Tearing down buildings for the 2006 Super Bowl

**LeannaM** · November-21-09, 01:41 AM

I've been reading about buildings [[like the Donovan) being torn down for the Super Bowl [[because the building was an eye sore).

I don't like to dwell on the negative, but how many buildings were torn down for the Super Bowl? Did they need to be torn down? Was it worth it? Would they have eventually been torn down anyway?

Here's an old article on it that talks about the Statler, Madison-Lenox, and the Donovan building [[not mentioned by name, but it says "A 1920-circa office building by architect Albert Kahn that once housed the headquarters of the Motown music empire was also demolished along with several smaller structures leaving broad gaps in the greater downtown streetscape.")

http://archrecord.construction.com/n...8superbowl.asp

This says that the Super Bowl was supposed to bring $300 million to the city. Obviously, that's A LOT of money. But did the buildings have to come down for that? The Super Bowl would have happened anyway, right?

http://www.inc.com/articles/2006/01/fumble.html

Just wondering your thoughts on this. Thanks.

**mauser** · November-21-09, 01:53 AM

Two other Superbowl fatalities:

The William Apartments

Art School of the Society of Arts and Crafts

Same developer.

Blarf · November-21-09, 01:57 AM

Tearing down those buildings really gave the city a better image for that event. No one noticed other dozen or so dilapidated buildings in the surrounding area.

**mauser** · November-21-09, 02:28 AM

Waumbek and Lancaster Apartments in Art Centre.

Also the Sanders Henry Street factory. This was the shorter building next to Donovan - also part of Motown. This building had precious art deco Louis Comfort Tiffany mosaics on the facade and sign. They started to demolish it, but the DIA came over to save the mosaic in time.

http://www.detroitfunk.org/?p=292

**renf** · November-21-09, 08:32 AM

Here is a picture of the Donovan Building on Woodward that was torn down
in very late 2005 in preparation for the Superbowl. Alas, I have not updated
my description to report that this building no longer stands.

http://www.detroit1701.org/DonovanBldg.html

Retroit · November-21-09, 10:27 AM

Shame on you, LeannaM! Don't you know that we must bow down to the almighty, All-American sports fanaticism and idolatry? We must keep building sports stadiums and hosting major sporting events in order for the poor people of Detroit to find any meaning for existence.

[[I hope you sensed the sarcasm.

)

**buildingsofdetroit** · November-21-09, 04:11 PM

So glad the DIA saved the Tiffany glass. Too bad it's not on display somewhere. I'd still love to see an architectural museum in Detroit for such wonders. Not that there's funding or enough interest, but one can dream.

**leland_palmer** · November-21-09, 06:11 PM

My demo coverage of the Donovan Building.

http://fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/200...-building.html

**buildingsofdetroit** · November-21-09, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by leland_palmer

My demo coverage of the Donovan Building.

http://fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/200...-building.html

Nice shots, LP.
Here's ours: http://www.buildingsofdetroit.com/pl...demolitionpics

**leland_palmer** · November-21-09, 07:19 PM

Some Madison-Lenox for good measure.

http://fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/200...son-lenox.html

**DetroitPlanner** · November-22-09, 10:41 PM

Funny I thought tearing down buildings was just a ruse to get Kwame's pistol-whipping party buddy out of jail for the big party.

**1KielsonDrive** · November-22-09, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by Retroit

Shame on you, LeannaM! Don't you know that we must bow down to the almighty, All-American sports fanaticism and idolatry? We must keep building sports stadiums and hosting major sporting events in order for the poor people of Detroit to find any meaning for existence.

[[I hope you sensed the sarcasm.

)

I love it Retroit. Right on.

**1KielsonDrive** · November-22-09, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by leland_palmer

Some Madison-Lenox for good measure.

http://fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/200...son-lenox.html

It felt so good they finally demolished the ML for that architectural masterpiece - the parking lot. Have you noticed the beautiful wrought-iron fence. Actually, it might be faux-wrought iron. Well maybe, plastic. And the asphalt : it has a real, ummmmm, modernistic look, Detroit style. The architect who designed the parking lot was certainly up to the task. His conception is magnificent. I personally love the lines and the color of the paint - white. Such broad and flowing strokes. I'm sure, all in all, the visitors here for the Sooper Dooper Pooper Bowl, really noticed our architectural gem - the ML parking lot. I got to park on it, too. I was delighted to experience it firsthand. Made MY Sooper Bowl.

**Gsgeorge** · November-22-09, 11:51 PM

Originally Posted by leland_palmer

Some Madison-Lenox for good measure.

http://fadeddetroit.blogspot.com/200...son-lenox.html

That's really hard to look at....

**1KielsonDrive** · November-22-09, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by Gsgeorge

That's really hard to look at....

Gs, Agreed!

**jackie5275** · November-23-09, 02:55 AM

I wonder how many of those demo projects were done by Bobby Ferguson & Co.

**Fnemecek** · November-23-09, 09:21 AM

People, people, people. Don't you realize how demolition = progress?

I mean, think of all the economic development that has happened post-Super Bowl XL. The new apartment building that went up on the old Statler site. The office building that went up on the old Hudson's site. The new development on the old Tiger Stadium site. The thousands of new businesses.

Look at other foolish Michigan cities, like Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids, who have foolishly latched on to historic preservation and sustainable cities. Notice how much worse their local economy is in comparison to Detroit's booming prosperity.

We owe so much to George Jackson and the DEGC. Perhaps we should all pitch in and send them on a whirlwind tour of the country so that they may share their economic brilliance with the world.

Retroit · November-23-09, 09:33 AM

[[he, he, he)

I propose that for the next major sporting event in Detroit, we demolish all buildings within a one mile radius of the hosting stadium so that our visitors can have an unobstructed view of our magnificent city.

**Fnemecek** · November-23-09, 11:36 AM

Well, George Jackson's office is within a one mile radius of all three of Detroit's sporting stadiums. Perhaps we could leave that building standing?

PQZ · November-23-09, 01:04 PM

Now that there has been a catalouging of the three buildings demolished for the Superbowl [the buildings in Brush Park were coincidental temporally to the Superbowl, no cause and effect there]...perhaps ther could be an accounting of the 60+ historic buildings that received facade improvement grants as a result of the Superbowl. You know, the buildings that were on the DDA's "hit list". I suggest the brainstorming be held at Cliff Bell's or Park Bar.

**ndavies** · November-23-09, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Fnemecek

People, people, people. Don't you realize how demolition = progress?

Look at other foolish Michigan cities, like Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids, who have foolishly latched on to historic preservation and sustainable cities. Notice how much worse their local economy is in comparison to Detroit's booming prosperity.

I would argue the opposite. These cities are rehabbing historic building because they have robust economies that have a high demand for real estate and can support the added cost of historic rehabs.

Having historic buildings is not a necessity. it is a nicety. People aren't flocking to other states for historic buildings. They are flocking there for Jobs. Create Jobs and the historic preservation will happen.

PQZ · November-23-09, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by ndavies

I would argue the opposite. These cities are rehabbing historic building because they have robust economies that have a high demand for real estate and can support the added cost of historic rehabs.

Having historic buildings is not a necessity. it is a nicety. People aren't flocking to other states for historic buildings. They are flocking there for Jobs. Create Jobs and the historic preservation will happen.

I would also argue that there is historic preservation occuring in Detroit as well. Perhaps Mr. Frank GlenBeckecek has heard tell of a building called the Book Cadillac?

**ghettopalmetto** · November-23-09, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by ndavies

I would argue the opposite. These cities are rehabbing historic building because they have robust economies that have a high demand for real estate and can support the added cost of historic rehabs.

Having historic buildings is not a necessity. it is a nicety. People aren't flocking to other states for historic buildings. They are flocking there for Jobs. Create Jobs and the historic preservation will happen.

If you're arguing that historic preservation is a "nicety", then you haven't read Jane Jacobs, and specifically, her chapter on "The Need for Old Buildings".

Not everyone can afford to pay rent sufficiently high to cover construction costs of "Class A" office space or "luxury" apartments. There is a definite need to preserving old buildings [[key word being "preserve" vis-a-vis "allowed to rot"), as their construction and financing costs are paid off. For the marginal cost of renovation, you get to return a property to the tax rolls.

Unfortunately, Detroit's obscene parking requirements and Culture of Demolition waste money on shit that doesn't create value in the local economy.

I'm glad someone was able to find an excuse to sit on their ass and wait for "something" [[i.e. "jobs") to happen, though. That seems to be the de facto modus operandi in Detroit. Never mind the number of people you could put to work renovating old buildings....

**Fnemecek** · November-23-09, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by PQZ

I would also argue that there is historic preservation occuring in Detroit as well. Perhaps Mr. Frank GlenBeckecek has heard tell of a building called the Book Cadillac?

Of course, I've heard of it. It's your response to every act of blatant stupidity by the DEGC.

**Fnemecek** · November-23-09, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by ndavies

I would argue the opposite. These cities are rehabbing historic building because they have robust economies that have a high demand for real estate and can support the added cost of historic rehabs.

Having historic buildings is not a necessity. it is a nicety. People aren't flocking to other states for historic buildings. They are flocking there for Jobs. Create Jobs and the historic preservation will happen.

So, by your logic, if I get wet while standing in the rain then one would conclude that my wet clothes caused it to rain.

I mention this because a) historic preservation creates more jobs than almost any other economic endeavor and b) most cities with strong historic preservation and strong local economies adopted their historic preservation stance first.