Post Number: 1
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:42 pm: || |
I created a plan for a new Detroit Red Wings arena and downtown convention center. I wanted to post some pictures, but they are too big. If you're interested, check them out at my home page Let me know what you think. I'm glad to finally post on this forum, its really interesting
Post Number: 380
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:45 pm: || |
Interesting design. Wish it would be an actual proposal for a new arena, but Illitch is dragging his feet on that so who knows.
Post Number: 672
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:51 pm: || |
I like the design, it'd be cool if someone with money would take notice.
Post Number: 875
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:57 pm: || |
Maybe re-reoute people mover so that it no longer goes right next to the water. Making it shorter will decrease headways and increase ridership.
I would seriously re-think either spanning or removing Michigan Avenue. That would really screw up traffic.
Nice inclusion of public transit line to integrate with MGM, Olympia, Existing People Mover, and Comerica Park. I'd try to move the new transit line station to somewhere closer to the public part of the new casino. That would also serve DTE energy better.
(Message edited by Detroitplanner on January 28, 2007)
Post Number: 2
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 11:06 pm: || |
Certainly in the Convention Center plan Michigan Avenue would be spanned. It would probably be less trouble than routing the Lodge Fwy. under Cobo. I-70 or I-35 (one of the two) runs under the Convention Center in Kansas City too, that is quite a site.
Post Number: 190
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 11:12 pm: || |
is that 1,000,000 sq ft of convention space all on one level? the way you have it split up between a main hall, a pavilion, and an 'east hall' (which appears to be on the west side of the building), it doesn't appear to be that way. preferably, it would all be on one level, i believe that's pretty much a requirement for any addition or replacement.
i am slightly concerned with the proliferation of parking between grand river and your chosen location for a new olympia. i would prefer to see more (or larger) ramps, and more businesses in that area than a bunch of flat lots, which is pretty much what we have now.
your idea for a transit center has merit, although i would prefer to see it as just one part of a larger, multi-use project, and not taking up that entire site by itself.
as for a 'retro' olympia-style arena, good luck. i would be very surprised if it has any resemblance to the olympia, i personally expect something all-new.
Post Number: 4
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 11:39 pm: || |
Thanks for checking out the plan. Nice call about my East/West confusion, I changed that. This building would have 970,000 sq. ft. all on one level, though there would be three different halls. The current Cobo Hall has 700,000 sq. ft., and 100,000 of it is in the basement, which is not ideal.
I've been to a lot of convention centers, and it is extremely rare to have one contiguous hall be 1,000,000 sq. ft; I can't even think of any that big. Usually there is one big main hall and a couple of smaller side halls that can be used alone for smaller conferences or used in conjunction with the big hall for the huge conventions (i.e. auto show), and this is the idea here. The parking in the map is already there in reality. If that can be developed, even better. The transit center certainly could be incorporated into a commercial building as well.
Post Number: 6
|Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 11:55 pm: || |
Love the plan-very thorough and well done- but i can't help notice that you built Olympia where Centaur Bar is. It's not a bad bar but considering how much money they put into that place you might have a time tryin to convince them to move. Just a thought...
Post Number: 467
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 12:11 am: || |
I gotta agree. I would never want to see Park Ave taken away from the positive developments that we are seeing in that direction right now.
This would be fitting on the corner at Woodward & I75, if we could get a cap to connect it with the rest of downtown.
Post Number: 1518
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 12:14 am: || |
I really don't like the fact that your plan would remove the Iodent Building (Centaur Bar) and would Either close off or span many major roads. Wheras leaving the the convention cernter wher it is and expanding into the Cobo Arena and JLA spaces would avoid all of that. and by looking at your map would have a heck of a lot more space available.
Post Number: 191
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 12:18 am: || |
Thank you for the clarification, Schulzte. For some reason i didn't see it that way when i first looked at it. Your explanation makes good sense, as it certainly would be of more use to offer several spaces of different sizes, as long as all can be combined for one mega-show.
I am aware that land is already parking, I was just hoping you weren't proposing acres and acres of permanent parking lots surrounding a new arena. Good to know you weren't. Hopefully it does get developed at some point, should your idea or one like it come to pass.
Post Number: 450
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 12:26 am: || |
What steps would you have to take in order to make this a serious proposal that would actually be considered? I like the plan, the west side of downtown is so lacking that the center here would be a good thing, though there is little space for future expansion. And not to mention we gain some prime real estate on the water. Imagine how much better our skyline would look with high rises in that area.
Post Number: 5
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 12:50 am: || |
All good comments, thanks all for the input. Now first, regarding Mayor sekou. My thinking behind this plan is having JLA/Cobo where it is now is about as bad a place you could have these buildings in Central Detroit. Those buildings can be successful in land elsewhere. That riverfront property could be so much better utilized as Commercial and Residential areas that would increase the tax base substantially. If were going to spend damn near $1 billion on a convention center, build a new one in a better spot rather than upgrading a 45 year old building that needs a ton of repairs as it is.
Sorry about the Centaur Bar there, I hate to knock out a good watering hole. I could either move the site about 100 ft to the West and block Clifford Ave., but I don't know how busy that road is, or if it could be blocked. Also the site could move to the corner of Cass and Adams as well, that looks to have enough room. In any case, this is the general area were there has been discussion of a new arena site.
As far as spanning roads, I didn't mean to make it look like lots of road blocks would be occurring. If Michigan, Bagley, and Third could all be spanned, I think that would allow enough traffic flow.
The street level entrance would be on Third Street, mostly under the span between the main and west hall. Patrons would enter here and go upstairs to the main lobby (shown in yellow). Another entrance would be on Grand River Ave. on the north side of the building. Skywalks would connect the MGM Grand Hotel, a new hotel to be constructed at the old MGM site, the Ramada Inn, the South parking garage, and the Michigan People Mover Station.
Thanks for the comments,
Post Number: 192
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 1:08 am: || |
I do like the idea of clearing up the riverfront, I've always felt JLA and Cobo was not the greatest use of that space. However, after reading some other opinions here and looking at it some more, I'm not entirely certain that's the greatest space for a convention center either, even with spanning various roads. But it is good to see different ideas proposed and discussed.
Post Number: 110
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 7:16 am: || |
Post Number: 114
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 8:34 am: || |
That photo of the old Olympia is awesome.
I no longer follow the NHL but was a season ticket holder for one year at that old barn.
NOT a bad seat in the whole place.
The venue was about as 'intimate' as one wants to be at a fight-filled sport.
Post Number: 17
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 9:56 am: || |
There are a lot of great ideas here. The renderings are very attractive as well. A historical stadium design for a hockey arena would be wonderful.
However, the major problem I see here is the continued emphasis on parking and parking structures. I noticed the prevalence of newer parking structures my last time in Detroit. This trend is a bit disturbing and continued construction of garages is simply unsustainable and detrimental towards any efforts to ever build real mass transit in the region.
Very nice effort though. Your design is appealing and it would be wonderful this arena or something similar could be built. The placement of the current arena was a mistake. Anything new needs to fit in contextually with its surroundings.
Post Number: 41
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 10:18 am: || |
Would so many new parking structures even be necessary? the "New Olympia" would hold 25,000 max. That is nearly 20,000 fewer seats than Comerica Park and 40,000 less than Ford Field. It would seem to me that the existing parking would be able to support that the demand without such a massive increase in parking spaces.
Post Number: 6
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 10:31 am: || |
As I stated earlier, most of that parking could be developed, its just what is there now. There is no big increase in parking with this plan, just a replacement of the two garages that would be removed from the proposed convo. center site. However, some parking needs to be available near a convention center no matter how much mass transit you have. No matter what city you are in, parking near a convention center is important.
I also think if you are going to build a light rail line, it is important that somewhere near the end of your lines you put a park and ride system in it, that way out of towners can park at a train station 30 miles out of town and ride in, making downtown parking less necessary. I think this would be attractive to visitors, as there is nothing worse than navigating downtown big city traffic and parking. Unfortunately, Detroit will NEVER have enough money to have full scale rapid transit throughout the city and suburbs. So you have to focus efforts on getting people into and out of the Downtown area, especially from Metro Airport.
Post Number: 115
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 10:58 am: || |
Do I understand that the amount of acreage or land required to build the new arena is less then many assumed in arena threads here?
I got the impression that hitting a new arena in that arena behind the Fox would be a tight fit.
Am I correct?
Or does the drawing show that this arena would require less land then we might have thought?
We've had a post where JLA was scanned and 'dropped' into space behind the Fox and JLA looked to really take up a lot of land.
(Message edited by emu_steve on January 29, 2007)
Post Number: 55
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 11:03 am: || |
That is great, very creative, thanks!
Post Number: 882
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 11:48 am: || |
How about Cobo 2 mostly on the Grand River, I-96, Park Ave Triangle; with a connection to a smaller space E of DTE? Put the JLA S of Michigan and utilize existing downtown parking such as the MGM garage.
Connect at DPM at the Rosa Parks Transit Center and eliminate the need for the long walk through the parking structure to MGM Grand or DTE?
Post Number: 7
|Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 2:27 pm: || |
The goal of the Arena was to make something more compact than what is typical of new NHL rinks. The big complaint comparing new arenas to old is that seating in the upper levels is so far from the ice. The idea with this arena was to make a more compact seating area, hanging the balcony over the lower bowl and bringing the upper level fans closer. That is why the size of the building would be much smaller than a typical NHL building. This new building would only be 440 ft. long by 312 ft. wide, though it would be much taller with the peaked roof (140 ft compared to 90 ft.). Joe Louis Arena is 550 ft. long by 328 ft. wide. The new proposed arena would seat 20,000 on a footprint typical of a 16,000 seat building.
You may say "Joe Louis is cramped, why make an even smaller building?" The main reason JLA is cramped is because 18,000 fans are all crammed through one concourse and the seating risers are too small. The new arena would have 4 concourses to spread out the fans more and wider risers for more leg room (32").
Hope that makes sense.