Masonic Temple Area...Enact an architectural ordinance to mirror the buildings?

The area between the Lodge and Woodward and between Mack Ave and the Chrysler has the Masonic Temple stately located. I was wondering what were people's views concerning a uniform architectural style for this area. There are 3 stately buildings with green roofs along with white facades.

In my opinion, uniform architectural styles in a given area add beauty and ambiance. Detroit might be able to sieze a unique architectual style with enacting an ordinance where all buildings in this area have the same color facade with the same green roofs as the Masonic temple. The university of Windsor has a church with the same color green roof. Red tiled roofs are asscociated with the Mediterranean. Maybe Detroit could push forward its own symbol of stately architecture in conjunction with its diverse array of architecture. However, no other US city has an area with a large concentration of this form of architecture. It might not be a bad idea for Detroit to have an area with a uniform building style which is "uniquely Detroit" and stately.

I believe the red rings staduim may be built in the area. But if not, the area could be revitialized with this upscale building style. There is already a park in front of the Masonic Temple where a a grand fountain could be erected as some sort of Plaza. Apartments/Condos/Office Buildings with commercial venues on the first floor could be constructed in a Pedestrian friendly manner. This form of architecture might rejuvenate the area as a desirable place. What are people's thoughts?

But then, that would interfere with their grand plans for building
low income housing in the area, to appease the multitude of bleeding hearts
worried about displacing the indigents in residence [[and name them after themselves, of course)
It's a total shame, actually, the fact that the Masons are allowing that grand
Structure to wallow in obscurity...already relinquishing ownership, I do believe.
I believe I've also heard somewhere that even the Ilitch's have pretty much
given up giving the venue a go, and are relinquishing as well.
....Just waiting for the 'Detroit Method' to begin.
You know....'Destroy By Neglect'.
Hey, I'd be happy with capacity occupancy at the Temple,
and the tearing down of the 'American Hotel' next door, to start.
Yes, a Grand Statue in the park would be next, and a fountain.
Develop the park....run the light rail, or the 'People Mover through there.
Make the whole area pedestrian friendly.
Why does the light rail have to be relegated to Woodward Ave. only?
Why not slight detours here and there in areas of density or interest.
Like down Second Ave. from Temple, through Wayne State campus,
uptown and back to Woodward from there.
Anyway....your idea is nice, but come on, they built Condominiums Downtown,
right off Woodward Ave.!!!!!
Now THAT'S City Planning for you.
What a shame.

Well this is exactly the problem. I do not believe that the City has a comprehenive plan to make Midtown pedestrian friendly...small parceled venues with continuous storefrontage, no space in between buildings...etc. One key element in attracting Urban Professionals is urban planning and architecture. So many dead blocks in Midtown with the hospitals, large musuems, parking structures, and condos contructed for the suburbs.

before we start talking about architectural ordinances for the area maybe we should find people willing to invest there... an ordinance isnt going to spur development.

... I would rather see all the derelict buildings in the area razed, including any derelict unrenovated apartments, flophouse motels... but how to address ongoing homeless issues in that 2nd ave./temple area...

You have to provide a safe and livable place for employees of prospective incoming businesses to live. It's not cost-effective or appealing to have few options than to have your employees live in the suburbs That's also what companies use to gain support from current employees to move their company. Nobody will choose to live anywhere where you don't feel safe, regardless of nationality, color or any of that stuff. I'm a big fan of gated communities [[grandfathering in current residents, of course) and cc cameras; they DO work in reducing crime. I'm also a strong believer of replicating existing styles in new construction and physically moving structures to "fill-in" and redesign neighborhoods.

Architectural cohesiveness should be a big issue because if managed properly, it could be a huge positive for Detroit. For example, look at St. Louis, which has managed its historical properties well [[i.e. good laws) and takes its architecture very seriously. [[Lafayette Square reminds me of how Brush Park could/should look.)

Of course not every structure can or should be saved. There are a lot of beauties, but a lot of shack-like structures, too, that have just seen their day. That said, we should consider it a blessing we dodged Kwame's "scorched earth policy"; it would be like removing Detroit's bones. But we still have a lot to work with. Being too poor to tear certain things down has it's silver lining.

Anybody can build a CVS anywhere, any time and they will all look the same. But the building they tore down to build it is gone forever. Why be a city of copies when we already have so many originals? We are unique. It's an advantage. Let's go with that.

Detroit can't haul business people into court and hold them accountable for defying court ordered stays of demolition, what makes you think this empty gesture will accomplish anything?