RustTown

Not to be rude, but I really don't care if you've posted positive things about Lansing architecture as it has no bearing on my opinion of the Ann Arbor skyline. Even more so, I think Ann Arbor is a great town, skyline architecture aside, which I place very little importance on, anyway. And I'm confused as to why you want to keep bringing that city into the Ann Arbor discussion.

Nice! Look, you can even see One Kennedy Square.

A little testy, I see? Really, I didn't mean in harm, simply stating my opinion. I will stop using "downtown" since a few are so incredibly picky about the word, and simply use "skyline." I'm not a big fan of much of Ann Arbor's skyline (especially the 60's additions), and I'm not going to apologize for that.

I kind of like it without the silos. It makes the architectural-interesting Chene Park canopy more visible, though that's going soon, too. But then, the riverfront will get a smaller canopy to the left (west) when Rivard Plaza is constructed. A fair trade, I guess, considering what else is to come.

I wasn't talking physicall spillover. I'm talking about Highland Park actively marketing itself as immigrant-friendly. Maybe "spillover" was the wrong word.

The Michigan Capitol rotunda, looking down at the glass-block floor.

A cool photo I found, and was labeled "The first automobile parade," moving down Washington Square in 1903. I wonder if it was the first ever? Hmm...

I completely agree. Look at how in Toronto, for instance, a city layed out a lot like Detroit, the business nodes along Yonge (i.e. North York) turned out. I'm not saying that it is necessary for HP to turn out like that, but a line running down Woodward would literally transform the city into something much better, and much more authentically Highland Park, like it used to be.

Model T Plaza is so far incredibly set back from Woodward. I don't even get it, at all. In fact, the setback is worse than in some of the sprawlburbs, and especially for a shopping plaza that size. I wonder why they built it so incredibly far back from Woodward? Either that, or my memory is bad and it isn't as far back as I think it is.

I wonder if in 20 years Highland Park will be a low-density, suburban-styled city of about 10,000? That's the direction it seems to be going in. I don't even think they know what they are shooting for, which can be a huge problem. Does anyone know if they have a masterplan? If not, that would be something crucial for them to have, regardless of whether the enclave heads toward a suburban layout, or and a more urban one.

I really wonder when we are going to see Highland Park turn around? It is near a point that if the population continues to decline, there will literally be no one left. I hope the new housing that is being built pays off, though I'd wish they'd get away with trying to build these new houses on such large lots. A physically small city like Highland Park, especially, can not get away with trying to bring the suburbs to the city. This can be compromised in a much larger city at Detroit with huge tracts of empty land to develop all different styles and function of housing, but every last piece of land in Highland Park must be maximized if they hope to rebuild the tax base. I would hope they would take an incredibly active role in trying to catch some of Hamtramck's immigrant spillover. That really is the difference between the two, at the moment. Immigrants are what saved Hamtramck from the fate HP has experienced.

I started getting off topic, so you can blame me. You make a good point. The perception of the city, along with the actual crime that helps strengthen the negative perception really needs to be attacked on both fronts. There is, indeed, a culture of lawlessness large enough in the city where I can definitely see why people point to Detroit as being different. I think the problem is that many want to simply put more cops on the streets, and only attacking the actual crime is nothing more than putting on band-aid after band-aid. The law-abidding citizens of Detroit, which are the vast majority despite popular believe among upper class Detroit and suburbia alike, have to be willing to go the distance in taking bake their city. Lawlessness is only created when you allow it to exist. Detroit has been a tough and city with a significantly lawless element since the early 1900's. It's going to take a lot to eat away at that negative element, but it can be done. What the law-abidding citizenry can do is stop indirectly feeding the negative element by their non-chalant attitude. This "crap happens" attitude among the law-abidding citizenry has to change first and foremost, before the already biased outside perception is ever going to change.

These days? Saginaw, Flint, and Detroit have all had too high levels urban warfare (as I and many other's call it) for years now. The United States has been a violent nation from its inception, mix that with race, class, and poverty and you create an excellent breeding ground for this type or urban warefare. Man, Saginaw has such potential. In that second photo I can see a small theater still in operation. There is not one historic theater still in operation in Lansing. BTW, does anyone know what population Saginaw peaked at? From books I've read, Saginaw was actually a major Michigan city with a lot of influence for quite some time. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was marginally larger than Lansing in 1910 from and old book I have.

The thing is, those with the means in Detroit need to start taking these projects over instead of just moving away. One of the biggest things facing the city is that there is a huge disconnect between the poor and the middle and upper classes. Besides living within the city boundaries, Detroit's middle and upper classes seem to have little to do with the city. They send their kids to private or charter schools, they shop in the suburbs... I don't mean to place all or even most of the blame on them, but this is a problem facing society in general in terms of city revitalization. Everyone wants to wait for "someone else" to come in from the outside and restart these abandoned retail areas, and when they don't they move leaving the poor, who have not the time or the means to fix these places up. Civic pride in most of Detroit (and most large cities in general) is shot.

I agree. Much of downtown Ann Arbor skyline looks incredibly dated now (Tower Plaza, University Towers, Maynard House/Apartments, Dahlman Campus Inn...) Hopefully, most of the new tower proposal will come through to offset this ugly era in high-rises.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what they are doing. And yes, 125 W. Allegan isn't a main address, so it's not listed on the assessor website, but it would be directly across from the Boji Tower, so it is the Farnum.

Tolling, as described to me by the former head of the Lansing EDC, is a way to keep a project alive, but also a way to keep it on the backburner meaning it's a little nudge, not a huge push towards getting it done. This is hopeful considering it looked like it had pretty much been cancelled just a year or two ago. I'm not sure what it going on, but I remember something saying something about a building at 125 W. Allegan, which would be either the Farnum, or the small, two-story building directly to the east.

lol, that was more confusing than my question. I need a map.

I don't agree that any parts of the avenue are "crappy," though there are quite a few sections underuitlized. Unlike every other major road in the city, I don't recall their being ANY abandoned properties, if even the retail vacancy is rather high on the east end of the district at the moment. There are very few blighted properties, as well. The only really bad properties I can think of are two giant houses-converted-apartment structures next door to the House of Kabobs that probably need to be torn down. It could be such and awesome avenue with lots of potential. It already has the basic building blocks in place: on-street parking, tree-lines, slow-moving, historic lighting which made a huge difference, streets and curbs are in good shape, ample street scapping, never trash-strewn...It would make for an awesome avenue and front door.

LA Dave, you don't have to quote a picture post. Wolverine, you don't consider where Plaza Towers, Maynard House...downtown Ann Arbor? Just driving through central Ann Arbor, it would seem that it would be hard to define "downtown." Are you talking the central business district as opposed to greater downtown? It's one of those rare Michigan cities where the central city all seems to connect easily.

I've always thought it would be cool to see the already relatively stable East Michigan Avenue taken to the next level with some low-rise residential infill on some of the small lots. I'm talking 3-5 story, narrow residential buildings with ground floor retail. With the growth of continued growth of Sparrow, I'd really like to see some good infill on Michigan Avenue from downtown all the way to to the freeway.

Wolvie, Is that lot where St. Nicholas Place was originally supposed to go not too long ago before the city killed the plan because it was too ambitious?

I'd definitely like to see both of those, as well, but for the moment, it is far easier to push it south where they can aquire land much more easily. Eventually, they hope to push it to Holt and connect it up with paths, there. The problems they have with pushing it north from where it currently ends (and this would be true if they decided to go north on the westbank, as well) is that the property owners have already showed a front against it. The area to the north is mostly residential with a lot of backyards on the river, even some with boatlaunches. Many wrongly believe that it would bring crime to the area, so the city first has to sell riverfront property owners on the idea. The reason the trail is the way it is now is because most of the properties that the River Trial currently runs through were once dilapidate industrial properties, and not many residential properties.

To get this back on something less controversial... At the meeting, last night, the council also voted to begin taking the first steps in extending the River Trail southwards from Potter Park to Hawk Island Park. This is great to hear, as it is a quality of life issue. I hope they one day find a way to take the River Trail westward through the Moores River Drive area. That's going to be tricky, but it can be creatively done.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I most definitely disagree with you. I don't think it is unreasonable, as a city entity, to overreach knowing full-well that developers are going to reach just as far if not farther. Asking a developer to fix up sidewalks and other infastructure around their development, regardless of whether the city is Gary of Phoenix, is not unreasonable. In fact, a city is not doing its job if it isn't out to get the best deal possible for its citizens. I know I'm coming off as anti-development, here, but I'm simply trying to offer the viewpoint of where a city needs to stand firm, and when it needs to concede. If you're going to ask city residents to subsidize downtown development, you better be asking the developer, on the other end, to concede something, as well.