  Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2743 Registered: 07-2004 |
With all the talk about Quicken moving to Detroit(I am not impressed).And a lot of you getting your sphincters all knotted up. I was in a truly spectacular bldg recently; one we all know. This place reminds one of what great architecture Detroit has.And it illustrates what a boom city Detroit was. It is unique in that I know of no other place like it anywhere. I am speaking of the Masonic temple.Some of you know more than I about the temple.To those that are not familiar there is an acadian press book as well as the internet. Is there any other bldg that houses two theaters,the drill room, two subterranean ballrooms (one a wonderful representative of the era in which it was built;The other a streamlined art moderne style) and a labyrinth of staircases rooms, elevators and hallways that are almost scary in their magnitude? So forgive me if I don't jump up and down because Quicken might build some non descript half sized generic forgettable semi sky scraper in Detroit_ as I said I am not impressed. Places like the Masonic are what made and makes Detroit what it is. And the impressive thing is that while I was at the Masonic there may very well have been something at the Fox,Orchestra Hall,and music hall........all impressive places as well. Other cities have impressive skyscrapers but I know of nothing like the Masonic. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 2772 Registered: 06-2006 |
The quicken move is exciting because it will bring 4-5k jobs minimum downtown and fill up one of downtowns many vacant parcels... Nobody is cheering the move because of any type of revolutionary architecture it will bring...they haven't even released renderings... And yes, the Masonic is quite a building...and I don't know if you realize this, but we get to keep the Masonic after Quicken's headquarters gets built...new and old can coexist...the Chicago Tribune building and the Chicago Water Tower are just as pleasant to look at even though newer buuildings have been built across the street from them | ||
401don Member Username: 401don Post Number: 60 Registered: 11-2007 |
You're right. I think everyone on this site agrees the architecture of Detroit is still its biggest asset. The irony of course is that the decline of the city in the 2nd half of the twentieth century allowed us to keep that architecture. I hate the term "pre-depression" though. I wish we had a term like "gilded" that they use to describe the 1800s. | ||
Kslice Member Username: Kslice Post Number: 221 Registered: 04-2007 |
First off, let me agree with you. The Masonic Temple is a great, beautiful building. I might say the Guardian is a better example of boom town Detroit but whatever. The thing is, real Art Deco skyscrapers haven't been built since the 30's, and it's unreasonable to hope for one today. Also, the Masonic is only 14 stories and would be under the category of "low-rise". The quicken move is most important for the jobs they will bring. Most people are excited because it will also be the first big ,non-casino building built in downtown in many years. And how do you know the new quicken building will be nondescript or generic? They have yet to even chose the site let alone the design. | ||
Patrick Member Username: Patrick Post Number: 5158 Registered: 10-2003 |
I have been fortunate enough to go on a private tour of the temple and got into places one normally wouldn't get to see on a normal tour. It's a damn shame that the area around it has seen better days. It looks like a bomb went off near there to be honest. | ||
Rbdetsport Member Username: Rbdetsport Post Number: 409 Registered: 11-2005 |
Also, the Quicken Move may very well bring enough boom into downtown as to renovate architectually appealing buildings. | ||
Detroitrise Member Username: Detroitrise Post Number: 746 Registered: 09-2007 |
Well Compuware brought a mini boom (or more so a small explosion) when they moved. It's already a given that ePrize and Fathead is coming. who knows, more might follow them. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2745 Registered: 07-2004 |
Kslice I said nothing about the Masonic being a skyscraper or art deco.It is neither.It is unique in it's make up..........I know of no other building like it that houses the theatre(s) and the countless other fascinating rooms. My point is that frankly I am mildly amused that there are literally hundreds of posts about a company that may build something in the city in five years time or so....yet right under your damn noses are many fabulous one of a kind buildings......as I said I find it amusing. I am all for jobs.....here is a question for those of you that bash the Ilitch empire: Shouldn't you encourage the Quicken folks to rehab a bldg? The Stott, Broderick, 1st national, Penobscot ......what about it? | ||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 1001 Registered: 11-2004 |
quote: Any one of those building have a spare 1-1.5 million square feet lying around? I don't think it's practical to expect them to spread their operation around. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 4024 Registered: 02-2005 |
New and old coexist beautifully in a functional city, as TJ initially pointed out. More people can appreciate architecture in the city, which they may have even been previously ignorant of, if they work and/or live in the city. I think we need to preserve every last one of our historic edifices and try to foster the redevelopment of those which which are vacant, as the City DID do/is doing with the B-C, Fort-Shelby, Globe Trading Co. Bldg, Lafayette Bldg., and others. Yes, they have fucked up sometimes. I'm sure that you and I agree that we are worse off without the Madison Lenox and the Barry Gordy-Motown Building, etc. Half of downtown has been decimated, just to create parking spaces. It kills me, but it should only want to make us build new stuff like corporate HQs to piece our city back together in a cohesive manner. We can't hope for the quality to ever rival that of the pre-depression architecture, but can we at least hope the responsible, fundamental design is there (i.e. large windows facing the street, little/no setback, first floor retail)? We sure can. Just because there have been some errors in the past, and just because a major new employer is not DIRECTLY helping the cause of some of our endangered buildings, does not mean we should not get excited about big news such as 4,000 new downtown employees. News like that solidifies the case that Detroit is a strong redevelopment track, and may encourage some developers who can get their hands on old buildings to pull the trigger and start rehabilitation projects. Then there is the real impact of 4,000 new employees, a certain percentage of which will want to live in the city. Having those good-paying jobs, their economic impact will be huge. Let's say 5% of QL workers move to the core neighborhoods of Detroit within 5 years of the move. That's 200 housing units purchased. I'm sure the moves of those people to the city will rub off on their friends, family, etc. Next thing you know it, the Broderick Tower is finally rehabbed. There you go: an example of the old being appreciated anew, and thus saved, because a new (and probably bland/cheaply constructed) new corporate HQ is built down the street. I'd say the city is much better off in that scenario, a scenario that will be at least partially influenced by things such as the QL move. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5771 Registered: 08-2004 |
Well we don't yet know what Quicken is bringing to the table in terms of its' plans... so getting "our knickers in a twist" is reserved for the future announcement. If Quicken wants to have a restored United Artists Building as residential for its employees (in a HQ next door), and if they want a restored performing arts center (UA Theatre), then that would be something to get really excited over. People may have prematurely written off the UA complex. Some of the interior spaces of that complex are (like the Masonic) just fantastic. And if Quicken also enhances the prospects of the Lafayette Building being redeveloped... how can one not get excited? | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 1486 Registered: 02-2006 |
quote: Do you really think that on a site hosting "The Fabulous Ruins of Detroit" that we've forgotten about the freaking Masonic Temple? There are countless threads on this site talking about things that have been gone for 30 years. Yes, I'm sure the Masonic Temple is amazing and beautiful and all that. But it's also private, and mostly closed to the community. It has no offices. It has no residents. So there is no sense comparing it to anything related to the Quicken move. | ||
321brian Member Username: 321brian Post Number: 506 Registered: 02-2006 |
lover is right. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10815 Registered: 10-2003 |
Beautiful building but I don't see criticizing the excitement over upto 4000 jobs coming to Detroit. The people that live in Detroit would prefer to see jobs and a stronger tax base than a beatiful building that sits around crack head and hooker heaven. | ||
Deandub11 Member Username: Deandub11 Post Number: 175 Registered: 05-2006 |
Not sure why city is taking shots at quicken moving downtown by tying it with the attributes of the masonic temple. Gilbert can build whatever he wants, thats his decision and his money. Why would I take a stand against progress in the city because citylover would like me to take note of historical buildings in the city. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2746 Registered: 07-2004 |
I was simply pointing out that the reaction to quicken is so distorted.And that Masonic is an amazing place. Sorry you all are paranoid but not surprised; very predictable. | ||
Detroitduo Member Username: Detroitduo Post Number: 892 Registered: 06-2005 |
Really Citylover? The excitement over 4000 jobs, plus, perhaps more to the Downtown area should be just downplayed? (you are not impressed) I suppose if Quicken was moving their 4000 jobs to Ann Arbor, you would be here blaming all of us Detroiters that Detroit didn't get the HQ, because you believe we're idiots and choose to downplay our crime problems and trivialize everything, because "it can happen anywhere". Of course your "simple" points are NEVER "just simple" without attacking Detroit. Your threads are always to criticize the people on this forum, because we just don't get anything about the problems of Detroit or the fact that you believe we are all stupid. Everything we do or say is just mis-directed... and you are the know-it-all who has all the answers. The fact is, if you had started the thread with a positive post about how you visited the Masonic and it is amazing and you wonder why the forum doesn't discuss it more often....then I wouldn't be so harsh. Instead you write a post that immediately attacks any Detroit reader. THAT is very predictable. Get over your bitterness and most of us may actually respect your thoughts. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10816 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: A city that has been bleeding jobs is getting 4K new jobs with a corporate owner who appears to be very interested in helping Detroit gain more jobs and improve. We shoudl downplay that, shouldn't we. CL - I agree that the Masonic is amazing. I doubt anyone here would disagree. Just imagine how amazing it would be if the city brought in more jobs, more tax revenue which may lead to more police officers and other improvements. If that happens maybe the area around the Masonic could be improved and developed. Imagine how wonderful the Masonic would be if it were surrounded by a vibrant, decent neighborhood. The well being of the entire city and the citizens of the city is more important than a single building, no matter how amazing it is. I can appreciate the beauty of the Masonic and other older buildings but I can't appreciate someone that lives 40 miles away dismissing the city's dire need for jobs and tax revenue as secondary to the beauty of a building. I see a stable city with stable neighborhoods and ample police officers and services as more beautiful than any one building could ever offer. | ||
Deandub11 Member Username: Deandub11 Post Number: 178 Registered: 05-2006 |
No it is not distorted and you are correct that we become inquisitive when someone makes remarks that don't have much relevance and in our opinion, or at least mine, don't make very much sense. If that is paranoid then so be it. I love that masonic, but thats not really the point here. | ||
Citylover Member Username: Citylover Post Number: 2747 Registered: 07-2004 |
Please show where I dismissed the idea of jobs. I pointed out that hundreds of posts about jobs that may or may not materialize in five years time is completely out of whack...........surely you can concede that much jt1. I was also pointing out that an announcment about anything in detroit has to be taken with a dose of skepticism. And I also pointed out that historically speaking the quicken move is not all that impressive when weighed against something like masonic. Predictably you all turn it into me being against jobs in detroit or being anti detroit..............as if I prefer not to see a city with stable neighborhoods and am[le police........... you all are neurotic and paranoid. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10817 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I can't concede that. Jobs are more important than the beauty of a building. How that is difficult for you to grasp is amazing to me. quote: I disagree on the potential historical impact. If you want to talk about historic architecture, I will grant you that but I believe that this would be the largest non-auto move to Detroit. I think that has the potential to be pretty historic. quote:} Not neurotic or paranoid. What is sad is your failure to realize your dismissive attitude towards the city and the citizens of the city over a great building. That building, in all it's glory has not kept that area from being crackhead/hooker central. Jobs and investment is what will help that area. The Masonic is an amazing building but it is probably easier to love it when you can drive up, tour it and go home. When you deal with the crackheads/hookers/johns/buyer s, etc on a bike ride or walk it is much harder to be dismissive about jobs because there aren't thousands of posts about the Masonic. I appreciate the wonderful architecture of the city but I appreicate the struggles and issues that many residents face everyday. I will take something that is for the good of the citizens over a beautiful building anyday. You may not be dismissive of jobs coming to Detroit but you certainly appear to think that Detroiters are foold for not salivating over this building when the city is losing jobs, residents, dealing with a rough budget, etc. If given the option of imploding the Masonic to drastically reduce unemployment in the city I would be the first to push the plunger. It is obviously not an either or situation but the jobs and tax revenue are certainly more important to the lives of the average resident. Now to your first post you state: quote: So forgive me if I think that your opinion is completely wrong and shows your indifference to the residents of the city. quote: I think the people make the city. I guess that is were we differ. You can look at the beautiful buildings and think how wonderful they are. I think of the situations many in the city face and think that 4K jobs and numerous spin off jobs for Detroiters is more important than the beauty of a building surrounded by crackheads and whores. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 5774 Registered: 08-2004 |
Well without getting into the name calling fracas, the original question was "Is there anyplace like it anywhere?"... and the answer is yes and no... While no single Masonic/Shriners building is as massive as Detroit's Masonic Temple, there are several structures around the country that are as magnificent (although not as large) as the Masonic. One is the Atlanta Fox (Yaarab Temple Shrine Mosque), also known as the Xanadu of Dixie. Although the Shriners have moved out decades ago, it is still a magnificent building with a 4,000 seat theatre (Arabian atmospheric), and large Egyptian style lodge rooms... http://www.foxtheatre.org/hist ory.htm Another is the Chicago Oriental Theatre, in whose 22 story building housed offices at the front, and Masonic lodges stacked above each other at the back. The 3,000 seat Oriental Theatre (today the Ford Center for the Performing Arts) was the main auditorium for the masonic groups. Best way to describe the interior is as a 3/5 scale version of the Detroit Fox. The Masons and Shriners are long gone though... http://chicago.urban-history.o rg/sites/theaters/oriental.htm And lastly is the famouns Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles, the site of both the Oscar's and Grammy's over many years (although the Oscars are now hosted in the new smaller 3,300 seat Kodak Theatre). The 6,300 seat Shrine Auditorium is the largest theatre in the country. The Shriners still occupy and maintain the building. It, like Detroit's Masonic Temple, is located in a rough area of town: http://www.shrineauditorium.co m/ | ||
Craig Member Username: Craig Post Number: 479 Registered: 02-2007 |
Jt - one point of contention: 'jobs for Detroiters.' I'll wager that most of these jobs are filled by people already in the suburbs. I've had dealings with a couple of firms in Detroit with aggressive affirmative action policies, yet residents are few. Best hope, I believe, is drawing some middle class suburbanites into residency. Everyone's tax money is green, though. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 10819 Registered: 10-2003 |
Craig - That is a fair point for those coming with Rock. I don't expect Detroiters to see a spike in jobs but I suspect that a great deal of any spin off jobs would employ Detroiters. I obviously worded that very poorly. | ||
Mackinaw Member Username: Mackinaw Post Number: 4037 Registered: 02-2005 |
Remember my point about how a QL move would help historic city buildings by giving them a better chance of renovation? This seems to support that: http://www.crainsdetroit.com/a pps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2007 1119/SUB/311190066/0/ |
