  Baltgar Member Username: Baltgar Post Number: 63 Registered: 06-2006 |
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20070507/NEW S01/70507013 This was posted on the Freep's website today. I have heard for a while now that the FBI in Detroit is really overcrowded at the McNamara Building, so this is not too big of a surprise. They have been adding a lot of staff and workload ever since 9/11. My question is though why build a new building when there are so many capable/empty buildings downtown. The only thing I can think of is that it is for security reasons. It would be easier/cheaper to build new than to retrofit an old building that would properly meet security needs. What do you all think? | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1375 Registered: 12-2004 |
I believe their stated reason for the new building was security, with recognition that many abandoned buildings downtown are functionally obsolete. That said, I still think they could build an urban-friendly headquarters that is secure and cost effective, instead of the silly suburban campus-style plan they have proposed. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1097 Registered: 06-2006 |
good news...I was hoping they would build new rather than renovate an existing structure... sounds like this is moving along pretty well if the announcement today is that the contact has been awarded | ||
Nyct Member Username: Nyct Post Number: 36 Registered: 01-2007 |
they should renovate the michigan central station. something HAS to be done with that building. driving into the city northbound on 75 is great until that building comes into view. i hate to say that it's quite symbolic of the state of the city and is terrible for detroit's image as visitors pass it. | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 2078 Registered: 11-2003 |
Cannot wait to hear where?? | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1140 Registered: 02-2007 |
Do y'all know whether the building will be a high-rise like McNamara or a Plaza? I prefer the high-rise as it will aid the skyline. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4253 Registered: 08-2004 |
Well don't get your hopes up too high... I can see the Corktown site as a superblock (5 blocks) with a low rise corporate campus look to it, and probably some grassy berms... something low and out of place near downtown is my bet. It'll make you wish they would have kept the 20 story office building that'll be coming down for a suburban style complex. With a planned 300,000 sq. ft. on 5 blocks, it may look like what the Federal Reserve built in Detroit... (Message edited by Gistok on May 07, 2007) | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1142 Registered: 02-2007 |
Actually Gistok, I can picture them building an adjacent building to the MN at Michigan and First, making it sort of like a Federal Office Park. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4255 Registered: 08-2004 |
No, it was announced last year that the FBI will be using the 5 blocks (Corktown) that were formerly used as Executive Plaza, the State of Michigan complex that the state government vacated for Cadillac Center (formerly GM HQ) in New Center. And that the 20 and 11 story buildings on that site will be demolished for a new FBI complex. | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1145 Registered: 02-2007 |
Oh wow. Well, it's still great. This will really pressure whoever takes care of this to give Michigan and Lafayette new streetscapes. | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 2082 Registered: 11-2003 |
Thanks Gistok, I forgot about that announcement. That campus style doesn't always fit in s Downtown, but sometimes the greenspace is nice | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4256 Registered: 08-2004 |
Bobj.... LOL... yes greenspace is nice, unless you happen to read all the posts about the DTE Energy greenspace thread. Some folks were howling with indignation there... | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 492 Registered: 03-2006 |
https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/76017/80772.html https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/76017/81709.html | ||
Nyct Member Username: Nyct Post Number: 37 Registered: 01-2007 |
from http://www.detroitrising.com/c orktown.htm FBI Detroit HQ-The FBI plans on building a new headquarters complex on the eastern edge of the Corktown neighborhood. The new facility will go on the site of the former Michigan State Executive Building on Sixth Street adjacent to the Lodge Freeway. Plans for the new headquarters include an office tower, an annex and a parking structure, but details will depend on proposals submitted by developers in competitive bidding. The new facility is expected begin construction in 2007 and open by 2009. APPROVED | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1146 Registered: 02-2007 |
Nice, it does include an office tower. I say go for it. | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1147 Registered: 02-2007 |
I don't think it's fair though that they're evicting Greyhound in this grid. With this project in mind though, I'm sure the Land Value and Demand will have a decent rise in the Corktown area. (Message edited by Urbanize on May 07, 2007) | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2750 Registered: 02-2005 |
so will the McNamara building remain standing? I'm guessing it will since it contains more than just the FBI, right? | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1149 Registered: 02-2007 |
It wouldn't make any sense to just raze it. | ||
Toog05 Member Username: Toog05 Post Number: 140 Registered: 03-2006 |
Feds name developer for $100 million FBI office in Detroit Paul Egan / The Detroit News The federal government has selected a Chicago developer to build and own a $100 million home for the FBI in downtown Detroit, officials from the General Services Administration announced today. Higgins Development Partners will build an eight-story office building, a four-story parking garage and a single-story automotive service facility on a 10.9-acre site across from the Greyhound bus station bounded by the Lodge Freeway andHoward, Brooklyn and Porter streets, officials said. Two local firms, JM Olson Corp. of St. Clair Shores and Ghafari Associates of Dearborn, will participate as local general contractor and associate architect, respectively, said James Handley, regional administrator for the General Services Administration. The GSA, which handles real estate for the federal government, will pay the developer rent of about $162.3 million over 15 years and will have on option to buy the building at the end of the lease, officials said. Two office buildings on the four-block site will be demolished as part of the construction contract, said Norbert Kieszkowski, the agency's deputy assistant regional administrator. The FBI has outgrown its space inside the McNamara Building on Michigan Avenue, Special Agent in Charge Andrew Arena said. Construction is to start this summer, with occupancy expected in April 2009. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20070507/U PDATE/705070395/1003 | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 497 Registered: 03-2006 |
looks like a fortress | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1105 Registered: 06-2006 |
I like the basic design...and 8 stories ain't bad...not thrilled about all the grass in front, but it's still an improvement to the area | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 532 Registered: 05-2005 |
If you looked up the definition of DOG SHIT, that rendering would be the supporting image. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4262 Registered: 08-2004 |
It has that stylish Novi or Troy look to it... with vast lawns for that nice "suburban feel"...  Geez, I guess $100 million doesn't buy what it used to... (Message edited by Gistok on May 07, 2007) | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 832 Registered: 09-2006 |
Gross.. | ||
Toog05 Member Username: Toog05 Post Number: 141 Registered: 03-2006 |
Well it is a federal building, they have to have grass around the building for security purposes, it sure does beat a SURFACE PARKING LOT. It also promotes greenery. (Message edited by toog05 on May 07, 2007) | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4263 Registered: 08-2004 |
I didn't know grass was such a good deterent... Oh but wait, I forgot, walk on someone's grass and get shot. Now it makes sense... | ||
Urbanize Member Username: Urbanize Post Number: 1153 Registered: 02-2007 |
I like the greenery. Although I hate how low dense it is considering it's in a area that favor High Density. | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 806 Registered: 11-2004 |
Nasty. But that's how the FBI builds them today, the Chicago office is pretty similar. http://www.aiachicago.org/spec ial_features/2006DEA/images/th umbsLarge/com_286_09FBI.jpg | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1834 Registered: 06-2004 |
Peeps... (1) It doens't look terrible, it just looks bland. It's the government, so it's what it is. (2) Look close at the picture, and you'll see the barriers. That's the reason for the grassy area. | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1835 Registered: 06-2004 |
PS I prefer this to the towers that are there now, at least. The more moderate height fits in better with nearby corktown, and a wall of buildings is never going to happen there, anyhow... at least not in our lifetimes. Let's rebuild the rest of downtown first. | ||
Spiritofdetroit Member Username: Spiritofdetroit Post Number: 462 Registered: 11-2006 |
gnarly lookin thing | ||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 281 Registered: 11-2006 |
I looked at the image and it seems that the triangular building is set on almost a hill with three separate grades. I assume this is the deterrent instead of berms. P.S. I did read that the Federal Gov't was going to get away from bland, boxy buildings. I'm not sure what to make of this one. I'm sure, though, that security considerations were a major factor. | ||
Bobj Member Username: Bobj Post Number: 2086 Registered: 11-2003 |
It is bland, but I actually like the grass | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 972 Registered: 10-2006 |
If they are going to build a suburban building (in mass and styling) this one doesn't bother me as much because it is outside of the CBD. There are many buildings over in that area that have more of the presence of complexes rather than walkable blocks as it is. If they had to build this and put it somewhere near downtown, this result isn't too oppressive. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 191 Registered: 11-2006 |
And you know the FBI can't have a building that anyone can drive cars up to that would just be dumb, so the grassy suburban feel helps to solve that problem in a way that doesn't make it look like a crappy fort knox. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5475 Registered: 10-2003 |
I'm kind of confused as to why they didn't just choose to reuse the current structure? I mean, I can only imagine it would have been a lot cheaper to simply strip down the tower portion, reclad it, and tear down the short portion is they didn't need it. Why does the city have to keep losing its skyline? The tower is only 35 years old, with the wide floor plates needed for modern office usage. I just don't get why we throw everything away. This isn't sustainable design and development, at all. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 977 Registered: 10-2006 |
I guess the government doesn't have a requirement to sustainably design. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 194 Registered: 11-2006 |
The current tower is god awful to look at, is a starting point, and lacks anything of architectural significance, there are many towers like it all over the US built by the government, a very similar one in San Fran if I remember correctly. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2751 Registered: 02-2005 |
Just a terrible use of space...but overall, no complaints because that location already is a superblock with a questionable-looking building. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5476 Registered: 10-2003 |
6nois, you've got to be kidding me. The Executive Plaza (the tower, specifically) isn't going to win any beauty contests, but you've got to be kidding me if you think the new design is any less generic. In fact, you could find this new design in most any big-city suburban office park in this country. BTW, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, architecture shouldn't factor to much into the decision to bring a building down. Again, they could easily reclad and reconstructed the thing. What I do realize is that the Executive Plaza is right on the freeway, greatly reducing the ease to secure the property. | ||
B2b76 Member Username: B2b76 Post Number: 2 Registered: 04-2007 |
First off it's only a sketch. How many of those have we seen in the past that never come to be. I'm sure it still has plenty of design left to go so give them a chance. Second Corktown is getting a $100 million dollar development and bitch, bitch, bitch. What I'm hearing is DO IT MY WAY or get out. BUT when you do leave I'll accuse you of abandoning the city. Maybe if we try hard enough we'll drive them out of Detroit to Troy or some other suburb that would love to have a $100 million development and then we can look at a bunch of empty surface lots and a rotting vacant building for the next 20 years. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5478 Registered: 10-2003 |
Nice post for your #2. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 203 Registered: 11-2006 |
I never said the new one was any better I just said the old one wasn't great. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 4264 Registered: 08-2004 |
I agree with you 100% Lmichigan... next thing you know some folks will question whether the buildings in Midtown are too tall and the taller ones should be taken down! There's nothing wrong with the existing 20 story tower that a new skin can't fix. Regardless of which side of the Lodge Fwy. it is located on (it is technically outside the CBD), it will DIMINISH the city skyline, since the Detroit skyline knows no boundaries. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 208 Registered: 11-2006 |
Really there is one thing wrong, its too small. They said it. The other issue is isn't the old one right up against Michigan Ave, or I am thinking of something else, if it is that isn't something you can just fix on that building. That would be a security risk. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 534 Registered: 05-2005 |
What I am hearing is that the development MUST look like TOTAL DOG SHIT, because ANYTHING less would be a security risk. Always glad to see people reaching for the highest and best. | ||
6nois Member Username: 6nois Post Number: 210 Registered: 11-2006 |
Not really. Look at the replacement building for the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. It is a very nice building and not a security risk. | ||
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine Post Number: 316 Registered: 04-2004 |
B2b76, why does it matter that Corktown is getting a 100 million dollar federal building? It isn't doing shit for them, except take away some pavement and drop the height of a building. I think people have the right to bitch and complain when a project such as this is going to leave its mark on the city for some time. Many people had hoped the lots west of downtown would become something more interesting than some fortified campus. Furthermore, one ugly building downtown is being emptied while a new one is constructed a few blocks over. Seems like a shitty deal rather than 'new development' for the city. I would have rather seen some sort of expansion of their existing location or else a better design for their new building. Lastly, as an individual who has done renderings in the past for the firm I work for, the designs usually get dumbed down from the original presentation. It's pretty much the same throughout the design industry So why shouldn't we expect worse? | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 535 Registered: 05-2005 |
It's our city. We need to demand better. | ||
Peter Member Username: Peter Post Number: 78 Registered: 02-2007 |
Development is development. All development is good. This building is fine. New buildings impress tourists. This building is a hell of a lot better looking than the old federal buildings in the city. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5482 Registered: 10-2003 |
All development is good. Good, I've got to remember that one. That, and that the city only exists to impress tourists, because this 8-story building (shoter than even the original 11-story Executive Plaza Building) will be so impressive to tourists; I'm sure of it. I can respect and argue with the idea that this trade-off may be pretty equal to what is being lost, but the idea that this walled/fenced off government complex; that this superblock eating up another 2 or 3 blocks of street, is better that what is there currently is ridiculous. Downtown Detroit has enough superblocks, as it is to be adding another one, and a gated community, at that. All development is good. Ha! (Message edited by lmichigan on May 08, 2007) | ||
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx Post Number: 715 Registered: 02-2004 |
Geez, you guys act like it's public land for festivals and whatnot. ITS THE GOVERNMENT. Be glad they're tearing down the old bland building and move on. We got bigger fish to fry. * MCS * Tiger Stadium * New Red Wings Arena I could go on here... (Message edited by Genesyxx on May 08, 2007) | ||
Club_boss Member Username: Club_boss Post Number: 80 Registered: 12-2006 |
I thought these new FBI buildings going up around the country were in response to the McVeigh bombing. I’m not sure about the ascetics but I seem to remember that the office space should be in a stand-alone facility, and that the FBI does not share its office space, with day care centers for example. Indianapolis is getting a new FBI building as well. http://indianapolis.fbi.gov/pr essrel/2007/contractaward03260 7.htm | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 949 Registered: 11-2003 |
This should be out in Auburn Hills. It's really that bad. I would rather not have the FBI in Downtown if this is the way it has to be. None of these workers will feel the least bit connected to the rest of the city. The old state building was disjointed, but at least there was some hope for infill. This new building however sits in the middle of a grassy field, and I'm sure there is no pedestrian access - obviously on purpose. Unacceptable for the Downtown area. Bad, bad inappropriate...bad. | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 107 Registered: 07-2006 |
This is a vast improvement over the current site, which is currently two 70s'style towers in disrepair next to two hole block of asphalt. It will certainly improve the aesthetics of the area, and its location just outside of downtown makes the density almost acceptable. This is not manhattan--a little green here and there is a good thing especially with the current configuration of towers and paved lots. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1106 Registered: 06-2006 |
Planner: I agree 100%. I wish I could slap these idiots who think that leaving the site in its current condition is actually better than building this new structure surrounded by some green.. Their attitude is precisely the reason Detroit why they have FAILED to rebuild Detroit...time for these obstructionists to move over and see how its done... | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 950 Registered: 11-2003 |
I disagree. The "gateway to Corktown" deserves better treatment. Could you imagine slamming this shit into Beacon Hill? Can you visualize what this will be like to walk past? Imagine deciding to leave the Fort-Shelby and walking west over the Lodge into the neighborhood. Is this really what you want there? It's disgusting. | ||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 284 Registered: 11-2006 |
Let me play the devil's advocate here: Could the FBI have built inside the CBD? (remembering that what they build would need to be oversized and protected somehow, say with berms). Assume Ilitch's surface lots behind the Fox are 'reserved' for 'future development'. ;-) Assume that the builder wouldn't spend 30M+ for the Gratiot site (proposed Greektown H-C site). Supposedly no builder building for the government would purchase the super pricey land. | ||
Beatsworking Member Username: Beatsworking Post Number: 64 Registered: 08-2004 |
I'm just pissed I'll have to fight with Feds to get a table at Eph's. D'OH! | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 152 Registered: 11-2005 |
"I wish I could slap these idiots who think that leaving the site in its current condition is actually better than building this new structure surrounded by some green..." Their attitude is precisely the reason Detroit why they have FAILED to rebuild Detroit..." Eric C, Corktown deserves a better entrance...like what? Most any development that provides jobs and money to a Detroit neighborhood is welcome...last time i checked Detroit needed money in just about every neighborhood. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 951 Registered: 11-2003 |
Again, I disagree. Appropriate zoning and land use are what help make a city different from suburban or rural areas. I couldn't imagine a way anyone could build a bunker and make it fit into a downtown landscape. As a result, I'd rather not see it Downtown at all. What about in some more distant, less dense area of the city? The new Federal Reserve Bank seems to work well with its 'suburban' style campus in Midtown. It just seems to me that in a state where urban, pedestrian-friendly areas are few and far between, every attempt should be made to preserve what we have. I don't view demanding good design as in any way obstructionist. Detroit is vast and there is a lot of empty land where this fortress could be built. Granted, it might not be as easy to assemble large tracts, but, damn. Here we are trying to maintain the urban character of our city and at every turn, people from Brooklyn to Clinton Township are telling us we are wrong to do so. Pathetic. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1113 Registered: 06-2006 |
"As a result, I'd rather not see it Downtown at all." Which is why your way has failed for years and people are fed up with it... | ||
Llyn Member Username: Llyn Post Number: 1837 Registered: 06-2004 |
Eric, Yeah, I'm kinda surprised that they didn't place it somewhere like next to the new Fed Reserve building. Seems like that would've been ideal for security arrangements with lots of space and a similar bland fed building needing protection next door. But as far as the location, I can't see that having an active new bland building isn't any better than letting even more bland executive plaza sit and rot for 20 more years... because that's exactly what would happen. People have looked at re-use of those buildings for some time and nothing seems feasible. The expense of re-hab is too great. Besides, I always thought those buildings looked completely out of place there. I don't agree with the taller is always better philosophy here. Sometimes, maybe most of the time, but not always. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 952 Registered: 11-2003 |
"My way." What a joke. "My way" restores the Book-Cadillac Hotel. It also gets the Griswold built. It also erects Compuware, two very urbane stadia, Brush Park and its' associated development. "My way" provides for a revitalized Washington Boulevard, a Riverfront Promenade, and at least two integrated casino developments. If you want to know what has "failed," look at the Michigan Plaza Building, the Ren-Cen before GMs redesign, and Washington Boulevard Plaza. The projects that have failed are the projects which have disconnected themselves from the rest of the urban fabric. As a matter of fact, the only projects that have been truly "successful" are the ones we have developed since the realization that pedestrianism and urbanism are interconnected - again - the examples I've given above. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1114 Registered: 06-2006 |
This is an FBI building. It isn't supposed to be pedestrian friendly. It's supposed to be secure. And beggars can't be choosers.. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 2754 Registered: 02-2005 |
Eric_c is right on...Thejesus, I don't know what the deal is here. First off, I don't see how the simple pleading for urbanism in our center city drives away downtown development and makes people "fed up." Second, it was that "other way" that was victorious time and time again downtown, and the years in which this anti-urban, anti-pedestrian modernism were winning out were the years that downtown fell apart at its fastest rate. As Eric_c points out, it was the various superblocks and even the Ren Cen which hurt downtown...all those developments made just for the sake of development, with no regard for the fabric of the city. Since downtown has come back around, it's been urbanism--"Eric_c's way"--which has been successful, and which we need to continue to strive for. Preserve existing urban fabric! Build new modern urbanism to fill in for what we've lost! Even the government should be held to those standards. Hell they're using our money anyway. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 953 Registered: 11-2003 |
I'm not a beggar. I'm a tax paying citizen of the City of Detroit and I want to see pedestrian-friendly development in and around our historic Downtown. Downtown is where structures are supposed to be designed for pedestrians. Put this shit in Midtown, on the East Side, West Side, North End or Southwest, but not in Downtown. It's completely inappropriate design for the district in which it will reside. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1115 Registered: 06-2006 |
I REPEAT...THIS IS AN FBI BUILDING... it's not supposed to be pedestrian friendly...the FBI is not about to rework their security procedures because some moron wants to be able to touch the building from the sidewalk... It's not being built downtown or in campus martius...it's ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE F-ING LODGE!!!! | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9068 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Between an emerging downtown and an emerging corktown. In a city with square mile after square mile of struggling areas this is being dropped between 2 emerging areas and will cause a major disconnect netween them. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 954 Registered: 11-2003 |
Calm down, Killer. I agree that in a post-911 world, there is no place for pedestrianism and the FBI. That said, put it someplace where pedestrianism is less important. Corktown is a 150-year-old DOWNTOWN neighborhood JUST on the other side of the Lodge. The style of building proposed by the FBI is not complementary to either Corktown or Downtown proper. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1118 Registered: 06-2006 |
and if they put it between downtown and midtown, you complain that it's going to create a disconnect between THOSE two areas... seriously...enough is enough...no more of this petty crap...your way has failed for years...there are new players in town that know how to build bridges that people can cross....no more spending two decades criticizing it's architecture and crying about what vacant, "historic" dilapidated structure has to get demolished to make way for it... there's a new way of doing things now, and when people look back 15 years from now, they will be astonished at the amount of development that occurred in Detroit during the first two decades of the 21st century compared to what little had happened here in the decades before... (Message edited by thejesus on May 08, 2007) | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9072 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: A lot of rhetoric but no facts and certainly nothing to make your claim in this argument. 'Their way' did not cause disinvestment over the last 40-50 years. Your argument carries no weight unless you consider the real factors that led to Detroit's demise. It certainly wasn't people asking to maintain an urban fabric around and in downtown. | ||
Cliff19336 Member Username: Cliff19336 Post Number: 9 Registered: 02-2007 |
You cannot reuse the old State office complex because it is built to close to the road. After Oklahoma City, the Feds (GSA) are requiring considerable open space around the buildings to minimize a blast close to the structure. You can bet that the fence will be quite substantial as well. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 955 Registered: 11-2003 |
Am I on Candid Camera?! Thejesus - that is some of the funniest shit I think I've ever read on this forum! You are genuinely comical. As if he actually thinks there is some great evolutionary leap being made by building a suburbanized compound! LOL! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1120 Registered: 06-2006 |
"You cannot reuse the old State office complex because it is built to close to the road. After Oklahoma City, the Feds (GSA) are requiring considerable open space around the buildings to minimize a blast close to the structure. You can bet that the fence will be quite substantial as well." Oh, but see, that doesn't work for us because we want an urban fabric and we want to be able to touch the building from the sidewalk...security needs to take a back seat to these interests | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 956 Registered: 11-2003 |
Is that what you think has been said?! How does "put it someplace else away from Downtown" translate into "security taking a backseat"? This is a riot! PLEASE...say something else!!!!! | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1122 Registered: 06-2006 |
Eric_c: "This should be out in Auburn Hills. It's really that bad. I would rather not have the FBI in Downtown if this is the way it has to be." There you go. Let's put the Downtown Detroit office of the FBI in Auburn Hills...that way, we get to keep our precious surface lots west of the Lodge! Like I said...my way's better... | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9074 Registered: 10-2003 |
thejesus - There is a middle ground between your way and Auburn Hills. You don't seem to be willing to address that. The thought of the someone wanting the investment dollars and employees being moved to AH over architecture is appalling to me. IN the same regard putting a barrier between two of the few emerging areas in the city is not the best choice for this project. | ||
J_stone Member Username: J_stone Post Number: 370 Registered: 10-2003 |
Why is the back facing Mcnally's? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9078 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: To discourage people from going there. They know that it is impossible to get back to work if you eat an entire Eph's sandwich for lunch. Eph's can be a productivity killer.  | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 617 Registered: 01-2005 |
I think it's a thing of beauty and a joy forever. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So, everyone is free to take their best shots at the project. However, can anyone tell me what an "urban friendly" building is? Sounds like a bu__sh__ buzzword out of some Land Planning 101 textbook. My guess is that no matter what the GSA decides to build there are a large number of people on this forum who will take pot shots at the deal. Just for fun, I think. The only thing that pisses me off is that it will cost $100,000,000. That's really something to get upset about. Does anyone care about that? | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 957 Registered: 11-2003 |
I should have clarified my Auburn Hills comment. This BUILDING DESIGN belongs in Auburn Hills. A bunker under a lawn with a building on top is inappropriate for the proposed Downtown location. I will repeat myself here now for at least the third time: this monstrosity belongs outside the Downtown area. And, by the way, just because the site is west of the Lodge does not mean it's any less important to incorporate any new structure into the existing neighborhood. Also, to 3rdworld - I don't know who said anything about "urban friendly". What I said was pedestrian-friendly. | ||
Emu_steve Member Username: Emu_steve Post Number: 288 Registered: 11-2006 |
For those outside of Detroit, what structures (or vacant land) currently sit on either side of the new FBI building? My other point from a previous post in this thread was to the effect: Where else in the CBD-area (I assume the building MUST be near the courts so somewhere miles from downtown isn't going to fly) could the building have been built? Foxtown is out. The Gratiot site by Ford Field is too pricey. I honestly don't see a CBD site and the next sites are those immediately adjacent to CBD. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1125 Registered: 06-2006 |
Eric: I see...so your solution is to build the Downtown Detroit FBI Field Office somewhere outside of downtown because it's not pedestrian-friendly, thereby keeping the two vacant structures and surface lots intact across from the bus station... So to recap... My way, the downtown Detroit FBI office stays in downtown, the surface lots get removed, the abandoned buildings get removed, a brand new building goes up in their place, and some grass and trees get planted... Your way, some other area gets all these benefits and corktown gets to keep its surface lots and vacant buildings... hmmm...I still think my way is better, and I'm sure most sane people would agree | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 958 Registered: 11-2003 |
I THINK YOU'RE TOO THICK-SKULLED AND OBSTINATE TO READ WHAT I'VE WRITTEN. YOU ARE DRAWING BIZARRE CONCLUSIONS AND ARE NOT READING WHAT I SAY. Never have I implied that I want to see buildings sit vacant. You are inserting words into my posts. In case you haven't been paying attention, Scott Martin and Corktown have been building beautiful, single-family homes in the style of a traditional neighborhood with great success in "North Corktown". They've also been working on plans for Tiger Stadium which are forward-thinking and modern, while at the same time work to preserve the scale and feel of the area. What's wrong with this kind of development? The "stick it there" development model has been going on in Detroit for decades. If that's "your way", you've got to know it fucks up neighborhoods. In so far as where to put the FBI? You got me. The decision's been made and we're all going to have to deal. It's too bad that this is all that can be done. That said, I stand by my original statement and opinion that this suburban-styled bunker looks like hell and is inappropriate for the site. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1126 Registered: 06-2006 |
nothing is wrong with that type of development...the only problem is, this site was not slated for that type of development...if the FBI building doesn't get built, it's not as though developers are lining up to build on this site.... earlier I stated that beggars can't be choosers, and you replied that you're not a beggar... well, let's see... no one has expressed any interest in developing this site, but you state that you would like to see it developed...so finally, someone, the federal government, comes in and wants to build and $100 million FBI complex on the site, and you respond with, "but it's not pedestrian friendly enough for me. I rather see..."... I think "beggars can't be choosers" is the the correct phrase to describe you and those like you... See, the only difference between me and you is that I, burdened by my tendency to think realistically, understand that it's NOT a choice between an FBI building and a single-family home neighborhood...rather, it's a choice between an FBI building and surface lot... (Message edited by thejesus on May 09, 2007) | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 959 Registered: 11-2003 |
I wasn't aware that the site was ever made available for sale on the open market. It seems to me that this state to fed land deal was arranged before the Plaza complex was completely vacated. By the way, Thejesus...why are you such an outrageously condescending smartass? Are you aware that your smarmy attitude detracts from your arguments? You discredit yourself with virtually every statement. You may feel as if you "think realistically", but it's clear you certainly do not think things through completely. You sound like a college-age kid most of the time. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4052 Registered: 10-2003 |
College age? He sounds that mature to you...? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9086 Registered: 10-2003 |
Leave him alone. He is just saying what a bunch of white leaders told him to think. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4053 Registered: 10-2003 |
lol Jt1 | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1128 Registered: 06-2006 |
oh brother...so now I'm being ganged up on by the three stooges? you three enjoy your circle jerk... Me? I'm going to kick back and watch a new building get developed at the corner of Porter St. and the Lodge... game over...obstructionists lose... :P P.S. Eric, sorry if I come off as condescending, but I'm tired of watching attitudes like yours prevent Detroit from making progress...enough is enough...time to move over and let the new players show you how things get done... | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9087 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Yep, it's attitudes, not economics, not the dynamics of SE Michigan, not the disinvestment of Detroit; it's attitudes. Get over yourself and understand the history that caused decades of disinvestment before you pat yourseldf on the back for 'being right' and 'your way' winning. Here is one way to help the city win: Move to the city as opposed to being another city cheerleader that is unwilling to invest your dollars in the city. You should be set, you already have your gun for driving through the bad neighborhoods. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9088 Registered: 10-2003 |
P.S. - I am still waiting for you to name the 'black leaders' that you referenced in the Salvation Army thread. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4056 Registered: 10-2003 |
Oh and it is not the provincial politics of the region either (ie Livonia pulling out of smart to keep the undesirables out). | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1130 Registered: 06-2006 |
"Oh and it is not the provincial politics of the region either (ie Livonia pulling out of smart to keep the undesirables out)." yeah, there you go... it's the politics of the suburbs that causes Detroiters to piss and moan every time a vacant, dilapidated building gets knocked down in preparation for some type of economic improvement... I knew if I kept posting in this thread long enough, eventually you guys would blame the suburbs for SOMETHING...lol (Message edited by thejesus on May 09, 2007) | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 960 Registered: 11-2003 |
Attitudes like mine keep Detroit from making progress?! I'm an "obstructionist"?! How do you figure? Not to mention, who are these "new players" you keep rambling about? How is it that a smart-mouthed college kid is in any way allied with "the players?" What the fuck have you done other than argue for bad design and "put it here" development on an internet site? While you masturbate over what you perceive to be the "new" way (while ignoring the fact that every development that has succeeded has been done the "old" way), I will still be paying taxes and contributing to the redevelopment of the city in which I reside. Game over...non-resident bullshit disregarded. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1131 Registered: 06-2006 |
JT: ok...give me until after lunch, and I'll try to post a list of a few hundred black leaders and you can go through and tell me which ones you agree with... personally, I could care less which ones you like and which ones you don't, but you seem really eager to do this and you appear to have enough free time to spend on something this, so I'll try to help you out | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9092 Registered: 10-2003 |
Not eager just calling out your bs assumptions about myself and Detroiters in general. The point I am trying to make to you is falling on deaf ears. You still do not see anything wrong with your ignorant and blatantly offensive assumptions. Now as far as your list goes. How should I address your list if there are black leaders that have differing opinions? Since according to you I (and Detroiters in general) just follow what black leaders tell us how do we deal with differing opinions of black leaders? Your statement is an easy out when someone in the city disagrees with you and pretty clearly shows your opinion towards Detroiters in general. You seem to apply it to Detroiters regardless of education. (Message edited by jt1 on May 09, 2007) | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4059 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Hmmmm....last time I checked there were hundreds of other leaders aside from 'Black' ones that have been making bad decisions over the last few years....why only focus on the 'Black' ones? Could it be that that is all you see are "Black" leaders? | ||
Crew Member Username: Crew Post Number: 1256 Registered: 02-2004 |
hey guys, you realize it's OK just to ignore eachother, right? It works for me and Karl. give it a try. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9094 Registered: 10-2003 |
I have to entertain myself during thew work day. This is my outlet to release stress. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1134 Registered: 06-2006 |
"Could it be that that is all you see are "Black" leaders?" yes, that's it, because I'm from Livonia which means I'm "the racist"...where have you been DS? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9096 Registered: 10-2003 |
You brought up the black leader cop out in the first place. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4060 Registered: 10-2003 |
And you know I understand that. I mean it only makes sense since Livonia prides itself on being the whitest 'city' in America... | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 618 Registered: 01-2005 |
Eric: 1953 in his/her 5/7 post said he/she wanted an "urban friendly" building Ok, you want a "pedestrian friendly" building. Same question: what the hell is a pedestrian friendly building? Still seems to me to be a b__s__ buzzword or two. Does it mean that,for example, I'm sitting around and decide I'd like to walk to the FBI building, but jeez, I think I'll pass on that because I don't feel comfortable walking over there? Is no one concerned that the idiots in Washington want to spend $100,000,000 of our money (a lot of it mine) to build a 300,000 sq.ft. office building w/ a small parking garage and an auto repair shop? On cheap land? Hell, I love the proposed design and the location, but for that kind of dough they can duplicate the Taj Mahal. And, is no one upset they're hiring a Chicago architect and a Chicago builder to build it? C'mon folks, let's look at the important stuff. (Message edited by 3rdworldcity on May 09, 2007) | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9099 Registered: 10-2003 |
3rd - I am guessing you know the developmentment world much better than most of us.* Given your history how much do you think it should cost. I would figure you would have to add in some costs for safety, security, technical aspects that aren't incorporated in many/most buildings. * Not being faceitious. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 961 Registered: 11-2003 |
3rdworld - fair question. To me, "pedestrian friendly" means easily accessable on foot. I'll give you examples of development both "pedestrian friendly" and not. Pedestrian Friendly: Compuware, Comerica Park, Ford Field, the buildings of the Financial District. NOT Pedestrian Friendly: Brewery Park, Ren-Cen before GM, Big Beaver Road in Troy. Downtown Birmingham, Royal Oak and Ann Arbor are "pedestrian friendly", Westland, Livonia and Canton are not. Is that clear? | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1144 Registered: 06-2006 |
3rdworld: To recap, he wants the building that houses DOWNTOWN DETROIT branch of the FBI to either be pedestrian friendly (don't ask me why), or he wants the DOWNTOWN DETROIT branch of the FBI to be somewhere other than downtown Detroit...lol | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1148 Registered: 06-2006 |
Eric_c: "I'd rather not see it Downtown at all." seriously, just stop now...you're just digging yourself a bigger hole (Message edited by thejesus on May 09, 2007) | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 968 Registered: 11-2003 |
Actually, you are, pussyboy: Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 957 Registered: 11-2003 Posted on Wednesday, May 09, 2007 - 7:12 am: ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------- I should have clarified my Auburn Hills comment. This BUILDING DESIGN belongs in Auburn Hills. A bunker under a lawn with a building on top is inappropriate for the proposed Downtown location. I will repeat myself here now for at least the third time: this monstrosity belongs outside the Downtown area. And, by the way, just because the site is west of the Lodge does not mean it's any less important to incorporate any new structure into the existing neighborhood. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1151 Registered: 06-2006 |
exactly...you want the downtown Detroit branch of the FBI to be outside of downtown... this is just not feasible, not to mention completely retarded... but go ahead and keep it up...at least the city and the FBI get it... | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 970 Registered: 11-2003 |
Too bad you don't. Last I heard, it's the Detroit Branch of the FBI. There is only one branch in the city, proper. Now I realize to people from Northville, everything East of Telegraph is "Downtown", but that's just not the case. What else ya got? | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9115 Registered: 10-2003 |
Technically Detroit field office but the point is made. http://detroit.fbi.gov/ | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 1153 Registered: 06-2006 |
and it's located downtown for a reason... like I said, the city and the FBI get it, so I'm not the least bit worried that you guys don't... it's being built on the vacant lots at Porter and the Lodge...if you don't like it, that's tough : ) | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 972 Registered: 11-2003 |
God almighty, you're stupid. Let's repost the same thing for the third time so Thejesus can comprehend my angle: Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 958 Registered: 11-2003 Posted on Wednesday, May 09, 2007 - 9:00 am: ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------- I THINK YOU'RE TOO THICK-SKULLED AND OBSTINATE TO READ WHAT I'VE WRITTEN. YOU ARE DRAWING BIZARRE CONCLUSIONS AND ARE NOT READING WHAT I SAY. Never have I implied that I want to see buildings sit vacant. You are inserting words into my posts. In case you haven't been paying attention, Scott Martin and Corktown have been building beautiful, single-family homes in the style of a traditional neighborhood with great success in "North Corktown". They've also been working on plans for Tiger Stadium which are forward-thinking and modern, while at the same time work to preserve the scale and feel of the area. What's wrong with this kind of development? The "stick it there" development model has been going on in Detroit for decades. If that's "your way", you've got to know it fucks up neighborhoods. In so far as where to put the FBI? You got me. THE DECISION'S BEEN MADE AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL. IT'S TOO BAD THAT THIS IS ALL THAT CAN BE DONE. That said, I stand by my original statement and opinion that this suburban-styled bunker looks like hell and is inappropriate for the site. www.rif.org | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 4062 Registered: 10-2003 |
LOL Eric... rotflmao Thejesus make sure you click that link and peruse that site...you really seem to need it. *and people talk about the Detroit education system* | ||
Jjw Member Username: Jjw Post Number: 308 Registered: 10-2005 |
I have read this thread and can honestly say that everyone is right!!!! Obviously, the FBI's major concern is security. And, Corktown is a great asset to the city of Detroit. My concern is the planned location. In the not-to-far-off-future, that location may be better used as a link from Corktown to downtown that is "pedestrian-friendly". So, I completely agree with Eric. However, that facility should be located somewhere near the downtown area; just not that particular site. A site that will not be drawing neighborhood walkers may be more appropriate. I personally think that location would be great for a mixed-use complex of residential-retail development. And... with the on-going progress in Corktown continuing, I don't think it would be that far-off. In summary, build the campus but not on that site. Oh, and I also agree with 3rdworld---it does seem like a lot of money for something that looks kind of tacky. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 625 Registered: 01-2005 |
The only businesses that need to be pedestrian friendly based on Eric's definition are those that depend on high volumes of foot traffic to succeed. A retail store (or any business) on Zug Island would admittedly not be pedestrian friendly. The FBI does not WANT a pedestrian friendly location for obvious reasons. Royal Oak merchants need a pedestrian friendly environment. | ||
Eric_c Member Username: Eric_c Post Number: 973 Registered: 11-2003 |
I cited Compuware, Comerica Park, Ford Field and the buildings of the Financial District as examples of highly successful pedestrian- friendly developments in Downtown. 3rdworld said: "The only businesses that need to be pedestrian friendly based on Eric's definition are those that depend on high volumes of foot traffic to succeed." I wouldn't say that Compuware Corporation relies on pedestrian traffic to succeed at anything. The storefront businesses that they have so intelligently included and encouraged most certainly do. But Compuware Corporation doesn't. I also wouldn't say that Ford Field or Comerica Park depend on a pedestrian-friendly environment for survival, either. The Palace of Auburn Hills and Silverdome are enough evidence of that for me. None of the banks or law firms in the Financial District need pedestrians, either. My point is that we need businesses to generate taxes, fill space and work with us on this pedestrian thing all at the same time. If there is to be a vibrant city center in Detroit, people will need to be out and about on foot. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 4407 Registered: 10-2003 |
May I ask, will they be adding more outside employees to this new office? | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5489 Registered: 10-2003 |
"My point is that we need businesses to generate taxes, fill space and work with us on this pedestrian thing all at the same time." I'm not sure, Eric, if that could have been said any better. If city planners can't imagine a city where development is able to walk and chew gum at the same time, then the city is going to be underserved by its planning department for years, and that's an understatement. (Message edited by lmichigan on May 09, 2007) | ||
Masterblaster Member Username: Masterblaster Post Number: 30 Registered: 03-2005 |
Corktown is an up and coming neighborhood, that is pedestrian friendly, urbane, and unique. This FBI building doesn't fit the neighborhood. Can't this building be erected near Fort Wayne or the Federal Reserve Building?? Wouldn't those locations be more appropriate?? | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5491 Registered: 10-2003 |
One would think, but I guess the offer by Danou Enterprises (owner of the Executive Plaza) was too good to refuse. I bet, like all things, it all came down to little more than money. | ||
Queensfinest Member Username: Queensfinest Post Number: 100 Registered: 08-2006 |
The FBI should have redeveloped Michigan Central Station. Plenty of open space around the structure. New security measures and roads would have been easy to retrofit. It's far enough outside of Downtown as well. Maybe the above argument could have also been avoided too. The time could have been spent doing more productive things while most likely on the job. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9122 Registered: 10-2003 |
I can't imagine that given the rail lines and rail tunnel that abut to the train station would make it as secure as they need. | ||
Queensfinest Member Username: Queensfinest Post Number: 102 Registered: 08-2006 |
Perhaps some of the rail infrastructure could be removed. I've heard that the possibility of the rehab of the station for use as an actual train station is pretty unlikely. Are trains running on the tracks adjacent to the station currently, and how close to the structure are they if so? |
