United Artists Theatre

**swingline** · November-15-19, 12:36 PM

Regarding the UA theater renovation, what possible successful business model exists for spending at least $25 million plus whatever endowment would be needed for an operating budget? Only an unprecedented gift from a wealthy benefactor could ever make the numbers work. It could never work as a for-profit venture. Folks shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the theater's value or merit derives solely from it's interior [[80% lost at this point) and it's potential programming. It has no exterior architectural distinction.

Getting the lights back on in the UA building is much more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. An infill project for the rest of the UA block [[a huge surface parking lot blighting Grand Circus Park) is more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. It would be very bad if saving the theater blocked either of these things from happening. Of course it's "possible" to renovate the theater. But it's not feasible. The theater footprint can assist in making other projects on the block feasible though.

**JonWylie** · November-15-19, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by swingline

Regarding the UA theater renovation, what possible successful business model exists for spending at least $25 million plus whatever endowment would be needed for an operating budget? Only an unprecedented gift from a wealthy benefactor could ever make the numbers work. It could never work as a for-profit venture. Folks shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the theater's value or merit derives solely from it's interior [[80% lost at this point) and it's potential programming. It has no exterior architectural distinction.

Getting the lights back on in the UA building is much more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. An infill project for the rest of the UA block [[a huge surface parking lot blighting Grand Circus Park) is more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. It would be very bad if saving the theater blocked either of these things from happening. Of course it's "possible" to renovate the theater. But it's not feasible. The theater footprint can assist in making other projects on the block feasible though.

There is no plan for an infill project and will the Illitch family owning the lot, there is essentially no hope for one. If an infill project was planned for the rest of the block, I'm sure some people would be ok with it.

**Gistok** · November-15-19, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by swingline

Regarding the UA theater renovation, what possible successful business model exists for spending at least $25 million plus whatever endowment would be needed for an operating budget? Only an unprecedented gift from a wealthy benefactor could ever make the numbers work. It could never work as a for-profit venture. Folks shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the theater's value or merit derives solely from it's interior [[80% lost at this point) and it's potential programming. It has no exterior architectural distinction.

Getting the lights back on in the UA building is much more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. An infill project for the rest of the UA block [[a huge surface parking lot blighting Grand Circus Park) is more important to the continuing revitalization of downtown Detroit. It would be very bad if saving the theater blocked either of these things from happening. Of course it's "possible" to renovate the theater. But it's not feasible. The theater footprint can assist in making other projects on the block feasible though.

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that an immediate plan for the UA theatre has to be done. The facade of the building where the vestibule and lobby of the theatre is was going to be sealed up anyway... for future development. If the auditorium portion of the building is razed, it will just be another addition to the sea of parking beyond that. Is more parking really preferable to a sealed building that is mainly out of sight?

You are correct in that it will require someone with deep pockets to develop the theatre space [[plus there's always the revenue from naming rights). Right now there is no current need. But who knows if in a few years that might change. The theatre footprint would not be a hindrance to the redevelopment of the rest of the block as can be seen here...

https://www.google.com/maps/place/15...!4d-83.0530437

Unlike the Fox Theatre, which has every nook and cranny filled with ornate plaster, the UA has large portions filled with flat wall surfaces that were painted to look like medieval ashlar blocks of stone. Most of the ornate plasterwork survives, and although large portions of that have some damage, once a plaster mold is taken [[or gotten from its' near twin in LA), reuse of the plaster mold for repetitive surfaces is not as costly as one would think. And as for the resources for future restoration of the interior, there are several restoration companies nationwide [[such as Conrad Schmitt Studios) that specialize in this type of work.

If they powerwashed the auditorium exterior [[it already has a new roof), then it could be mothballed [[like so much of District Detroits surviving buildings are already). It doesn't look unsightly because both the Michigan Bldg. and the UA Building tower block most of the theatre portion anyway. And cleaned up, the exterior would look just like it did for over 50 years as a working theatre.

Once this space is gone... then there will never be another chance to "grow" the entertainment district. Once it turns into a parking lot... it will be that way for a very long time...

**Atticus** · November-15-19, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by Gistok

I don't think that anyone is suggesting that an immediate plan for the UA theatre has to be done. The facade of the building where the vestibule and lobby of the theatre is was going to be sealed up anyway... for future development. If the auditorium portion of the building is razed, it will just be another addition to the sea of parking beyond that. Is more parking really preferable to a sealed building that is mainly out of sight?

You are correct in that it will require someone with deep pockets to develop the theatre space [[plus there's always the revenue from naming rights). Right now there is no current need. But who knows if in a few years that might change. The theatre footprint would not be a hindrance to the redevelopment of the rest of the block as can be seen here...

https://www.google.com/maps/place/15...!4d-83.0530437

Unlike the Fox Theatre, which has every nook and cranny filled with ornate plaster, the UA has large portions filled with flat wall surfaces that were painted to look like medieval ashlar blocks of stone. Most of the ornate plasterwork survives, and although large portions of that have some damage, once a plaster mold is taken [[or gotten from its' near twin in LA), reuse of the plaster mold for repetitive surfaces is not as costly as one would think. And as for the resources for future restoration of the interior, there are several restoration companies nationwide [[such as Conrad Schmitt Studios) that specialize in this type of work.

If they powerwashed the auditorium exterior [[it already has a new roof), then it could be mothballed [[like so much of District Detroits surviving buildings are already). It doesn't look unsightly because both the Michigan Bldg. and the UA Building tower block most of the theatre portion anyway. And cleaned up, the exterior would look just like it did for over 50 years as a working theatre.

Once this space is gone... then there will never be another chance to "grow" the entertainment district. Once it turns into a parking lot... it will be that way for a very long time...

Further, moth balling the existing theatre does not preclude the redevelopment of the UA building itself. The concept that the theatre must be torn down is nothing but an Illitch myth.

There may be a day where the conversation must be had whether to tear down the theatre because a business case doesn’t exist for its redevelopment. But if that conversation is to be had, there needs to be a serious and beneficial project that will be taking its place... not more parking. For the time being, a mothballed theatre is better use of the land than more parking. That should be without question. And until such time that a better use of the land can be contractually guaranteed, there should be no conversation about tearing down a historic theatre.

**Gistok** · November-15-19, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Atticus

Further, moth balling the existing theatre does not preclude the redevelopment of the UA building itself. The concept that the theatre must be torn down is nothing but an Illitch myth.

There may be a day where the conversation must be had whether to tear down the theatre because a business case doesn’t exist for its redevelopment. But if that conversation is to be had, there needs to be a serious and beneficial project that will be taking its place... not more parking. For the time being, a mothballed theatre is better use of the land than more parking. That should be without question. And until such time that a better use of the land can be contractually guaranteed, there should be no conversation about tearing down a historic theatre.

Amen... and the theatre auditorium already has a new roof, that the Ilitches belatedly added about 7 years ago. Had they done so 22 years ago when they first bought the building, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion about should it be torn down due to its' current state.

Just another example of the Ilitches "demolition by neglect"... for more parking...