Jump to content

Statler Hotel Demolition Progress

Allan

By Allan
in Detroit

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 516
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Fletch Unincorporated Area

Fletch

Posted
Posted

Yeah, one day soon maybe all of downtown can consist of four things: stadiums, some green space, a handful of occupied buildings, and concrete, whether in the form of highways, streets, sidewalks, or parking lots. Why can't the City somehow zone more of these demolished properties into green space is something I'd like to know. If City officials are so image-obsessed these days maybe they should know that tourists and other outsiders are much more impressed with parks and other green spaces than concrete. Their slogan: "Downtown Detroit - Just Like Hoover Dam Except We're Holding Back People."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brother Ray Whistle-Stop

Brother Ray

Posted
Posted

Rule 3  Sometimes, however painful, it's time to cut your losses.  The Statler has been a vacant hulk for thirty years.  Thirty Years!  Meanwhile, "the wedge" grows every day as the elements deteriorate the structure.  At some point, City officials decided that it is impossible to renovate this building :cry: .  Given the imminent prospect of receivership, the City simply can't afford to preserve its history.  Corrupt?  No.  Reality?  Yes.  Mournful?  :(

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry for the late reply, I haven't been on this site for several weeks. I must comment on "Rule 3" because I'm sick and tired of hearing people use this as a lame-ass excuse for justification in tearing down Detroit's historic buildings. Before anyone uses this excuse again may I suggest you do the following:

Book yourself a plane ticket over to Europe and take a historic tour of any city - including modern London if you must. Many of these cities have homes and buildings that are hundreds of years old and are still standing and thriving. Get to know more about each building's history and there is a very good chance that it was neglected and/or abandoned for decades (just like the Statler) at one point or another. The Medici home in Florence is a perfect example.

Folks, 30 years is just a freakin' dot on the lifeline of a building when our future generations look at the history of a classic building in a (former?) classic city!!! Could you imagine five generations beyond us (let's just say Allan's (3X)Great Grandchildren in the year 2105) taking photos of historic Detroit, posting their findings on the internet and telling everyone about how the Statler once stood vacant for 30 years before the City woke up and realized that it should be preserved? 30 years is nothing when it comes to European history!!!

- BR

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zissou Burg

Zissou

Posted
Posted

Thats a very good point Brother Ray but unfortunately the mindsets of Americans and Europeans differ greatly. In Europe they preserve their history and treasures while in America, not just Detroit, there seems to be a willingness to destroy our older buildings. Then we put up structures that resemble the very buildings that we just destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fletch Unincorporated Area

Fletch

Posted
Posted

I've been to Europe and have walked said routes, although I didn't see the Medici home while in Florence (incidentally, the Colesseum in Rome, I think, is a better example), and I sympathize. The problem is nobody even in suburban Detroit (i.e. the majority of metro Detroit's taxpayers) is interested in preserving their own town's history. That's regrettable, but that's reality. I think Zissou's right: Americans, much more than Europeans, feel that if it doesn't work, throw it away and move on. To an extent, that's true everywhere. After all, even Europeans understand the wedge concept and are willing to (loosely) limit the amount devoted to preservation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ramcharger Whistle-Stop

Ramcharger

Posted
Posted

Since London was used as an example, I thought it would be interesting to note that there are very few opportunities for urban spelunking in London. When a building becomes vacant the owner must secure all possible entrances to the building or he could lose it. If squatters gain access, they also gain legal status. It often takes a long and expensive legal process to evict them. If Detroit's slumlords were faced with the prospect of losing their property I'm sure they would do much more to secure their buildings. This would prevent these buildings from being striped of everything from pluming to architectural elements, which often makes the buildings difficult or impossible to renovate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.