Lafayette Building Slated for Renovation

[RustTown]

True, but there can be exceptions when you provide more square footage. What is weird about this is that the floor heights of the Building are relatively high (13' which makes for 11-12' ceilings) which make for better office space. The floors in the tower get progressively shorter in height which is better suited for residential use. So, this does seem a bit backwards.

I'm just glad that Susan is slowly but surely bringing this building back, which was once almost completely vacant save for the falcons in the roof, some telecommunications equipment, and a few tenants on the first few floors (the gallery floors).

[detroitfan]

I haven't been in this building but I imagine the H shape due the light courts doesn't make for very effiecent office space. So even though tower floors are smaller they're more open. I figure they'll make it like the Park Shelton which has somewhat simliar shape to the building

http://www.theparkshelton.com/floorplans_index.htm

[Allan]

Honestly, I don't know what I'd do with a whole floor of living space in the tower. Haha.

I remember the early 1990s when the building was nearly vacant. I remember riding by on the people mover and wondering why it was vacant, and why they couldn't turn it into apartments.

[rbdetsport]

I can not believe that there has not been any news about the Lafayette. Is the developer still stuck in the whole window thing? Anything happening with this project?

I KNOW I KNOW THIS IS DETROIT!!!!!

[RustTown]

Dude, calm down. Are you going to spam every recent post?

[rbdetsport]

And you could not have sent me a PM instead. Ok, thats sweet Lmichigan.....

[Allan]

Calm down, rbdetsport. Developments take a large amount of time to put together. You've got to evaluate what's already existing, decide how many units to put in, draw up the plans, bid the plans, meet with the city, get permits, etc. Not to mention the fact that you need to put together a funding package, which is typically composed of funds, subsidies, and tax credits from several sources (anywhere from 1-25 different sources). On top of all that, there's no telling what unexpected obstacles you'll run into once they're digging into the building. Unexpected obstacles mean higher costs...higher costs mean financing issues.

[rbdetsport]

Calm down, rbdetsport. Developments take a large amount of time to put together. You've got to evaluate what's already existing, decide how many units to put in, draw up the plans, bid the plans, meet with the city, get permits, etc. Not to mention the fact that you need to put together a funding package, which is typically composed of funds, subsidies, and tax credits from several sources (anywhere from 1-25 different sources). On top of all that, there's no telling what unexpected obstacles you'll run into once they're digging into the building. Unexpected obstacles mean higher costs...higher costs mean financing issues.

Thanks for the advice Allan

[rbdetsport]

Finally it is back in the news!!!!!

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?newsId=7553

[Zissou]

For me the best part about that article is the fact that they will be sharing parking with the Book Cadillac instead of building seperate structures. It appears as though people are beginning to use their heads.

[rooster8]

If you read the Crain's article (north of Michigan and east of Shelby) it seems that the parking structure might take the place of the People's Outfitting Co. building.

[rbdetsport]

If you read the Crain's article (north of Michigan and east of Shelby) it seems that the parking structure might take the place of the People's Outfitting Co. building.

Well this is the area so that may be a possibilty, but I don't think that will happen. If it does I will be angry because looking at the ariel view, there are many places to put a parking garage.

[RustTown]

If they truly plan to share it with the revitalized Book-Cadillac, than the days of the People's building are numbered, since we know that hotels will not even let there patrons walk half a block to the parking garage. I guess it really begs the question is it acceptable to lose one historic building to save another? IMO, no, not if it doesn't have to be lost, like in this case where there is a surface lot that could be built on literally across the street from the Lafayette, and a half-a-blocks walk from the B-C.

[andrew.w]

If a parking ramp was set on the surface lot directly west of the Lafayette building, there is a clear shot between the two buildings to the north that leads right to the entrance of the Book-Cadillac. It seems like there could be some way of building a ramp here so that that the walk from the hotel to that site would be barely longer than the distance across the road to the Peoples Building. There would also be an oportunity to make that small area across the street more pleasant for when people walk out of the hotel's front door.

[RustTown]

I don't get what you're saying. Hotels will not let their patrons walk even half a block in an urban area, especially past an abandoned building. On top of that, barring building a skybridge through the People's Building, there is no way to directly connect it to the Book-Cadillac.

[Ramcharger]

I had questioned the placement of this parking structure last month after reading a Det. News article about the Book Cadillac. Allan pointed out that it said "east of the structure at Michigan & Shelby".

The building at Michigan & Shelby is the Detroit Commerce Building. It says east of the structure at Michigan & Shelby, so it sounds to me like they are building it at the NW corner of Michigan & Griswold, where the old Kinsel drug store was.

[andrew.w]

I don't get what you're saying. Hotels will not let their patrons walk even half a block in an urban area, especially past an abandoned building. On top of that, barring building a skybridge through the People's Building, there is no way to directly connect it to the Book-Cadillac.

What?

Isn't the People's Building the green box?

I was reffering to the red surface parking lot.

Sorry for the confusion.

[RustTown]

Yes, it is where you drew the green box, but they are talking about the parking lot next door to People's, not the one you have outlined, I don't believe.

Oh, I just saw Ramchanger's post. I really hope that the original article is right and they are talking about building this thing stretching north to south (roughly given the skewed street grid of downtown) instead of east to west where they'd almost certainly take down People's/Commerce Building.

[Ramcharger]

I agree with you Andrew. The site you are proposing makes much more sense. There could be skywalks connecting both the Book Cadillac and the Lafayette building. Since it

[RustTown]

I have a feeling that that particular lot probably serves both the Holiday Inn Express and the courthouse. I bet you you the owner of the lot was probably asking too much, as well. They'd have to build a structure that would support a renovated Lafayette and Book Cadillac as well as the Holiday In Express and the courthouse. That would have to be a huge garage.

[hudkina]

That lot sure doesn't look like it serves the Holiday Inn Express. It's definitely a no early release lot most likely used by workers at the courthouse and surrounding blocks. It looks like the Holiday Inn Express uses the garage or lot across Washington Blvd. for its guests.

If the owner won't sell it for a reasonable price, the city should use eminant domain to take control. Especially if the only other option is to tear down the Outfitters building.

[Jin Kim]

Tearing down People's building to build a parking structure would be beyond lame, considering options that doesn't require tearing down of a building exist.

[detroitfan]

That lot sure doesn't look like it serves the Holiday Inn Express. It's definitely a no early release lot most likely used by workers at the courthouse and surrounding blocks. It looks like the Holiday Inn Express uses the garage or lot across Washington Blvd. for its guests.

If the owner won't sell it for a reasonable price, the city should use eminant domain to take control. Especially if the only other option is to tear down the Outfitters building.

Looks like that lot is owned by the federal gov I doubt the city would win in a game of eminant domain against them

Posted on DetroitYes

The better question would be why not build a parking deck directly west on the parking lot servicing the Federal Courthouse? The answer lies in that the feds control that parking lot and are looking long term at a new courthouse and other federal offices there. The lot is unavailable for purchase

[RustTown]

Even if it wasn't owned by the feds, do you really think Detroit city government is competent enough, or brave enough to even do that? The city always seems to settle for less because it feels that it must. How sad.

[detroitfan]

It has nothing to do with settling. The Michigan Supreme Court overtunned it's Poletown decision land can't be claimed under eminent domain and given another private party