University Club next to fall?

[Huggybear]

Great information Huggybear. I would have thought one of the more vocal preservationists would have posted such information...either now or in the past.

Hmm... you're right. It's puzzling, since this building is historic [[by ordinance standards), is pretty, and is of a scale and condition that make it amenable to reuse.

But I guess there is a difference between being a preservationist and a building hoarder. The usual excuse of hoarders is that the hoarded items will be valuable someday, but the reality is that they do not discriminate between what is actually likely to be valuable and what is garbage:

The hoarder may mistakenly believe that the hoarded items are very valuable, or the hoarder may know that the accumulated items are useless, or may attach a strong personal value to items which they recognize would have little or no value to others [[Wikipedia).

Hoarding tendencies, I think, explains why there is such knee-jerk "preservationism" on DetroitYes.

But why there is so little action with something like the University Club, which both arguably meets historic district criteria and is still relatively useful, is a different question. You would think that people who get upset about demolitions of old things would be more up-to-date on - and active in - pursuing the relatively simple mechanisms available to everyday citizens. And react more quickly [[if not be pro-active) in addressing things. It's not like filing a petition with City Council is that difficult.

But I think you can see the hoarder's mental paralysis where things like this building go ignored at the same time people get their shorts tied in a knot about buildings that are much weaker on the historic district criteria and have [[or had) much less chance of survival. Too much distraction. Too many things to "save" by complaining on the internet.

[PQZ]

Hmm... you're right. It's puzzling, since this building is historic [[by ordinance standards), is pretty, and is of a scale and condition that make it amenable to reuse.

But I guess there is a difference between being a preservationist and a building hoarder. The usual excuse of hoarders is that the hoarded items will be valuable someday, but the reality is that they do not discriminate between what is actually likely to be valuable and what is garbage:

The hoarder may mistakenly believe that the hoarded items are very valuable, or the hoarder may know that the accumulated items are useless, or may attach a strong personal value to items which they recognize would have little or no value to others [[Wikipedia).

Hoarding tendencies, I think, explains why there is such knee-jerk "preservationism" on DetroitYes.

But why there is so little action with something like the University Club, which both arguably meets historic district criteria and is still relatively useful, is a different question. You would think that people who get upset about demolitions of old things would be more up-to-date on - and active in - pursuing the relatively simple mechanisms available to everyday citizens. And react more quickly [[if not be pro-active) in addressing things. It's not like filing a petition with City Council is that difficult.

But I think you can see the hoarder's mental paralysis where things like this building go ignored at the same time people get their shorts tied in a knot about buildings that are much weaker on the historic district criteria and have [[or had) much less chance of survival. Too much distraction. Too many things to "save" by complaining on the internet.

Insightful and interesting take. I think you may be on to something...

[Huggybear]

Well, Buildingsofdetroit and Detroitnerd?

[PQZ]

Apparently they are doing the business with Detroit Dad in the lobby. With an offer of money.

[Detroitnerd]

Well, Buildingsofdetroit and Detroitnerd?

What's up, Huggybear?

[canuck]

I am wondering about the plan for Detroit from the Kresge foundation, and perhaps the need to effect a moratorium on the demolition of all sizable buildings before any plan is revealed. Since apart form the big hospital projects admittedly on available campus real estate, there arent other significant investments to let important structures be demolished. This short term stuff is a really negative aspect of doing business in detroit from outside observers. The real balls as Detroitnerd and others pointed out so many times, is in saying NO. A moratorium on new construction wouldnt be so bad either. This would send a signal that the city finally means business.

Who wants Detroit to become another casino disneyland [[check out Bethlehem Pennsylvania).

On the other hand, I do think that heavy mono industry has forged Detroit character to the extent that it is less inclined to think of itself as endowed in the artistic. One of the important things for the future generations is the opportunity for expression in the arts. The city, state and federal govs need to foster arts and crafts institutions and businesses. These as well as light industry to complete the mix in order to reuse existing structures and anchor parts of the city.

It is a city with a good bone structure and it needs to get steady doses of calcium to keep standing. So the planning phase should comprise some interim where nothing goes up or down for a while...

[DC48080]

The city, state and federal govs need to foster arts and crafts institutions and businesses. These as well as light industry to complete the mix in order to reuse existing structures and anchor parts of the city.

Why does the government have to foster this? If you're an artsy craftsy type person invest the capital and buy a building and set up shop. Why does the government have to fund it?

[Bearinabox]

Why does the government have to foster this? If you're an artsy craftsy type person invest the capital and buy a building and set up shop. Why does the government have to fund it?

People, by and large, don't have millions of loose dollars lying around for pet projects.

[DC48080]

People, by and large, don't have millions of loose dollars lying around for pet projects.

Well the government gets it's money from the people. We don't need the government to waste any more of our precious tax dollars on pet projects.

[bailey]

People, by and large, don't have millions of loose dollars lying around for pet projects.

Apparently convenience store owners do.

[Bearinabox]

Well the government gets it's money from the people. We don't need the government to waste any more of our precious tax dollars on pet projects.

Sometimes this is true. Other times, those projects, which individuals don't have the ability to fund on their own, produce something of value to the larger community. Part of the government's job in this instance is to distinguish between a waste of money and an investment in the greater good. Nobody is suggesting that public money be invested indiscriminately.

BTW, what are "precious" tax dollars? Are they precious jewels like Cobo Hall?

[Bearinabox]

Apparently convenience store owners do.

I don't see where anyone suggested that.

[DC48080]

BTW, what are "precious" tax dollars? Are they precious jewels like Cobo Hall?

I would never call Cobo a precious jewell. Hell, I wouldn't even call it a cubic zirconia.

[Hermod]

BTW, what are "precious" tax dollars?

"Precious tax dollars" are money earned by the people from the "sweat of their brow". As a society, we know that we have to sacrifice some of our earnings for the common good. You have to think of government as a parasite. Successful parasites [[like government) exist without damaging the health of their host [[the taxpaying public). Unsuccessful parasites cause the weakening and eventual death of the host. Virulent parasites [[like the Bubonic Plague) completely destroy the hosts [[and eventually themselves).

A successful government is thus one which is very parsimonious with the monies extorted from the populace of the government entity doing the taxing. Artists should be supported by patrons, donors, and customers not the taxpaying public.

[Bearinabox]

Artists should be supported by patrons, donors, and customers not the taxpaying public.

The upshot of that would be that we'd end up not having a whole lot of art. I guess we as a society have to decide whether or not that's a fair price to pay for a tax cut.

[DC48080]

The upshot of that would be that we'd end up not having a whole lot of art. I guess we as a society have to decide whether or not that's a fair price to pay for a tax cut.

But lets say I wanted to open a business, perhaps a grocery store, and I didn't have the funds to purchase a building and buy inventory. Should the government bankroll me? Otherwise there would be a lot less places for people to buy food.

[Bearinabox]

But lets say I wanted to open a business, perhaps a grocery store, and I didn't have the funds to purchase a building and buy inventory. Should the government bankroll me? Otherwise there would be a lot less places for people to buy food.

The government should fund things that a) have value to society as a whole and b) don't generate enough profit to make it worthwhile for someone to provide them. For the most part, grocery stores don't meet the second criterion. Detroit might be the exception, though.

[Huggybear]

Wow... way for the SomeoneShoulds™and the College Republicans® to highjack a discussion of a simple, concrete problem.

This is one building that is a manageable size, is in a good location and could possibly qualify for preservation tax credits - the only thing that would really be a positive incentive for an indifferent owner in deciding what to do.

The structure of government in Detroit is not going to change to socialism or a command economy any time soon. Nor will it change to a libertarian paradise. The State of Michigan will not fund anything in Detroit but roads, and the Michigan Supreme Court is not going to give back to Detroit eminent domain power like it had in the Poletown era. And both governments are broke. And since it is still the case that since there are no sticks to prevent the destruction of old buildings, you have to have a carrot, which means tax credits, which means a historic designation in the here and now.

So now that we have disposed of the reasons to get into a political debate here, and since subtlety, logical reasoning, and small internet print are apparently flustering some people,

WHO HAS ACTUALLY DONE SOMETHING TO ADVANCE THE BALL ON SAVING THIS BUILDING?

[canuck]

Both the US, Canadian and Ontario govts invested in GM being kept alive to the tune of what, 60 billion? That kind of money goes a long way. GM is somebody's pet project too by the way. We are all paying for the mess they make in a big way. Like the banks they are too big to fail. You spread some of that money around to people who have strong projects in light industry or the arts and you will be surprised what can happen. Arts and craft coops could attract people from many countries where handiwork is a way of life and also craftspeople from Mi and the US. It is also cool to think that if we get back to values like craft vs productivity [[which doesnt preclude high tech) then this whole economy of fighting lower wages in other countries is less dramatic. The importance of farming on a small scale and producing crafts like high end furniture [[Michigan was well known for great designers) is self-evident. People will buy into products that make sense and are carefully crafted. The same goes for accessories. Some more enterprising folk will of course grow and take up more space in industrial reused compounds, and the city will generate more of the same. Crafts breed other crafts just like the automotive sector does or aerospace in my town. Montreal is the 3rd aerospace city in the world, and its a cycle of boom and bust of course. We witnessed some pretty big industrial buildings getting back to use after years of decline, here are a couple on the Lachine canal, Canada's industrial cradle. The french regime first started to dig a canal to lake St-Louis at the western edge of Montreal island in the late 1600's. But the real work started in the early 19th century and was inaugurated in 1825.
Industrial decline around the canal led to tens of thousands of lost jobs. But in the past 20 years
that area close to downtown has been transformed. Lots of artists, film company offices and light industry have taken over entire factories much like the TechTown initiative in your city. We also lost maybe 50 or 60000 thousand jobs in the garment industry over the years but there seems to be a comeback. Gap Canada has stopped dealing with a lot of their third world slaveshops in favor of canadian garment factories in Canada. Cities like New York and Toronto and Chicago may have a nice cushy financial sector but they somehow cant just keep on making money on money. We need to restart some manufacturing and not be totally dependant on deficit inducing offshore profiteering by the middleman.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/story...19900&sponsor=
http://lenordelec.ca/content.php?pag...thern_Electric
http://www.complexecanallachine.com/index.asp

I believe in the urban farming agenda and a lot of cities are looking into this, although they dont have Detroit's potential of closeknit open land to building ratio.

[DC48080]

GM & Chrysler were hardly anyone's pet projects. You are talking about two of the largest employers in the United States, who also happen to employ tens of thousands of people in other countries. You can not rationally compare their situations to some painters and sculptors who want money to set up a studio or a gallery.

[canuck]

Why be so picky? Why does it have to be monstrously big? How do you think Henry Ford got started? Tinkering with what a lot of folks must have called junk...

When I say arts I mean film and theatre and music and circus arts which by the way start off with an idea. What is more noble? The idea behind a brand new SUV or an action movie or a play or a painting? Take your pick! I'm not fussy, I'm just saying different strokes for different motors and different folks. Montreal's Cirque du Soleil started on a dime, they got next to no funding by the way by the govt. Laliberté the founder is a billionaire now, but that doesnt mean his business success has to be repeated by thousands more. I am implying that the variety of businesses in arts and crafts and light industry in particular tend to network and feed off one another. They tend to purchase pick-ups and buy graphic design services and coffee machines and need catering like small cafeterias supplied by maybe a local breadmaker etc...

We shouldnt be blinded by scale equals serious business. Maybe that is a big part of Detroit's past problems and its contemporary image of itself. I think that if you looked at the early days of the automotive industry, you would find hundreds of start-ups with weird little idiosyncrasies and it must have been pretty exciting. That kind of spirit can get lost in the mire of huge abandoned factories.

[Hermod]

The upshot of that would be that we'd end up not having a whole lot of art. I guess we as a society have to decide whether or not that's a fair price to pay for a tax cut.

Most of the really expensive art was not produced by government subsides.

[DC48080]

How do you think Henry Ford got started? Tinkering with what a lot of folks must have called junk...

He and the other automotive pioneers got started with private capital put up by investors who were often friends and family, not with government money. Plain and simple.

Government should not be in the business of funding people who want to make movies, paint pictures, or do plays. The reason the govt. helped out GM & Chrysler is because if one or both of them failed the entire economy would be in ruins. If you think it is bad now you haven't seen anything compared to what it would be like with those two big companies.

If some painter or movie maker cannot afford to practice his craft it will not hurt the national or worldwide economy.

[Hermod]

GM & Chrysler were hardly anyone's pet projects. You are talking about two of the largest employers in the United States, who also happen to employ tens of thousands of people in other countries. You can not rationally compare their situations to some painters and sculptors who want money to set up a studio or a gallery.

The painters need to paint paintings that people will buy. Then they will have money to rent or build themselves a fancy studio.

[DC48080]

The painters need to paint paintings that people will buy. Then they will have money to rent or build themselves a fancy studio.

EXACTLY! Well said!