I've posted a few construction photos in my 4th/Cornwell and State Districts thread in My City Photos

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=161164

Do you happen to have a map showing the boundaries of the Fourth Ward?

I do not have a map, and I'm somewhat unsure of the Western boundary. I used to think it was 5th, but apparently it's division. I guess that makes sense since division separates downtown from the State/Liberty area. Apartment listings and my friends who live beyond division claim to be in the Kerrytown area, unless the 4th ward actually contains Kerrytown The southern border is obviously Huron since the University is on the other side. The eastern border is a bit staggered, but the historic district goes all the way to Glen, but steps back in along Catherine and up to Ingalls. and then moves along Kingsley, down State to High Street, which connects up with Division. The clump of structures dominated by the nursing school in the Northeast corner including the houses in the court is called Cornwell Place, and that area is not included in the historic district, which might explain all the ample parking up here. But some houses still remain. There used to be this incredible Spanish-Mediterranean style building not far from me, but it was demoed for parking. Only a couple of these interesting apartment buildings remain here in AA, my own being one of them

https://www.aadl.org/gallery/buildings/hhaa069.gif.html

Although as I stare at water beginning to come out from beneath the baseboard, this place needs a little TLC

Another new building to rise!


APPROVED

Construction Start Date: Spring 2009
Completion: 2012
Cost $102 million financed (as always) by private money and gifts.

To be demolished: Surface Parking lot. (Spaces recovered in:addition to Monroe Garage)

To be demolished: Historic contract, violating aluminum panels will be removed from five story section

http://www.plantext.bf.umich.edu/pro...StreetView.jpg

http://www.plantext.bf.umich.edu/pro...StreetView.jpg

Rendering showing how existing buildings will be modified to conform with historic contracts. The aluminum panels were considered a violation, but were never removed after installation.
http://www.plantext.bf.umich.edu/pro...dElevation.jpg


LOCATION
http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/lawquadnew.jpg

More: http://www.plantext.bf.umich.edu/pro...aw/design.html

Most impressive.

BTW, do you happen to have any photos of the stadium renovation?

Amazing. If only UM could get North Campus straightened out into something that doesn't so closely resemble suburban hell, I'd be happy. But I guess this is part of the reason why Law students pay 30k a semester and A and UP students "only" pay 10k.

I hope they can get the stone to match.

Finally those ugly aluminum panels on the side of the Law library addition will get replaced! The "after" rendition looks 100 times better. BTW I lived in the South Quad dorm my first two years at UM (ugly building pictured in the upper left of the aerial view).

LMich, since my exams are done, I'll take a drive on over to the stadium and get some shots. EDIT NVM I haven't drive my car in weeks and the battery is dead. Maybe tomorrow, I'll walk there or after I jump start by car.


You know what really excites me about this project? The fact that there will be people working to build this. This project and the nuclear physics lab at MSU give me hope for Michigan.


BTW, subterranean North campus will get worked out soon. Check out the master plans if you haven't seen them yet. Being a student at TCAUP, I share your pain. I wish the Art and Architecture Building would be replaced. I work in the TCAUP Media Center also, so I have to put up with 8 straight hours several times a week without seeing daylight.

I'm at TCAUP, too, which means I'm sure I've seen you around. I'm first year MUP, how bout you? Damn that stats final I just turned in...damn it all to hell!

But now it's time to celebrate that it's over...even if it is a Monday!

What does the Arts & Architecture Building look like? It couldn't possibly any worse than the Urban & Regional Planning Building at MSU, the irony of the location and design of which is not lost on the students in that program.

I'm a second year planning student, but I also did my undergrad in architecture at TCAUP. I miss my 2 years prior to architecture when I was in LS&A and had ALL my classes on central campus. This is my 4th year in the A&AB, bah. Really it's quite functional if you are in architecture, but the planning department is shoved in dark hallways or any leftover spaces that architecture doesn't occupy. I'd really like to see the whole department moved into the Old Randall physics building, next to SNRE Dana Building. It would be more than appropriate. Unless you are focusing on physical planning, the MUP program really doesn't have much in common with what goes on in that building. U of M's planning program was a lot more policy/financial based than I thought.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3072/...2061b32c_b.jpg

And that's the nice side of the building.


About the new stuff, I think it's nice to de-modernize the one building, but I REALLY wish the new buildings that are being built were modern.

While the architecture on Central Campus is higher quality, at least North Campus is authentic. I don't think U of M needs any more neo-revival-revival-neo-post-revival architecture. And to be honest, I don't even think these new buildings even look that good. Some of the revival stuff from the 20s on campus doesn't even look good either. I don't want any goofy blobitecture or anything like that either, but just something that is well done and modern. The art and architecture building on north campus is bad (I complain about it in my head every few hours, and out loud every few days), but I'd honestly rather be there than in one of these buildings.

Actuallyl, I find the Stern and Cox revivalist architecture quite good on Central. A lot of people can't even distinguish the difference. I've never had a problem with this architecture when it was done well, so I really could care less if all of Central campus vacancies get filled with early century architecture. But there is also some really well done contemporary architecture. I love the new BioMed building and the alumni hall additon looks superb.

University of Michigan expected to purchase Pfizer site in Ann Arbor
by The Ann Arbor News Staff
Thursday December 18, 2008, 11:46 AM
http://www.mlive.com/business/index....n_expecte.html

http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews_i...1808pfizer.pnghttp://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews_i...1908pfizer.png

The University of Michigan is on the brink of striking a deal to buy the Pfizer facilities and bring 2,000 new jobs to its vast north Ann Arbor research campus, sources confirmed this morning.

U-M officials confirm they'll be making an announcement at the Board of Regents meeting this afternoon, with a planned press conference afterward. But they did not disclose the contents of that announcement.

One source who has knowledge of the preliminary discussions said U-M agreed to pay Pfizer $108 million for the site, which will include life sciences, medical and research facilities. U-M expects it will bring 2,000 new jobs over the next decade, the source said.

The facility, which spans 177 acres and includes 2 million square feet of research space, once held 3,600 employees and has been a major employer - and taxpayer - in town for five decades.

Chris Easthope, a former Ann Arbor City Council member who left the council last month, confirmed that U-M is making an announcement that the university is buying the site.

Easthope said the discussions never included the city.

"It will be great jobs are added to the site," Easthope said. "Those jobs will probably not make up for the loss in tax base."

Another source told The News that the university has some limited responsibility for environmental clean-up of the site, expected to cost $12 million. That source also said there will be a thorough due diligence period before anything is concluded.

Ann Arbor City Council member Stephen Rapundalo said city elected officials have been informed that regents will be asked to approve the purchase of the entire 177-acre Pfizer campus.

Rapundalo, executive director of the biosciences industry trade association, MichBio, said there's been talk that the university will use it for the expansion of its medical center. He said he's not sure whether the expansion of anything else - such as U-M's engineering college on nearby North Campus - was being contemplated at this point.

The purchase of the property by the university rather than a private company might have been a disappointment a year ago, but the economic downturn may mean any activity on the property is welcome news.

"The university does provide stability," Rapundalo said. "It's a positive in the near term. But we have also to be concerned about lost property tax revenue. While I applaud the university for its commitment to the community, I wish they had thought about talking to us and the implications before moving toward a decision."

As a public entity, the university will not pay real estate taxes. U-M currently employs about 37,000 people and is the county's largest employer.

The site has emptied over the past two years after the company announced in January 2007 that it would pull up its stakes here.

At the time, 2,100 people worked there. Of those, 851 accepted transfers to other Pfizer sites in Connecticut, California and New York, among others. Another 35 people are working for Pfizer remotely from their local homes, including several who had already been doing that before the closure announcement was made.
PFIZER TAXES

• In 2008 Pfizer's total tax bill was $12.5 million. That money went to the City of Ann Arbor, local schools, county government and other jurisdictions.

• In 2009, that amount is expected to fall to $9.2 million, reflecting the removal of equipment that is subject to property taxes. Mayor John Hieftje said today he expected that those taxes would be paid in full, regardless of the pending sale to U-M.

• In 2010, tax revenue from the 77 acres will disappear, assuming the deal to sell the property to the tax-exempt university goes through. It will leave a $3 million hole in the city's budget.

Pfizer has been in a tax assessment dispute with the city over its property. Pfizer argues that its research facility is only worth half as much as city assessors say, and that it was overvalued by about $119 million for the 2008 tax year.

The difference meant a $2 million loss in property tax revenue. The assessed value, which is supposed equal 50 percent of market value, was $238.4 million.

Pfizer is Ann Arbor's largest taxpayer. Pfizer paid $14.1 million in taxes last year, just under $4 million of which went to the city of Ann Arbor.

Pfizer spokesman Rick Chambers said he can't comment on any announcement U-M may or may not make.

Reported by Tom Gantert, Judy McGovern, Tracy Davis, Dave Gershman, Stefanie Murray and Susan Oppat.

This story is being updated.
© 2008 Michigan Live. All Rights Reserved.

I'm confused, how is U of M creating thousands of new jobs by buying this? Something seems to be missing in this story.

EDIT:

Just found the answer in another article on this:

I guess I was shocked, because I hadn't even imagined that UofM would committ to something so huge. This is huge, if they can make it work. But, I'm confused. Is this essentially an expansion of the UofM Health System or some other department/agency? I guess I'm not getting the university's focus, here.

I think so. I mean 6 years ago there was no such thing as the "Life Sciences Institute" Parts of this department were underneath some other departments (like biology or something).

I think this is an extension of the health system.

BTW, such a large chunk of the health system up by NC makes construction of an intercampus elevated rail system even more necessary. I've saw chunks of it in URS plans (when I was visiting a tour of their offices), and it's not so much about moving students from North to Central, but employees of the health system as well.

what? are you kidding me? this is an awful idea. elevated rail? are you sure you study planning hayward? that would be the worse misfortune to befall the university of michigan. streetcars--yeah, fine, but elevated rail? do you live in the 80's?

lol, what would it be elevated over, parking lots and grass? I can imagine in some specific areas it would make sense for it to be elevated, but in general I think it would make the most sense for it to be on the ground.

Also, in general, for non-bus mass transit, I don't think it has as much of a benefit over buses that it might in other areas. There are no businesses for there to be spin off investment to, and there is no stigma to the UM buses. I think this decision would be totally about which method is the most effective and efficient for moving people. Additional buses could easily end up being the best solution.

Folk, that response was unnecessarily rude. Please find a more appropriate way of expressing your opinion.

Well good or bad, I'm not the one drawing up the plans. The only advisory plans I've been aware of show sections where routes would likely have to be elevated or else require demolition or street closures.

BTW, streetcars aren't going to solve the congested intercampus commuting problem. Maybe getting around town, but definitely not between North and Central. Streetcars would be nice, but would quickly become overcrowded on a high commuting route.