Rrl Member Username: Rrl
Post Number: 513 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 209.181.212.60
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 6:41 pm: | |
Are you referring to the view, or sight, from the top of the new building? Sight does not = SITE |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2196 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.24.35
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 6:57 pm: | |
No one yet knows the answer to your questions (cuz they are still mum on the subject). But I see one of 2 possibilities... 1) a bulk building (all the same height) like the Statler or Compuware (less than 20 stories). 2) a lower base with a taller tower on the park (sorta like the Book Building/Book Tower scenario) of over 30 stories (the Broderick is 34 stories). The first scenario would be less expensive (since going "tall" is expensive), but I would be happy with either scenario. Perhaps others can dream up some other ideas. |
Haydenth Member Username: Haydenth
Post Number: 59 Registered: 05-2005 Posted From: 68.252.70.61
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 7:06 pm: | |
At this point, anything taller than a dirt lot would be great. |
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine
Post Number: 161 Registered: 04-2004 Posted From: 24.231.201.120
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 7:09 pm: | |
I'm guessing the company is going to need about 700,000 - 1,000,000 square feet judging by the number of employees and necessary office space. Although it could possibly be less. And if you were to incorporate a parking structure in the base of the building, you could have something in the 25-30 story range. Height is nice, but I'd be happy if downtown Detroit could have some density for once (Message edited by wolverine on May 30, 2006) |
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986
Post Number: 71 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 71.201.190.23
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 9:38 pm: | |
Acceptable Height for Statler Site? With the potential that Quicken/Rock may select the Statler site as their new world HQ, How big would this development be (sq feet, height)? 20 plus stories? If this is so, what would be an acceptable height for the Statler site that would please both Quicken/Rock and the aesthetics of Grand Circus Park? Is 30 stories too tall? |
Apbest Member Username: Apbest
Post Number: 70 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.40.65.66
| Posted on Tuesday, May 30, 2006 - 9:43 pm: | |
well broderick is 34 stories so, not nessecarily |
Quinn Member Username: Quinn
Post Number: 728 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 64.139.64.80
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 9:52 am: | |
Still don't understand why they don't buy the Monroe block. Bigger and they can go as tall as they want to (look how tall Cadillac Tower is). Having said that, I believe Apbest is right. Precedent is set by Broderick. I can see it going a little higher. Also, since the site is quite a bit larger than Broderick, I agree with Gistok that there could be a base of 20 stories that covers the entire lot with a tower that rises up to 30 or 40 stories. Maybe we'll get lucky and we'll have our very own modern interpretation of the "Cathedral of Commerce" (AKA Woolworth of New York) |
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw
Post Number: 1612 Registered: 02-2005 Posted From: 69.220.63.57
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 9:57 am: | |
Oh, we'd be lucky. Thankfully the Guardian, Penobscot, and Buhl remain, among others, so we still have some cathedrals of commerce. |
Rsa Member Username: Rsa
Post Number: 860 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.217.229.108
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 10:26 am: | |
well, technically they could go roughly 480 feet without a setback (from the property line). the setback law/code allows for the park to be included in the calculation. so there's an opportunity. one of the great things about grand circus park, that is now mostly gone, was the rythm of the buildings. starting with the ymca and going clockwise, you had tall-short, tall (fur bldg) short (madison), tall (broderick) shorter (whitney), etc. etc., tall (kales) short (adams), tall short (bank) tall (fyfe) etc. you get my drift. it created a really interesting urban space that would be nice to see again. |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2203 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.168
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 1:46 pm: | |
Nice pic Quinn! Cass Gilbert's 792 ft. Gothic masterpiece was the tallest building in the world back in 1913 when it was built. |
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj
Post Number: 53 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.135
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 3:34 pm: | |
Rumor has it that if QL chooses a Detroit location, they will ask all of you for your approval before making a decision on what to build. |
Quinn Member Username: Quinn
Post Number: 729 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 64.139.64.80
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 4:05 pm: | |
|
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2209 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.72.39
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 4:13 pm: | |
Wow Quinn! You have my vote for DetroitYes PhotoShop Picture of the Year! (Itsjeff eat your heart out!) And Rjlj... you have my vote for "DetroitYes Noob Boob of the Year". |
Apbest Member Username: Apbest
Post Number: 74 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.40.65.66
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 4:27 pm: | |
he is quite the joker |
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313
Post Number: 52 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 72.229.136.103
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 5:24 pm: | |
The Picture is fantastic but we are in an age of new architecture, that building (Woolworth bldg) is almost 100 years old. And although it is a magnificiant building, should QL choose the Statler site DETROIT will have an opportunity to build (re-build) its own history. |
Quinn Member Username: Quinn
Post Number: 730 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 64.139.64.80
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 5:44 pm: | |
I know...it is a play on my earlier post. I think the volume study is interesting though. |
Gistok Member Username: Gistok
Post Number: 2212 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.72.39
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 5:56 pm: | |
There have been a lot of Post Modern buildings going up around the country with a fancy top that look similar to the Woolworth Building, but without the detailing. So anything is possible. I would just hate to see a building there with an all glass skin. One unexpected benefit of Quinn's picture is that it shows (for possibly the first time on this forum) the hollow interior court of the David Whitney building. Now picture the fancy wrought iron & glass skylight above the 4 story arcade... moved to the top of the building. That building could have an awesome 18 story atrium! |
Quinn Member Username: Quinn
Post Number: 731 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 64.139.64.80
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 6:26 pm: | |
Well just in case here's some glass...(stolen from a photo of Seattle)
|
Tkelly1986 Member Username: Tkelly1986
Post Number: 73 Registered: 01-2004 Posted From: 71.201.190.23
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 6:52 pm: | |
That is awesome, how tall is that Seattle building? |
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan
Post Number: 3816 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 24.11.154.56
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 7:01 pm: | |
It's something like 931 feet tall; very imposing. (Message edited by lmichigan on May 31, 2006) |
Naturalsister Member Username: Naturalsister
Post Number: 685 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 70.8.40.160
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 10:21 pm: | |
I'll take it!!!!!!!!!! Do you all think that a QL HQ on the Statler site will have enough of a residual affect the clean up Capitol Park? The East / West continuity for the CBD has been discussed at length on several threads. How do we get Capitol Park going?, Stott right? later - naturalsister |
Apbest Member Username: Apbest
Post Number: 76 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.42.220.61
| Posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 10:57 pm: | |
No, but I think that a QL HQ combined with the BC and Lafayette will be though, enough for Washington Blvd which would probably start with Capitol park. However, for that to occur efficiently they need to make visible progress on the Rosa Parks transit center they officially "broke ground" on last year so that they can move those bus stands currently chilling in the Park (Message edited by apbest on May 31, 2006) |
623kraw
Member Username: 623kraw
Post Number: 913 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.41.224.200
| Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 6:00 am: | |
Where's the PhotoShop parking lot? Might as well gear up for reality while you're at it... |
Rayraydetroit Member Username: Rayraydetroit
Post Number: 11 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 67.72.98.45
| Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 10:46 am: | |
Please, no more glass towers. A couple new buildings with classic design are 150 Jefferson (nee Madden Bldg) and Comerica Tower; Woodward @ Larned. |
Rjlj Member Username: Rjlj
Post Number: 56 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 63.171.81.135
| Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 11:01 am: | |
Once the bus stands move out of Capitol Park progress will begin. Until that happens, Capitol Park and the buildings surrounding it will remain stagnant. |
Quinn Member Username: Quinn
Post Number: 732 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 69.242.213.101
| Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 11:11 am: | |
It's a joke. |
Apbest Member Username: Apbest
Post Number: 77 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 68.40.65.66
| Posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 11:38 am: | |
no more glass towers? first we need glass towers for there to be no MORE...Ren Cen I suppose you could call "glass", unless you consider one kennedy square a tower |