Banners may drape empty Detroit sites

[Allan]

Banners may drape empty Detroit sites

But efforts to add decorative storefront ads for All-Star Game face governmental snags.

By Louis Aguilar / The Detroit News

http://www.detnews.com/2005/business/0506/30/B01-232780.htm

[DetroitBazaar]

Reminds me of 1980 when the republicans were in town and they put awnings on the vacant hotels around town as if to fool people. Time to start walkiing the walk. The people from out of town, will see right through it all.

[Zissou]

My guess is that most people will realize right away that these particular buildings are most likely abandoned. I think the advertisements will be effective from the standpoint that people wont dwell so much on the run down parts of downtown and focus more on the thriving parts like Campus Martius and the Riverfront.

[dnast]

If there's money to be made it won't hurt to go ahead and do it.

[RustTown]

Exactly. From my viewpoint it's not about trying to fool anyone (though that may be the hopes of the city), it's about putting these buildings to use as SOMETHING, even if it is just a canvas for an advertisement. If it's bringing in money for a city business or a business or group that invest in the city, I'm all for it.

[SNWEB]

I'm for it if the money actually goes somewhere.

Lets drape the United Artists and give the money to Ilitch so he can demolish more buildings using tax dollars instead!

[Fletch]

Between demolishing these structures and renovating them, lies a proposal like this. When policy options are so attenuated, sure, advertising on buildings that've been abandoned for a generation has merit indeed. Covering them, though, does seem a little too Statler-awning-esque - fine garbage now, worse garbage in the long run. My only question is this: what is the city trying to hide?

[SNWEB]

My only question is this:  what is the city trying to hide?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Basically they want out of towners to think Detroit is a nice clean suburbia with parking lots at every corner.

They don't want to show of our rich history and historic buildings.

[wolverine]

They don't want to show of our rich history and historic buildings.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because Detroit shows them poorly. You all know by now that I have a huge appreciation for Detroit's historic architecture, but broken windows and grimy dirt facades isn't exactly the best backdrop you want at a major event. If any of you went to the fireworks the other night, you would realize how dark and dreary the Whitney, UA, and broderick towers looked. You couldn't even see them, and it was really depressing.

Remember these ads would only be a temporary thing. They would really brighten up the city, and give "a feel" that it's more alive. I have to say that alot of us are biased because we want to show the real Detroit because we think these buildings are cool. But guess what, a lot of people don't want to see them, and I think Detroit could avoid a lot of the negative criticism we see in the media if something like this is done. If the building's aren't covered, I don't think visitors are going to say "Wow, that building is sure ugly, why don't they tear that down," rather... "Wow, is that a depressing site, why let such a beautiful building go to waste; Detroit is really messed up." We don't want that thought to overpower the good that has come to Detroit in the past few years. So why not for just a few weeks, hide these depressing sites behind something bright and lit up.

[SNWEB]

I think this would be better, repair windows and light Detrout up like a candle.

Courtesy of theworldiscoming.com

[Allan]

There is no way you could get away with that! Trust me, you wouldn't want to turn on any lights inside the Broderick. You might be able to get away with it in the Whitney Building, but even that's starting to look run down.

[SNWEB]

The only building that is shown naturally is the Book Tower ahahaha.

Where is our exterior lighting on the Guardian and Comerica Bldg? Aahaha

[wolverine]

I think this would be better, repair windows and light Detrout up like a candle.

Courtesy of theworldiscoming.com

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL, yeah right. There is no way the city of Detroit would ever approve of lighting up some of those buildings. I think the Whitney is the only abandoned building that is allowed to have electricity. With the exception of the Broderick on the lower floors.

[RustTown]

I was about to saying, lighting abandoned buildings from the inside would be such a fire hazard it wouldn't even be funny.

But, back to the subject, I find that some reject the proposal simply because they feel the city has the wrong motives. Regardless of not of whether the city is trying to "hide" these buildings, you must make up your mind on your own. It seems completely logical to use these perpetually vacant buildings as canvases for temporary banners regardless of what the city may be trying to do.

Let's face it some of these buildings may be years away from renovation, and some are coming down (that's just a given). What would be a good, economic reasons NOT to use these buildings as advertisements during events or simply at times through out the year? Surely, if a building is drapped in a huge banner it people can put 2 and 2 together to figure out that the building can not be in use. No one is trying to hide anything, and if they are, than they really take people for fools.

[DetroitBazaar]

Sure, why not drape all of the buildings with ads- who will be getting the money anyway? I'm all for it now. However, out of towners will look at the banners and see right through em- they'll go home and tell stories about it like they did in 1980.

Just an opinion, yeah, I like dough like anybody so if that's the only option right now why not, but I bet it won't do a thing to actually enhance anything in the future.

[dnast]

Just for humor's sake, I'd like to see some pictures of the buildings with the new awnings back in 1980. Unlike that situation whether no one falls for the ads or not (my calculations say there will be at least 7 people who will be tricked, by the way), it could be a vague assimilation to public art.

Hell, let's have fun with it. If you get too serious about the state of Detroit, you'll quickly fall into a state of depression (totally ignoring how much things have changed even since the late 90s; I fall into it all the time).

By the way, DetroitBazaar, whatever you get out of my above comments - don't get me wrong, I totally agree with you

[DetroitBazaar]

I feel ya, dnast. I'll try to dig some up for ya. A couple of years back, they were still on one of the hotels- Statler, I believe, just blowing in the wind, torn and tattered. Interesting though.

Peace