Discuss Detroit Archives - January 2008 Quicken Redux : ) Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise

Post Number: 1324
Registered: 09-2007
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 7:21 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Since you all blew out the original Quicken thread, let's start another one basically about where they may choose to locate their headquarters downtown and why. Yes, it is another dream thread like the one you guys blew up. :-)
Top of pageBottom of page

Mortgageking
Member
Username: Mortgageking

Post Number: 13
Registered: 12-2006
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 7:29 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Great idea Detroitrise!
Let's rehash the entire thread. Complete with Quiggen drawings and baseless speculation.

I'll start.

I've heard from reliable street prophets that Quicken is going to announce their intention to build on the Statler site this coming Wednesday during the Cadillac Square announcement.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 4750
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 7:59 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Damn you, MK! You ruined my big secret revelation. Now, I got to make up something else...
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroit313
Member
Username: Detroit313

Post Number: 594
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 10:33 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

BUMP!:-)

<313>
Top of pageBottom of page

Rbdetsport
Member
Username: Rbdetsport

Post Number: 438
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 10:43 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ahhh... the Quicken threads... this thread brings back some good memories... lol
Top of pageBottom of page

Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok

Post Number: 6075
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 11:12 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

No Quicken/Qwiggen thread is worth a hill-o-beans without Quinn's picture, which contrary to what he says (that he produced it via Photoshop)... was actually secretly obtained from a Quicken employee.... :-)



Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 4756
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Sunday, January 06, 2008 - 11:22 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Except for the wishful thinkers (e.g., those directly in the industry and directly affected), the construction and mortgage industries aren't expected to return to their 2006 levels until 2011 or later. If so, don't expect rosy-pink scenarios to happen in the Metro area and, especially, the city until then either.
Top of pageBottom of page

Kslice
Member
Username: Kslice

Post Number: 257
Registered: 04-2007
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 8:57 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

A show of hands (posts). Who would not like the fake building in the picture to be built?
Top of pageBottom of page

Genesyxx
Member
Username: Genesyxx

Post Number: 837
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 10:01 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

(raises hand) Looks so omnious.
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 4421
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 10:06 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Shouldn't it look like this instead?



Top of pageBottom of page

Fishtoes2000
Member
Username: Fishtoes2000

Post Number: 377
Registered: 06-2005
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 11:03 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

That's funny, Johnlodge. The same thought had crossed my mind. With the widespread access to aerial photography via Google Maps and others, why wouldn't one take advantage of the free advertising/notoriety?
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 4423
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 11:07 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You mean like this enormous Col. Sanders?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2 006/11/17/colonel_sanders_mosa ic/
Top of pageBottom of page

Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok

Post Number: 6085
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 11:30 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Genesyxx... don't we have an "Omnious" hotel in Detroit? :-)
Top of pageBottom of page

Thegryphon
Member
Username: Thegryphon

Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2007
Posted on Monday, January 07, 2008 - 6:09 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think it looks sweet. Reminds me of something out of Superman's Metropolis (EG the Daily Planet)
Top of pageBottom of page

Charlottepaul
Member
Username: Charlottepaul

Post Number: 2197
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 7:29 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"I think it looks sweet."

It's not the 1920s anymore people!! Detroit needs to do more to get itself out of the 'neo-stoneage' of architecture...
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise

Post Number: 1354
Registered: 09-2007
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 7:49 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ok, then I'd say it's time to demo the Penobscot, Book (Cadillac and Tower), United Artist, Opera House, Tiger Stadium, Guardian, Fisher, GM, etc. buildings nad make way for glassy, shiny skyscrapers!
Top of pageBottom of page

Charlottepaul
Member
Username: Charlottepaul

Post Number: 2200
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 8:05 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"Ok, then I'd say it's time to demo the Penobscot, Book (Cadillac and Tower), United Artist, Opera House, Tiger Stadium, Guardian, Fisher, GM, etc. buildings nad make way for glassy, shiny skyscrapers!"

It is how those buildings got there in the first place--something had to go that was there before. There is however much less demand for land in Detroit today than there was 60+ years ago, so might as well fill the vacant locales first.

P.S. And all of those buildings are fine examples of their era, but it is 2007!!
Top of pageBottom of page

Bearinabox
Member
Username: Bearinabox

Post Number: 475
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 8:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Detroit needs to do more to get itself out of the 'neo-stoneage' of architecture...

Why?
Top of pageBottom of page

Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok

Post Number: 6088
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 8:14 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Charlottepaul... that building was built in NYC in the 1980's or so. It's Post Modern, not 1920's.

Although I like the "edgy" design of the Cadillac Centre on the Monroe Block, I would prefer something more Post Modern on the Statler site. Otherwise it would stick out like a sore thumb with all the other buildings being early 20th century.

Grand Circus Park is a classic design, and I don't think something edgy would fit in as well as it does on Campus Martius, where many of the buildings bordering it are modern. Not everything new built in the future in Detroit needs to be cutting edge!

Remember cutting edge usually means maintenance nightmare... just ask the folks at Harvard that are suing Frank Gehry!
Top of pageBottom of page

Detroitrise
Member
Username: Detroitrise

Post Number: 1355
Registered: 09-2007
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 8:20 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Now, I think the Federal or Judicial/Greektown districts will be best for anything glossy (many of the towers in these areas are 1970s).
Top of pageBottom of page

Gistok
Member
Username: Gistok

Post Number: 6089
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 8:33 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Although there is a lot of good architecture in the modern movement, there is also a LOT of bad architecture. Prince Charles of England, an armchair architect like many of us here, perhaps said it best when complaining why modern architects tend to "throw away" all the architectural traditions of the past...

"The fashionable architectural theories of the 50s and 60s, so slavishly followed by those who wanted to be considered "with it", have spawned deformed monsters which have come to haunt our cities... as a result of 40 years of experimenting with revolutionary building materials and novel ideas, burning all the rule books and purveying the theory that man is a machine, we have ended up with Frankenstein monsters, devoid of character, alien and largely unloved, except by the professors and their students who have been concocting these horrors in their laboratories..."

It seems a might presumptuous to assume that all modern architecture has to throw away 2,500 years of architectural tradition, which has been respected rather than reviled by architects of old, just because architectural professors and their students today say so!

That is why I like Post Modern architecture. It respects the past architectural tradition, rather than denounces it like much new architecture today.
Top of pageBottom of page

Warrenite84
Member
Username: Warrenite84

Post Number: 203
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Wednesday, January 09, 2008 - 6:22 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I agree Gistok. I'd rather have a building design respectful of the past, say with a few setbacks, than a building better situated in a Dr. Seuss book.

Whatever buildings we get in Detroit's future, I hope they all have a lasting allure.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.