I don't see what this fear is based upon. Compuware and One Kenndy certainly don't have massive set backs. The only one with "major setbacks" would be Comerica Tower and I think they did a reasonable job of balancing the need for set backs for various reasons with an urban feel. The challenge is that the space is so huge that trying to fill it with a complete streetwall is going to be very difficult for the reasons KDG nnoted (220' depth) while also acheivings omething that does not sit largely vacant and bankrupt becasue there is not enough market to support such a development. IMO KDG came up with a good strong solution that provided appropriate heighths, mixed use, public space, interesting and contextual design along with a market sensitive amount of square footage. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1573 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.164.127 |
Why is everyone so worried about something that isn't going to happen? Save the debate until an actual development is announced. Danindc maybe you need to step up and do something in Detroit instead of being critical of what others are doing. It is easy to preach from DC when you aren’t doing anything here. | ||
Gogo Member Username: Gogo Post Number: 1214 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 198.208.159.20 |
Like when the Kennedy Block building was announced?? | ||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 8122 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.71.66.191 |
Not to mention all of the fed $$$ spent in that city (D.C.)...and there is still blight. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3531 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
Interstingly enough, 1 in every 20 African Americans in DC has either HIV or AIDS, an infection rate nearly 15x that of other major central cities. But clearly it is a utopia with no social problems or ills. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1247 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
As a design professional, it's my job to be critical to produce the best possible product. Call me arrogant if you will, but until you've actually been in a design coordination meeting involving different disciplines, you have no idea what transpires. Thoughtful debate from a wide variety of parties is necessary to produce high quality design. I'm sure my firm would be very happy to step up and be a part of Detroit's rebirth. Where do we sign up? | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1575 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.164.127 |
Is part of your job also to tell another design professional that their design sucked even though they have a lot stronger understanding of the site then the 10 minutes you spent measuring the steel? | ||
Mcnamara Member Username: Mcnamara Post Number: 28 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 204.22.230.98 |
mind_field: my info is based on insider info. The discusion with rock is very sensitive at the moment, but things look very good. If the talks go well, we should see an announcement in the next few months. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6719 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
Tell David Hall I'll buy him a beer at Karras Brothers if he can make it happen. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1248 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I never said the design sucked. Do I think there are things about it that could be improved--absolutely. You have no idea of my knowledge of the site. Your unvalidated assumptions are worthless. | ||
Rust Member Username: Rust Post Number: 92 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 64.118.136.130 |
I think KDG design is great and that the problems in the plaza area is solvable. Why not build a small structure along the Woodward street wall pehaps two bays deep (assuming the columns are on 20' centers) with openings to the plaza area at either end by the towers. This would convert the plaza to a courtyard. I am not sure if this would kill the retail aspect in the plaza but it would sure help Woodward retail. If the smaller retail structure I proposed was designed with high ceiling heights and transparent glass walls perhaps there would be enough visibility from Woodward into the plaza retail area so that passerbys would be intrigued enough to want to explore back into the courtyard? | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 495 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.240.205.61 |
According to a poster on the skyscrapercity forums, Rock Financial will NOT be moving to the Hudson's site. But, 2 separate suburban companies with 1,500 employees will be. No further info, I just hope these companies that are moving downtown will be high growth, non-auto businesses. I have no idea how accurate this info is, as the poster claims to be an insider and involved in some way with downtown development. | ||
Jz_detroit Member Username: Jz_detroit Post Number: 6 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 12.19.128.172 |
Inside info however it was in the news back in November as well. Redico is in talks and Rock's Livonia HQ lease is running out in the next 3-4 years. The article is no longer on the Detroit News website but you might be able to search the title below and find something. Rock Financial eyes Detroit HQ Detroit News 11/06/05 | ||
Darwinism Member Username: Darwinism Post Number: 398 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 69.215.30.34 |
KDG did an admirable job with the design, however, it wasn't taken. There is no reason to fantasize about the pool on the rooftop, or the public plaza, or whatever the case may be. If Redico falls through, then we can come back to KDG. Until then, stop wasting time debating for nothing. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1576 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.164.127 |
No that is just the underlining tone of your posts.
I can assume that KDG has spent allot more time studying that site then you have. I can also assume they have spent more time studying the Detroit market and what can work here then what you have in DC. So my assumptions are not that worthless.
I’m not an expert but you might want to start by actually have so type of presence in the city. Maybe open a small satellite office in the city instead of setting up shop on an internet forum. You might be able to accomplish more that way. | ||
Mcnamara Member Username: Mcnamara Post Number: 29 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 204.22.230.98 |
All that i can say is that I work for a governmental entity that is intimate with the project talks.... | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1578 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.164.127 |
I think people are forgetting how amazing the tax benefits are when you are located in an enpowerment zone. | ||
Mind_field Member Username: Mind_field Post Number: 496 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.240.205.61 |
Mcnamara, trust me, I'd rather believe you than the skyscrapercity guy any day. I'd love for Rock to come downtown, a high growth, non-auto company would be a godsend. In a perfect world, Rock and the 2 1,500 employee suburban companies would move downtown, but fitting 6,000 people on that site isn't going to happen. Jz, I'm well aware of that article, I printed it out. Anyway, we all know something big will happen at the site, how can it not? Ultra high visibility on the region's premier street, underground parking, and a Renaissance zone. hopefully we don't have to wait too much longer to hear the details. | ||
Mcnamara Member Username: Mcnamara Post Number: 30 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 204.22.230.98 |
mind_field: I completely understand, folks throw out all sorts of rumors at times, it is tough to weed through the b.s. I'll post when I know more... | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 521 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 69.246.5.196 |
I know this was discussed before, but I can't remember the answer ... how many spaces are there for the underground garage? I've never actually gone in there, but looks to me like there is going to have to be a garage built above the ground to accomodate the likes of a company like Rock. | ||
Detroitkev Member Username: Detroitkev Post Number: 39 Registered: 04-2005 Posted From: 66.178.218.40 |
I think there will be 2 new garages built to accomodate all of the employees. One on Library next to the Library lofts, and the other on Broadway. Here's hoping the new structures have ground floor retail. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1249 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
...and interestingly enough, we have Goat and Skulker ignoring the subject at hand and resorting to personal attacks. I'm sure that attacking other people and places is going to do a lot to rebuild Detroit, isn't it? If you're going to trot out something as irrelevant as an AIDS infection rate, at least also state that 39% of DC residents have a college degree, versus single digits for Detroit. Seriously--what point are you trying to make? If there is something I wrote that wasn't at all constructive, I could understand. The only person who responded to the content of my posts was kramerdesigngroup, and I appreciate that. I expressed an opinion that only one person has countered. You two are too arrogant to appreciate that not everyone is a blind cheerleader for every scrap and morsel that Detroit gets thrown. It's not as if the basic tenets of architecture are different in Detroit. If something new is going to be built, it deserves the respect of constructive criticism to ensure it is the best possible solution. If you have $300,000 for a burnt-out shell of a rowhouse in a transitional neighborhood, Goat, feel free to contribute to reducing blight in DC. It would certainly help, considering that 42% of our land is nontaxable, despite these undocumented sums of federal money you think pours in. Now, are you going to post something of substance, or will you continue to put words in my mouth? I would like to discuss the topic at hand. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 6729 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 198.208.251.24 |
The point that they are trying to make is that you rarely ever point out anything positive in Detroit. That you often bash anything that may be positive for Detroit. All the while you trump DC as a paradise for everyone and a symbol of perfect planning and management. You may not see that but nearly everyone else on the forum does. I appreciate your input on this thread but you tend to lean towards the 'anything in Detroit is bad' and DC is mecca' mentality. It gets old. | ||
Sharmaal Member Username: Sharmaal Post Number: 717 Registered: 09-2004 Posted From: 136.2.1.103 |
"39% of DC residents have a college degree." Is that the same 39% that is contributing to running this country into the ground? That's nothing to be proud of. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3533 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.103.104.93 |
Ditto Jt1's post. Note that when a social ill is described about DC, it is construed as a personal attack. | ||
Jz_detroit Member Username: Jz_detroit Post Number: 7 Registered: 12-2005 Posted From: 12.19.128.172 |
Rock is 3,000 employees and that is between 7 buildings. Don't expect the entire company to move there. Not everyone wants to work downtown, in fact many hate it. Rock is a company that is about growth. Being downtown is a huge sign of growth. They don't have to move down there obviously being such a successful company being where they already are. My inside source is a very high-up at Quicken Loans/Rock. | ||
Merchantgander Member Username: Merchantgander Post Number: 1581 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 150.198.164.127 |
Jz_detroit are you David Hall? | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 5518 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 208.27.111.125 |
They have to move anyway, if they want to consolidate into one office. And it looks like they'll have to build, since there's much available with all the square footage that they need. So if they have to build, they'll find some financial advantages to building on a brownfield in Detroit. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 1250 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.100.158.10 |
I never trotted out DC as a mecca--just trying to provide a different POV on things--one that might, at times, counter what the Detroit cheer du jour may be. I'm sorry if that is construed as arrogant. What am I supposed to write--"yay!"? There are already people who do that, and I don't need to add to it. The truth is, Detroit remains a fascinating laboratory, and deserves more than blind adherence and casual acceptance of the status quo. If I weren't interested or didn't care, I wouldn't waste my time. Let's not be afraid of difficult questions. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 337 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 35.11.210.161 |
It's easy to question how about offering a SOLUTION that works in DETROIT? So far you haven't don't that This conflicts
with this
If you think can come up with a better idea bring it. | ||
Darwinism Member Username: Darwinism Post Number: 399 Registered: 06-2005 Posted From: 69.215.30.34 |
Danindc: The funny thing around here on DetroitYes is that to NEVER, EVER make comparisons of Detroit with any city anywhere on earth whatsoever. It is a death-wish to do so. It is common sense around here to realize that Detroit's problems are absolutely unique and would have never, ever occur anywhere else on the face of the earth. Therefore, its solutions should also be unique and thought from the ground up. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to compare D.C., NYC, Chicago, St. Louis, L.A. or anywhere else in the world for that matter. To do so would be condescending and sinful. |
