  Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3637 Registered: 10-2003 |
 | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3638 Registered: 10-2003 |
The Film Exchange Building, star of Old Photo VI - Where Is This?  | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3639 Registered: 10-2003 |
How do you vote?  | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3640 Registered: 10-2003 |
Wayne State University, now the tallest university in Michigan!  | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3641 Registered: 10-2003 |
The Crystal Ballroom project get serious...  | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 355 Registered: 09-2004 |
Lowell, I probably passed you downtown near the Commerce demo. I was down there late this afternoon and the demolition had progressed about that far. Sad to see it go, but I'm really impressed with the rendering for the new building to go in.  Thanks for sharing your other photos! | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3578 Registered: 08-2004 |
Lowell, back when I went to WSU, 1971-75, they probably were the tallest University back then... but then later they went and destroyed Mackenzie Hall, tallest building on campus! | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5088 Registered: 10-2003 |
The Maccabees Building doesn't have any classroom space in it, does it? Isn't it office use for the university? | ||
Bussey Member Username: Bussey Post Number: 483 Registered: 12-2003 |
Correct, it is utilized by numerous schools for their faculty offices. Great views of downtown. | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 68 Registered: 08-2006 |
What and where was Mackenzie Hall? | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 5472 Registered: 02-2004 |
Next to the Maccabees building on Cass, Putnam and Warren. Its used to part of Wayne State University Housing now its long gone. | ||
Kathleen Member Username: Kathleen Post Number: 1911 Registered: 10-2003 |
The parking structure at Putnam and Cass is where Mackenzie Hall stood. When I was at Wayne State, it was where you went to register for classes, and it housed the student bookstore, the health clinic, as well as many administrative offices. | ||
Detroit_stylin Member Username: Detroit_stylin Post Number: 3736 Registered: 10-2003 |
So where was the McKenizie Hall in reference to Roscoes' Arcade (RIP I loved tha place!), that used to front Woodward and the McDonalds that used to sit around the corner on Cass? | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 283 Registered: 02-2006 |
Lookin good Detroit. 313 | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3582 Registered: 08-2004 |
Don't know where Roscoe's Arcade is or was, but as Kathleen stated at Mackenzie Hall was at the corner of Putnam and Cass the opposite corner of the same block from Warren & Woodward. I don't remember exactly how tall Mackenzie Hall was, something like 14 stories. But it was one of the largest buildings in Midtown. It was a massive brown brick building with a large hip roof with a wide overhang. Similar to Prarie Style houses. I remember the lobby was full of tiles (Pewabic?), a beautiful space. Unfortunately the floors where the professors had their offices had dimly lit narrow hallways, and the offices were narrow rooms about 7 ft wide and 12ft deep. These floors appeared rather depressing. I don't know why there wasn't more outrage at the proposed demolition back then. But maybe there was, as I can remember WSU received a lot of flack for demoing the Gleaners Building on Woodward. The loss of Mackenzie Hall was a true loss for the high density of Midtown. Here's the only pic (not a great one) that I could find of Mackenzie Hall. But it shows the enormous mass of the building (facing Putnam): http://life.wayne.edu/article. php?id=265 | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 392 Registered: 10-2006 |
WOW! So it was student housing? Seems like a rather unusual layout for it. Was it originally built as housing? | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5090 Registered: 10-2003 |
Jeeze, that was on big-@ss building. Didn't realize you guys were talking about an historic building. When was it constructed and who was the architect, if anyone can find that? | ||
Detourdetroit Member Username: Detourdetroit Post Number: 259 Registered: 10-2003 |
Preservation Wayne fought for Mackenzie Hall and put together a alternative use strategy... A portrait of David Mackenzie that was in Mackenzie Hall traveled down the street to Mackenzie House after the demo apparently... there were several demos that knocked density out of Midtown... too bad | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 395 Registered: 10-2006 |
yeah, I would have guessed that midtown was pretty competitive with new center at some point. | ||
Gumby Member Username: Gumby Post Number: 1521 Registered: 11-2003 |
I have a couple questions about the Crystal Ballroom building. Do we know if the Woodward facade is how it originally looked or was it changed when they widened Woodward? It has always looked funny to me when compared to the side of the building. Did they save the old window frames from the side to restore or are they going to replace them with something not as nice? Is that area along the top in the near corner that is made of brick, is that a cheap repair job made a while back? It has always looked different to me. If so do they plan on restoring the area with this renovation? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3584 Registered: 08-2004 |
Gumby you are correct about the mid 1930's widening of Woodward put a new Deco front onto the Crystal Ballroom Building. You should have seen the front of the Majestic Theatre Building before the widening... sort of Venetian Gothic. Hey 56packman, do you have a pic of the facade of the original Majestic? Can't find one on the internet. The cinema treasures website shows the wrong theatre facade. | ||
French777 Member Username: French777 Post Number: 114 Registered: 10-2006 |
LOOKS GREAT. French777 | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 2060 Registered: 07-2004 |
The Commerce Building is not coming down without a fight. Passed by there Friday and about a quarter of the building is still standing. How long has it been since they started demolition? | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 511 Registered: 10-2006 |
Based on the first pic/post, for this thread, a good guess would be about a month ago. There is obviously always a lot of work that goes into a demo process before it is visablely dismantled. The colder weather might have had an affect as I don't think that they are in a hurry for any reason to bring it down. | ||
Spiritofdetroit Member Username: Spiritofdetroit Post Number: 293 Registered: 11-2006 |
oh its been well over a month | ||
Beantown Member Username: Beantown Post Number: 31 Registered: 10-2006 |
The visible demolition began in early December, with the first gaping hole on the east side of the building appearing the week after Christmas. Here is a picture taken on Tuesday of this week.  You can see the crane-like machine wrestling with one of the I-beams, one at a time. There is visible progress made every week, and considering the brutal cold streak for the past four weeks, I am not at all disappointed with the rate of progress. | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 114 Registered: 08-2006 |
Who says there is no progress.... http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s004.jpg | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 202 Registered: 03-2006 |
more pics fareastider, give us more! | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 116 Registered: 08-2006 |
check what I posted at the book cadillac thread until then though try these.. http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s055.jpg http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s010.jpg http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s089.jpg http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s014.jpg Enjoy views of the Guardian, Stott, and Washington Blvd as well as another Book Cadillac pic | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 204 Registered: 03-2006 |
awesome, keep them coming. | ||
Jimaz Member Username: Jimaz Post Number: 1588 Registered: 12-2005 |
Yeah, I couldn't resist saving that Guardian photo. Stellar job! | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 197 Registered: 03-2006 |
Without trying to get off topic too much, does anyone know if the knew owner of the book has plans to clean its facade? I didn't realize how dirty it is until I looked at the Washington Blvd pic. Great pics on both threads fareastsider! | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 229 Registered: 11-2005 |
yes | ||
Beantown Member Username: Beantown Post Number: 35 Registered: 10-2006 |
There were four pics and a video of the DCB demolition posted on Faded Detroit last weekend. Just thought I would link them on this, the most appropriate thread. http://www.fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/ (Message edited by beantown on February 23, 2007) | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 324 Registered: 11-2005 |
Pictures from 2-22-07 taken from a seventh-floor vantage point: Just click on People's Outfitting. http://s152.photobucket.com/al bums/s164/rhymeswithrawk/ | ||
Korridorkid Member Username: Korridorkid Post Number: 60 Registered: 01-2005 |
Great stuff Rawk, Thanks a million for sharing! | ||
Quinn Member Username: Quinn Post Number: 1161 Registered: 01-2005 |
You know...I would never be for tearing down an old building when I thought there was any chance of saving it. Having said that...since there is a specific use for this lot, and from what I see, a great design for a garage with street-level commercial space and residential on top...I'm not too upset. Destruction of buildings that are not useful (ok this isn't particularly historic or anything...I wouldn't be saying this if, oh say they were tearing down the Fox for a parking garage) for a good purpose, like this, is the hallmark of a growing, progressive city. Destroying buildings when there is no good reason or plan...why that's what we're typically known for (hello...madison-lenox and hudsons RIP). This is kinda exciting! Now...just stick to your promise and build that big, beautiful new project (hello Kraemer and developers! ;) ) | ||
Leland_palmer Member Username: Leland_palmer Post Number: 230 Registered: 08-2004 |
Here's my latest destruction update... http://www.fadeddetroit.blogsp ot.com/2007/02/commerce-update .html | ||
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine Post Number: 283 Registered: 04-2004 |
Wow, look at the thickness and spacing of the steel at the front. They really overbuilt things in those days. Or I guess the steel might have been weaker. | ||
Milwaukee Member Username: Milwaukee Post Number: 858 Registered: 08-2006 |
I wish they didn't have to tear down the Commerce building. I thought it was a nice old building downtown. The Griswald is nice, but I'd prefer if they had incorperated the new structure and lofts into the old Commerce Building. Oh well. | ||
Mikem Member Username: Mikem Post Number: 3100 Registered: 10-2003 |
Tonight:    | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 511 Registered: 12-2006 |
So they were working today. Guess I went down during their lunch break at Lafayette. | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11318 Registered: 10-2003 |
Ha, my neighbor and I made a pass thru downtown last night and he said "Man, that would make a great picture at night!" I was down there again tonight for a bit, though forgot my camera. Leave it to MikeM to have it covered. | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 237 Registered: 11-2005 |
So what is the timeline on The Griswold? It looks like the site could be cleared by April or May. | ||
Leland_palmer Member Username: Leland_palmer Post Number: 235 Registered: 08-2004 |
Here's your Sunday update... http://www.fadeddetroit.blogsp ot.com/2007/03/almost-gone_04. html | ||
Nyburgher Member Username: Nyburgher Post Number: 65 Registered: 10-2006 |
Those are stark pictures of the full price Detroit will pay for not having a decent mass transit system. Every other building or worse will have to be a parking garage and your city will suck. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 882 Registered: 11-2003 |
Andyguard73-- A lot if not all of the BC facade on the north side has been cleaned, and some of the Shelby side as well. They started cleaning it no later than October. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 8453 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Nice contribution to the thread. | ||
Nyburgher Member Username: Nyburgher Post Number: 70 Registered: 10-2006 |
It's very sad to see a great building torn down. It's sad every time, but when you are replacing it with parking it's a tragedy. Hong Kong blows stuff up all the time but it's to build something bigger that will put more people and energy into the city. This kind of a thing is just pure waste. Jane Jacobs is dead now so she doesn't have to see this. | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 445 Registered: 03-2006 |
80 condos and retail in an area in flux? what are you talking about trust me Im a historical preservationist, but that's an philosophy that is not absolute. Realistically speaking, this is a great development...example, would you rather have a bunch of abandoned buildings or a great looking garage (relatively speaking) with a CVS and soon a restaurant (Salad Creations or whatever) that is new to the state of michigan and spaces to support high end residential space (1001 woodward if it ever gets off the ground)... (Message edited by apbest on March 05, 2007) (Message edited by apbest on March 05, 2007) | ||
Nyburgher Member Username: Nyburgher Post Number: 72 Registered: 10-2006 |
Detroit is now as a city without a dense mixed use core and no decent transit surrounded by sprawl. So, I guess this is the best you can do. The thing is that with the money spent on parking garages, you could fund a transit system. | ||
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine Post Number: 284 Registered: 04-2004 |
^ Very true. And that's the point. Detroit will not (at least within the next 20 years) have the kind of development that could be considered extraordinary. Yes condos stacked atop parking with some ground floor retail is great, but it's pretty common elsewhere. This isn't something to get excited about. I think it's okay to defend the preservation of the People's building. A full redevelopment of the building would have gone much further than 80 units and ground floor retail, not to mention there would have been space to grow for other businesses in the empty space next door. But Detroiter's, for some reason, still cheer on the creation of more parking structure even though they say they hate parking. After all, the main purpose of this new building IS parking. I think any parking downtown is bad, unless you plan on stacking a 40 story apartment tower on top, but at that point, the building's main program is an apartment tower instead of just a dressed up parking structure. But we can't have that. We don't have a transit system to justify the construction of buildings downtown that are independent of the automobile. I've just come to accept it, even though I disagree with it. After all, Detroit is the motor city. The towering art deco skyscrapers defined Detroit's past. The parking structure is the architecture that defines Detroit today. | ||
Nyburgher Member Username: Nyburgher Post Number: 73 Registered: 10-2006 |
That's why I said, your city will suck. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5180 Registered: 10-2003 |
Don't blame Detroiter's for accepting second best, blame them in the rest of the Metro residents for not putting in the work it takes to get a decent rapid transit system that would make developments like this look as silly as they truly are. BTW, the idea that anyone is cheering on more parking is ridiculous. People are relieved (if only slightly) that this is going to be MORE than parking. Again, the point is that this was originally proposed as nothing more than parking. | ||
Beantown Member Username: Beantown Post Number: 38 Registered: 10-2006 |
And don't lose sight of the fact that this "horrendous" parking structure was a critical element in the Book-Cadillac redevelopment. Many of the future condo owners, including myself, would not have bought a unit there if there weren't parking in close proximity as part of the deal. Would the detractors rather have no parking garage and no B-C restoration? You can talk all you want about theories and hypotheticals regarding mass transit, and I can't wait for more options there. But unlike those who choose to flippantly blast our city from afar, I'm forced to deal with REALITY of our current mass transit situation. Once we have more good mass transit options, then we can begin to be justified in questioning the need for additional parking. Until then, it's an essential part of the development equation. What about that is hard to understand? | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 203 Registered: 03-2006 |
Thanks Burnsie, but I was referring to the Book Building/Tower in this pic by Fareastsider: http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/TowerTop s014.jpg It is awesome to see the BC's exterior shining again though! | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 8454 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Yes, because the developers and public entities funding these garages could just pool their money and pay for a transit system. The parking garages are to support other developments. I can assure you the development dollars for those garages would not go to a transit system. I am finding it hard to believe that you have any grasp of economic realities. It also doesn't help that you have stated in multiple posts that you have never been to Detroit. | ||
Dnvn522 Member Username: Dnvn522 Post Number: 194 Registered: 11-2004 |
quote: HAHAHAHAHA! So you're comparing a city of 7 million people to Detroit? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3743 Registered: 08-2004 |
Nyburger, since you obviously don't live here, and don't know what "The Griswold" is (didn't see you post anything there), you better check the 2 threads on this forum about what is replacing the Commerce Building, before you make clueless statements about Detroit. Many of us here were aghast at the thought of the destruction of the Commerce Building... until we saw the beauty that will replace it. Granted there are about 11 floors of parking in what is replacing it, the top 7 floors will be luxury living, with the ground floor as rather swanky looking retail. The new building will have something like 3 times the footprint of the old building, and with its' Beaux Arts like look will be a splendid compliment to the Book Cadillac Building. And it will complement the "high density" of downtown Detroit. Now go look at "THE GRISWOLD RENDERING OFFICIALLY RELEASED" thread (first half), to see what is being built, that actually will increase the density of downtown... | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 41 Registered: 10-2006 |
Gistok. how will a crappy parking garage replacing a sizable office building increase the density of downtown? The building under demolition appears quite substantial and is much larger than its replacement. Even if a few floors of condos are eventually added to the garage (a BIG if), the total square footage of the new development is much smaller than the original building. Regardless of the condo potential (unlikely in a glutted market/poor economy), this is yet another loss for downtown, though it is somewhat tempered by the Book Cadillac renovation. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 246 Registered: 03-2006 |
Crawford you dont have a clue, get your info straight please. | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 42 Registered: 10-2006 |
Thanks for the detailed rebuttal, Kemp. I'll try and take your lead by limiting my posts to ad hominem attacks. Can anyone else explain why this demolition of a big office building for a small parking garage is a net plus for downtown? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3751 Registered: 08-2004 |
Crawford... didn't you see that the Commerce Building only took up about 1/3 of site? The replacement building will be about the same height as the Commerce Building, but take up 3 times the footprint. And the new building may go up all in 1 phase, although that hasn't been announced as of yet. I'm sure that it depends on pre-orders for condos. But if the Book-Cadillac is any indication, it should not be a problem. The economy in metro Detroit does suck... but that didn't stop the Book Cadillac from bucking the treads with a near sellout. So for some strange reason, downtown seems less affected by the regional economy than the region as a whole. By far most forumers have been in favor of the new project, so much so, that few now lament the loss of the old building. Go check out the BC and Griswold threads. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 354 Registered: 11-2005 |
I hated to see the People's Outfitting Co. Building go. I really had mixed feelings about it. That was until I saw what the 1980s remodel did to it. I think it was at detroitblog.com, maybe? While the outside had some lovely terra cotta and nice, huge windows, the inside left a lot to be desired and probably doomed any hope for renovation. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 358 Registered: 07-2006 |
Crawford, your information is completely backwards. The Griswold is has a footprint of more than twice that of the Commerce Building, replacing both the Commerce and a surface lot, and is roughly 4 stories taller. It's got ground floor retail, provides parking not only for its own condos but for the B-C condos and hotel as well. And why do you say 'BIG if'? Why do you call it a glutted market, when the B-C sold so quickly? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3752 Registered: 08-2004 |
For those that haven't seen the replacement (or haven't checked the other threads):  Hope that helps! | ||
Blort Member Username: Blort Post Number: 38 Registered: 02-2007 |
Why didn't they just rennovate the People's Outfitting Co. Building into condos while building the parking garage in the empty lot next to it? Detroit has torn down enough of its historic buildings already, do we really need to demolish more? | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 43 Registered: 10-2006 |
I still don't understand how this is a net plus. Parking garages do not count as occupied floor space. Seven floors of apartments, even with a larger footprint, would be a fraction of the former building's size. The fact that a larger footprint is being used means that even if we pretend the parking is 100% occupied space, the building has a much smaller FAR (Floor Area Ratio) than its predecessor. FAR is the standard metric for building density (ratio of square footage to footprint). | ||
Mdoyle Member Username: Mdoyle Post Number: 41 Registered: 10-2006 |
Well its occupied space rather than unoccupied space that no one wants. Renovation costs are astronomically higher than demo and rebuild. There is plenty of unoccupied commercial office throughout Detroit. You win some and you lose some and seeing as how there were absolutely no plans whatsoever to renovate the commerce building thats how I would see this as a net gain. | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 44 Registered: 10-2006 |
Well I guess if we accept that the Commerce Building had no hope, then parking with some condos is a small improvement. I can't imagine this is a long-term solution for the downtown streetscape. Now even Woodward across from Compuware has a giant blight of a surface parking garage. | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 156 Registered: 03-2006 |
Is that the old OLDE building? Or the building across the street that houses the coney islands? | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 247 Registered: 03-2006 |
Sorry for not giving more detail to you Crawford. Perhaps read some of the posts on this thread and on the other threads re: this topic. We have been talking about this for quite sometime now. This is one of the most exciting projects in the city and even the preservationist seem to be ok with razing the empty Commerce Building to build the Griswold project. This is a big benefit to the success of the Book and the surrounding area. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3754 Registered: 08-2004 |
And an additional item is that the ENTIRE first floor of the larger lot (besides the parking entrance NOT on Michigan Ave.) will be retail. Granted that much of the volume of the building will be parking, but this will probably be the best looking parking garage downtown with retail AND residential. And as already stated elsewhere, the "street wall" effect will be enhanced along Michigan Ave., and this building will be a boost for developing Capitol Park behind the building. (Message edited by Gistok on March 05, 2007) | ||
Spacemonkey Member Username: Spacemonkey Post Number: 157 Registered: 03-2006 |
I used to work in the OLDE building on Griwold. Ernie Olde's son, EJ, hung himself in the elevator shaft there. | ||
Swingline Member Username: Swingline Post Number: 729 Registered: 11-2003 |
A simple fact: without a parking garage of substantial size, the Book Cadillac renovation doesn't happen. Further, the late lamented Commerce Building would never have been renovated into condos because it didn't have any parking. None. The Lafayette Building is also going to be able to utilize the new parking facility. The new garage also adds value to the potential of a David Stott Building conversion. New Yorkers might scoff at the emphasis placed on parking here, but so what. Parking may not drive development in Manhattan, but Manhattan with its $1,000.00 per sq. ft real estate prices and transit alternatives is completely unique in this country. CBD office building conversions in every other urban place (e.g., Chicago, Boston, Baltimore, Seattle) all required new sources of parking before any of the deals could proceed. In a utopian urban place, an unpolished gem like the Commerce Building would never have been demolished. In Detroit though, where 95% of the housing market does not exceed $250.00 per square foot, and virtually every middle income household owns a car, some buildings are going to be lost to parking. Carefully considered tradeoffs must occur. Losing the Commerce Building is potentially saving three other major buildings, not to mention adding the 40 or so units in the Griswold itself. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 204 Registered: 03-2006 |
Well said, swingline. Not to get to far off topic, but since you brought it up has anyone heard anything new on the Lafayette building? Also, while I'm sure it won't hurt it, I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Lafayette won't be using this building for parking. Can anyone confirm that? Thanks. (Message edited by andyguard73 on March 05, 2007) | ||
Crawford Member Username: Crawford Post Number: 45 Registered: 10-2006 |
I'm aware of the parking requirements in a market like Detroit. My issues are with the extensive surface parking and the decision to tear down irreplaceable urban fabric. The city already subsidizes luxury apartments. Why can't it subsidize underground parking? | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1412 Registered: 10-2003 |
I don't understand the reference to People's Outfitting Co. Was that a later name for the Detroit Commerce Building? What was the original name for the building? That's what should be used. And I don't think it's a great loss. Architecturally, it wasn't that remarkable and the facade had been mauled by modernization. It's not like it was the GAR, or Wright-Kay building, or something like that. The Griswold will make better use of the site and, as has been pointed out, makes the B-C project feasible. Without the Detroit Commerce Building demo you have no renovated B-C. | ||
Korridorkid Member Username: Korridorkid Post Number: 72 Registered: 01-2005 |
"Irreplacable urban fabric"? Okay, while I lament the loss of a building with the Commerce Building's age, I don't feel it's irreplacable, or at least singularly essential to Detroit's Urban Fabric. I don't deny it was a example of a Chicago School Architectural Style ,-- thus deserving of historical merit. I don't deny that Chicago School is a great style with shining examples of it's design theory, but I don't feel the Comm. Building was a stunning, comprehensive representation. In comparison to other examples: L.B. King Company Building on Library and Grand River The Healy Company Building at 1426 Woodward The Woodward Building on Woodward and Clifford The Farwell on Griswold and the Garfield Building on Woodward in Midtown It dosen't seem as impressive. IMHO, the loss is not as significant, comparativly speaking. Surface parking aside, I think a building like The Griswold is a great replacement. More impressive in many,- maybe not all-, aspects. Sometimes you have to lose now to win later. | ||
Lowell Board Administrator Username: Lowell Post Number: 3716 Registered: 10-2003 |
Posted on another thread but worth posting again...  | ||
Fareastsider Member Username: Fareastsider Post Number: 197 Registered: 08-2006 |
Here is a view from above... http://i141.photobucket.com/al bums/r50/fareastsider/RENCENto p069.jpg | ||
Wolverine Member Username: Wolverine Post Number: 285 Registered: 04-2004 |
Just a quick mention, I hope people aren't taking my post in the wrong way. As I said, I've come to accept parking in Detroit as a reality. My closing lines are parking is the new definitive architecture of Detroit since that's what we've built the most of in the past 20 years. Parking is an absolute necessity for these projects to happen, but I mentioned that it was shame that this was the reality, for the fact that a succesful urban core calls for real structures that aren't dedicated to parking. You can put 3 levels of retail at the bottom, but it's still going to struggle to be a vibrant and active block since it's so overscaled. There's a reason why people love Greektown so much. The commerce building was unique in that as you passed it, you knew the entire building could be dedicated to something other than parking. Detroit is very deceptive with its architecture. It tries to cover up what people don't like. I used to support this, I wanted to hide the parking structure as much as possible so that it would look like real buildings. But now I've realized we would be better without them entirely. Sometimes I wish Detroit could build one giant Mega Structure that would meet the demands of numerous buildings downtown. The ground floors could contain grocery stores, bix box retail, basic needs whatever. It would be a place that satisfies all (I don't care how stupid it sounds). You get your car, you get your food, you get your discount retailers, and it would be connected to the people mover. If such an option were to become available, anyone who felt they needed their car to be across the street within the CBD would just be downright lazy , with the exception of the old and disabled which need their vehicles close by. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 356 Registered: 11-2005 |
I don't understand the reference to People's Outfitting Co. Was that a later name for the Detroit Commerce Building? What was the original name for the building? That's what should be used. Yes, the building was originally the People's Outfitting Co. building. ASKED AND ANSWERED By Dan Austin Free Press staff writer PubDate: Monday, 1/15/2007 QUESTION: What is the history behind the building being torn down next to the Book-Cadillac Hotel in downtown Detroit? Answer: Demolition began in November on the 12-story Detroit Commerce Building, which was built in 1916 as the People's Outfitting Co. department store. It will be replaced by a parking garage for the renovated Book-Cadillac. Leopold Wineman founded People's Outfitting in September 1893 in a four-story building at Michigan Avenue and Shelby Street in Detroit. The store's motto: "It's easy to pay - the People's way!" "The People's way" was to allow shoppers to buy everything from cameras to jewelry to furniture on no-interest credit - and it proved to be a success. The building being torn down replaced the original store. The chain spread to Cleveland, Indianapolis and other cities. In 1955, Wineman's grandson Henry, then the company's chairman, told the Free Press: "No matter how big People's grows, there will always be the same warm-hearted atmosphere as of old. For People's will never be too big to be human." But it was too big to stay in business, and in 1959, People's merged with the State Sample Co. department store. The company filed for bankruptcy 10 years later. Plans to resurrect it never panned out, mostly because of People's debts. The building housed various government offices from the mid-1960s until the mid-1990s. Other than large advertisements plastered on its windowless side, the building has sat unused since. That was a brief background, but there have been reputable blogs that have done much more thorough histories of it. (Message edited by rhymeswithrawk on March 05, 2007) | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5185 Registered: 10-2003 |
Rhymeswithrawk, could you post a link to that article? | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 361 Registered: 11-2005 |
'fraid not, Lmich. It ran in January, so you have to pay to get at it now. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 362 Registered: 11-2005 |
It's the top item on the search here if you want to buy, though. http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-sear ch/we/Archives?s_site=freep&f_ site=freep&f_sitename=Detroit+ Free+Press&p_theme=gannett&p_p roduct=FP&p_action=search&p_fi eld_base-0=&p_text_base-0=detr oit+commerce+building&Search=S earch&p_perpage=10&p_maxdocs=2 00&p_queryname=700&s_search_ty pe=keyword&p_sort=_rank_%3AD&p _field_date-0=YMD_date&p_param s_date-0=date%3AB%2CE&p_text_d ate-0=-3qzM | ||
Flybydon Member Username: Flybydon Post Number: 85 Registered: 01-2005 |
  | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3761 Registered: 08-2004 |
Thanks Flybydon! This gives us our first true indication of the footprint area that we are talking about. I mentioned that the Commerce Building took up 1/3 of the whole site, but as others mentioned, it looks more like 1/2 of the site. When you look at that whole trapezoid shaped site, and think of all of it at the height of the former Commerce Building, then it will have considerable mass (even though much of it is a parking garage). It also gives us a nice idea of the general size of the retail area (although part of it will end up a garage ramp to the upper floors). Although we haven't seen rederings of the back side of The Griswold, it appears that by its girth, that there may be some Condo's in the back side of the building overlooking Capitol Park (generally) above the level of the buildings taking up the back side of the block. Kinda makes you wonder if this same scenario (ground floor retail, parking levels, condos on top) could be done to the triangle corner of the Lafayette Building block, since there are so few windows facing towards Campus Martius on that side of the Lafayette Building. (Note: I realize that the legendary American and Lafayette Coney Islands are there, but they could always be incorporated into a grander structure.) | ||
Beantown Member Username: Beantown Post Number: 43 Registered: 10-2006 |
Yesterday was so beautiful, how could I not go to the Detroit Commerce Building / Book-Cadillac area and take some pics: http://www.flickr.com/gp/58485 135@N00/9972Kt (Message edited by beantown on March 14, 2007) | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 684 Registered: 10-2006 |
Gistok, just for everyone's information, retail (as in the ground floor of the Griswold) usually is about 60 feet from the front of the building to the back. Leaving forty feet (for a total of 100' to the alley), or plenty of distance for a parking ramp and a service corridor behind the retail. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 403 Registered: 11-2005 |
Beantown, that one with the People's Outfitting Co. and the Penobscot is really, really neat!!! | ||
Nyburgher Member Username: Nyburgher Post Number: 114 Registered: 10-2006 |
So two thirds of the block will be occupied by a parking garage. Detroit will suck. This type of thing might be the best you can do for now but it's sad. It also doesn't take into account the reason a person would want to live in a city in the first place. I imagine that the buyers are expecting all kinds of shopping nightlife and convenience to pop up. The chances of that happening without adding large numbers of residents is far out. you just can't reach those numbers every third building as a garage. I have some memory of how many residents it took to breath life into lower Manhattan, there are thousands and it still has long way to go. The current fad seems to be for every city to renovate or build a few fancy buildings that add a few thousand people into empty downtowns and expect NY to pop up. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3824 Registered: 08-2004 |
Nyburger get a grip! You don't even live here, so quit your bitching. This building will improve the STREET WALL. One thing that preservationists have learned... "not every building can be saved"... this is the same mantra used by The National Trust. Even Preservation Wayne, Detroit's leading historic preservation society is happy with the results (the saving of the Book-Cadillac plus an attractive mixed use building behind it). If that building didn't come down, there's a good chance that the entire Book-Cadillac deal could have fallen thru. Detroit doesn't suck, but your continual griping about this building sure does... (Message edited by Gistok on March 16, 2007) | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 476 Registered: 03-2006 |
well put Gistok...I say this as a staunch preservationist | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3825 Registered: 08-2004 |
Thanks Apbest... I toned it down a bit... I wish to stay "above the fray"... | ||
Apbest Member Username: Apbest Post Number: 477 Registered: 03-2006 |
haha...I had some choice words as well, not for nyburgher specifically but for the absurd, yet apparently popular sentiment upon which they were based. (but not living in Detroit makes it a wee bit worse) however, I suppose this post sort of negates the point of revising my previous comments whatever | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 533 Registered: 11-2005 |
All gone now. Bye-bye. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 344 Registered: 03-2006 |
Went down there around 7pm Saturday night, nothing bu a pile of dirt. Also it was great to see, on a weekend evening, a lot of workers still on the job site at the Book Cadillac | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 535 Registered: 11-2005 |
While I am incredibly excited about the Griswold project - and know there was nothing that could have been done with the People's Outfitting Co. building - I was sad to see the building go. Now, like so much of Detroit's history, it's "looooooooooooooooong gone." The B-C is lit up like a Christmas tree day in and day out. They better be working on weekends if they hope to get it done by fall 2008. | ||
Eastsidedame Member Username: Eastsidedame Post Number: 19 Registered: 12-2006 |
This is so sad. I live in Houston and there's even been talk about demolishing the Astrodome because there's (two) new stadiums, now. This city has NO pre-1960 movie houses left, a couple of old hotels that they made into lofts. (They tore down the best one: the Shamrock). The new stuff they've built is built crappy and cheap. I can go out outside right now, take my fingernail and make the stucco-crap brick on my house crumble into dust. There's not a a square angle anywhere in my 1980s-era "master planned community" home. Nobody seems to care about the aesthetic beauty of Detroit anymore. Guess it's hard when times are so tough; but exploitation to make a buck? There's got to be a better way! Please, please, Detroit. Treasure the beautiful architecture you have left. Every cornice, every column, every oven fired brick is precious. I know things are tough, that's why I moved here a long time ago. But once people have a reason to live in Detroit (i.e. JOBS, JOBS and more JOBS), you'll mourn all that was lost and can never be recovered. Detroit will look like a McCity, pre-fab, sterile and available anywhere else in the sun belt. | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 279 Registered: 10-2003 |
Eastside, I appreciate what you are saying and am glad you said it. But that sentiment aside, Detroit won't have to worry about not having any pre-1960's architecture left. The historic preservation movement has REALLY taken hold in the last decade. As mentioned in another thread, even Illitch is starting to understand it. And in yet ANOTHER recent thread, someone made the point that preservation is actually a profitiable investment here now. I think we'll have plenty of beautiful architecture around here for years to come, but your post is great because the more, the better. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 542 Registered: 11-2005 |
Like I said, Eastside, I wasn't happy to see it go. But it is important to realize any chance to save the People's Outfitting Co. Building was lost when the inside was gutted and turned into crappy cubicle office space. The outside has some lovely terra cotta, but even it underwent tacky-ass "upgrades" in the 1980s. Yes, Detroit has an abundance of historical structures. Yes, many of them can be saved. Sadly, many of them cannot. Driving down Brush Park, you look at all of these 1800s-era homes that look burned-out and ready to collapse. But they're not torn down. Why? Not because of neglect in all cases, but because there are people with money who are willing to drop millions into saving them. I think Brush Park might be the greatest example of where Detroit's history meets its future: Houses that are more than 100 years old next to new condos next to a new baseball stadium next to lots and lots of vacant lots that serve as a reminder of what will happen if the city's history is not saved. | ||
Busterwmu Member Username: Busterwmu Post Number: 368 Registered: 09-2004 |
photos anyone? | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2237 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: No, but its highly indicative when someone in Skulker's professional position has an attitude like this. Never mind that he's a self-described "advocate" for preservation. People who really do want to succeed and create positive change won't tolerate such negativity--especially from someone in a city government job. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 8650 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: This is an anonymous forum. Skulker is posting his personal opinions in a manner that he wants to personally. His posts are not indicitive of his professional behavior. At work I wouldn't call someone a douchebag. On this forum I would. Two separate entities. Maybe, just maybe people like Skulker (and myself) are fed up with hearing theories on what should be done from people that moved hundreds/thousands of miles away. We are tied into the current situation and reality in the city while so many preach about what we should do regardless of the financial and logistical issues faced. This forum has gone to shit partially because it is now overtaken with people stating what Detroit should do to make it good enough for them to maybe, one day move back as well as the "'member how great Detroit was crowd." Detroit suffers from lack of investment, lack of jobs, lack of people. lack of educated citizens, etc. Maybe, just maybe if the people that loved Detroit so much on a forum actually decided to move to or invest in the city there may be a day when there will be a financial reality that will allow everyones pipe dreams to come true. Until then people like Skulker will do a lot more for this city than the hundreds on here that state what Detroit should do or used to do. All of the dreaming and reminsicing doesn't put one nickel into the budget for a project. It must be easy identifying ways to save a city from miles away since so many on here are certain they can do it from NY, DC, Texas, Cali, etc, etc. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 2238 Registered: 10-2003 |
Jt1, I don't disagree. But what you need to consider is that the people who have moved away, moved away for reasons. This doesn't mean they don't think Detroit isn't worth "saving" or "fixing". Obviously, if we didn't care, we wouldn't bother to post here. I turned down job offers in Detroit because I knew I wouldn't be happy there in the long-term. I don't believe I should have to drive to work or to get a loaf of bread if I live in a large city. My field is also related to construction, and the market in Southeast Michigan has been relatively slow compared to the rest of the nation. That's just me. Others have their own reasons. Where others have advocated endeavors to make Detroit attractive to tourists and suburbanites, I have always argued the city should aim to make itself work for those who already live and work there. I don't believe in "luring" people. I do believe in saving one of America's great cities, and creating a worthwhile sense of place. There are already too many Houstons and Disneylands to sacrifice Detroit for another. But I think it's naive to expect people to invest in the city before things change for the better. The City has a responsibility to create a better environment for investment, and this is what seems to go neglected. The repeated subsidies of building demolitions, unbalanced budgets, disingenuous means of redevelopment, and failure to advance on public transit, among other policy failures, do not serve to create an atmosphere in which an investor will earn an positive ROI. The people who moved away are not the ones culpable here--they have merely acted rationally in response to the environment presented to them. While there are many admirable efforts happening in Detroit, it's time to stop blaming those who left in search of greener pastures. We're seeing the forest from the outside, while you guys are holed up in the same tree. I would argue that people who left are acutely aware of things that need to be fixed in Detroit, which is why they left. Perhaps if some of the things we take for granted in our new locales were addressed in Detroit, instead of downplaying us all as ignorant, the City might stop bleeding population and jobs. (Message edited by DaninDC on March 26, 2007) | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3711 Registered: 10-2003 |
Thanks, Jt1, that summarizes my sentiments and stance exactly... | ||
Rsa Member Username: Rsa Post Number: 1061 Registered: 10-2003 |
very well said jt1. | ||
Swingline Member Username: Swingline Post Number: 758 Registered: 11-2003 |
It's too easy to attack opinions just because they come from people who don't live here anymore. There's plenty of people who do live here who don't know what the fuck they're talking about. Are all the folks up in here who opine so perceptively about Detroit automatically disqualified about discussing urban issues that arise in New York or Chicago? I don't think so. It is possible to express cogent points of objection without dropping f-bombs on former residents who dare to suggest that we not undervalue our current built environment. Save the f-bombs for the folks who constantly validate their flight from the city by droning on about how wonderful it used to be in Detroit until CAY screwed everything up and forced them to leave. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3917 Registered: 08-2004 |
... still guys... that's no way to talk to a lady! Even Rasputin had more manners than that!! | ||
Matt_the_deuce Member Username: Matt_the_deuce Post Number: 717 Registered: 10-2003 |
Gistok - that's currently up for review. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3712 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: The next block over is of course the BC and one block the other way is Campus Martius Park. She's talking out her ass in huge generalizations from 1,000s of miles away and making disparaging remarks without much basis. Eastsidedames post was ill informed, condescending and without much merit. That was the main reason I attacked it. The fact that it was from someone who wanted to lecture Detroiters on how to run the City she abandoned many years ago makes it even worse and gives me even more ammo for the big FY. Sorry if I don't wear kid gloves but I am sick of the pandering and generally low standards to which this forum has sunk. And, Gistok, no he didn't. Remember he reveled in the fact that a woman was raped by a professional athlete? I don't find that to be very mannerly. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 4273 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Please tell me you aren't mourning the loss of the most ill-conceived baseball parks ever foisted upon the Major Leagues? The abandonment and subsequent demolition of Shibe Park was a tragedy. Knocking down the Astrodome will be a mercy killing. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 3918 Registered: 08-2004 |
Skulker, you're right! I forgot about that one! | ||
Dds Member Username: Dds Post Number: 180 Registered: 10-2006 |
quote: Not only about Detroit, but Houston, too. | ||
Dds Member Username: Dds Post Number: 181 Registered: 10-2006 |
quote: They don't even use the Astrodome for the Livestock and Rodeo anymore. I'm pretty sure they have more events at the Silverdome. Jelk is correct. The only thing good about the Astrodome was the old scoreboard, but that was taken out in the early 90's, and the fact that for $2 at Randall's you could get into the stadium for some much needed AC for a few hours. | ||
Erikd Member Username: Erikd Post Number: 830 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: quote: quote: Skulker may have been a little harsh with his responses, but I completely agree with his point. The posts by Nyburgher, Eastsidedame and DaninDC imply that the Commerce building is simply being torn down to make way for more parking, but they are ignoring the entire development. The Commerce Building demolition is just one part of a large project. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 565 Registered: 11-2005 |
The posts by Nyburgher, Eastsidedame and DaninDC imply that the Commerce building is simply being torn down to make way for more parking, but they are ignoring the entire development. And ignoring reality. Anyone who lives in or works in Detroit and is familiar with the People's Outfitting Co. Building knows that it was far from holding the structure-that-most-needs-savi ng title. When it ceased being the People's Outfitting building and became the Commerce Building, its fate was sealed. Don't believe me? Detroitblog has some great history and background of the building and the department store that once resided there as well as what it looked like on the inside. Check out the shot with all of the cubicles: http://www.detroitblog.org/?p= 423 Not exactly gorgeous or historic. Without its death, the B-C would be jeopardized and few buildings are as important to Detroit's future as the new B-C. If you look at those photos on Detroitblog, you'd see that the building needed the kind of gutting that the B-C did, and there is neither the investment nor the interest in doing two projects of that magnitude right next to each other. If they're so worked up about a modernized "eh" structure, I can't imagine how worked up they would have been had they been around for the Madison-Lenox or Statler demos. | ||
Eastsidedame Member Username: Eastsidedame Post Number: 29 Registered: 12-2006 |
I've read the comments about my recent remarks. I had a great education at Detroit and Detroit area public and Catholic schools, as well as WSU, so you won't hear any F-bombs here. Dds didn't indicate exactly how or provide any evidence to show my post was ill-informed about either Houston or Detroit, so I can't speak to that. Though Dds is perfectly correct about the Astrodome, and this is precisely my point: We don't use it anymore so LET'S JUST GET RID OF IT! Jelk did not elaborate on why "knocking down the Astrodome will be a mercy killing." It is still a tourist attraction, believe it or not. Incidentally, not everyone wants to raze it. There is discussion of turning it into a shopping mall/entertainment center type facility. This is still in debate. Jelk, have you SEEN it up close? Actually been in it? Do you live in Houston? Danindc, you are absolutely right in your rebuttal of JT1's diatribe. I wish I could have put it as eloquently. My dad was a bricklayer in Detroit his whole life and worked on a lot of buildings. I developed my appreciation for architecture in Detroit and just feel sad to see a lot of that history go. Sentimental? Too bad, I'm entitled. When I get e-mails from people telling me they're tearing down this building or that, I can't help but feel a twinge of sadness. Not everything that is old is worth saving, granted. And the building in question, in its irreparably altered state may be included. But much of what was good is now gone, and that's a fact. And yes, you were quite right about investments/businesses in Detroit. No ROI here without the city's dedication to attracting business. It's not even a calculated risk. And now Comerica, which started in Detroit, is gone..to Texas, ironically. Can you blame them? If you've ever run a business, then do the math. Texas doesn't even have a state income tax! How can Detroit compete with that? And that's NOT an insult, just a thoughtful serious question: HOW? And regarding Skulker's comments: "She's talking out her ass in huge generalizations from 1,000s of miles away and making disparaging remarks without much basis. Eastsidedames post was ill informed, condescending and without much merit." What's disparaging about asking for historic preservation? And I'm just ASKING here, not mandating. Whom did I insult? And, it's only 1 thousand miles away...1200 to be exact. And what "merit" do I need to post here. An Urban Planning degree? I have a right to my opinion no matter where I live, whether you like it or not. And like Nyburgher and Danindc, I've lived in other places besides Detroit, so at least we have a frame of reference. That bugs you, I know. "That was the main reason I attacked it. The fact that it was from someone who wanted to lecture Detroiters on how to run the City she abandoned many years ago makes it even worse and gives me even more ammo for the big FY." Ah, now we get to your real motivation. Did I touch a nerve, there, Skulker? You don't know anything about me or why I'm not there. I did not leave Detroit...Detroit left me. Unlike you, evidently, there were thousands of people who lost jobs or couldn't get one after graduation and were FORCED to leave. Count me among them. I miss Detroit and care about it. I stick up for Detroit on a regular basis and am proud to do so. If I "wanted to lecture Detroiters on how to run the City", I would have. Like perhaps electing a proven, successful businessperson for mayor next time, instead of a second-generaton gimme on the government payroll. That would be a step in the right direction. But no, all I did was make a plea for historic renovation. A real "advocate" would know one when he heard one. If Detroit wants to blow itself up and start all over again, I can't stop it. All I can say, from my experience in living in other cities, is "told ja". If I've offended your tender sensibilities....sorry, see, I don't wear kid gloves, either. "I am sick of the pandering and generally low standards to which this forum has sunk." Well just scroll on by....it will get better. Another once great Detroit is building gone. Replaced by something better? Hope so. We'll see. And you might want to ask Danindc for some Spackle for that chip on your shoulder. | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 567 Registered: 11-2005 |
And you might want to ask Danindc for some Spackle for that chip on your shoulder. Oooooh, you got served! But Eastside makes great points, gang. Kid's got spunk. You gotta like that. And I don't think Detroit necessarily wants to blow itself up. L. Brooks Patterson wants to, though. | ||
Skulker Member Username: Skulker Post Number: 3727 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: So do you get emails that celebrate the remarkable restorations of buildings, like, oh say, the Book Cadillac? Or do you only have a 1,200 mile view that is skewed and not accurate based on sensationalistic panic? Based on your post I have to conclude the latter. quote: Interestingly enough, the business community supported Kilpatrick over a person with a stronger business background. He has gotten very high marks from the business and development community for cutting through red tape and adopting a very pro development stance. Perhaps the newspapers in Texas didn't report that. quote: Actually, I have gone through two periods of unemployment where doing menail labor while having a post graduate degree was necessary to make it through tough times, so....blow it out your ass. Detroit hasn't given up on me and I haven't given up on Detroit. Here's am idea. You left. You started a new life. You live in a new city. Forget Detroit and let those that are here and dealing with the reality everyday do what is necessary. Either that or if you are unable to resist her siren song, take the time to form useful, informed opinions, not kneejerk Henny Penny all the buildings are falling down reactions. quote: Well, yet again, your post is condescending and ill informed. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 2414 Registered: 12-2004 |
Okay, Skulker - don't edit yourself. Tell us how you really feel. LOL! | ||
Swiburn Member Username: Swiburn Post Number: 86 Registered: 07-2006 |
I enjoy Skulker's posts, and I will tell Eastside dame that Detroit's elected officials are certainly appreciating its' architectural history a lot more now than say 20-30 years ago. And let's face it, they and the Illitch's are the bottom line in all of this. It's just amazing to see the Book Cadillac restored! There's an esthetic sense now in the city that's been kind of lost for many years. But this is true for most cities in the U.S. New York almost tore down Grand Central Station in the late l970s. I do city historic preservation and community development block grant work. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 417 Registered: 03-2006 |
Work is progressing nicely on this project. The big pile of dirt is gone and excavating work is underway. They have dug out a huge hole and have a lot of workers at the site. Pics coming soon. | ||
Kenp Member Username: Kenp Post Number: 419 Registered: 03-2006 |
   | ||
Scs100 Member Username: Scs100 Post Number: 872 Registered: 12-2006 |
Good shots. Nice to see them break ground there. | ||
Andyguard73 Member Username: Andyguard73 Post Number: 229 Registered: 03-2006 |
Thanks for the picks Ken! |
