I'm a little late to the party but thought your question still deserved an answer.

The biggest investment that the Templars had was not just buildings, but land. Land was the mark of their wealth and status and where they made their money. I'd love to be able to tell you how much land the Templars owned by region but unfortunately, it is too difficult to do so. If you want to get an idea of the size however, Records of the Templars in England In The Twelfth Century will give you a good idea of the scope of this ownership, the areas they cultivated, and the people they employed. With their demise in 1312, much of the land was repossessed by the state or handed over to the Hospitaller Order. A lot of the estates were run into the ground by their new owners which led to buildings falling into disrepair and their eventual removal.

However, buildings are still very important and all around Europe and the Holy Land. The presence of a crafted stone building is also a mark of status and many survive to this day, one of the most famous is the beautiful Temple Church in central London constructed in the late 12th Century. Wikipedia does in fact have a pretty comprehensive list here. To have such a towering building survive so many centuries and to still be used to this day is a testament to their legacy and mot certainly leaves a mark on history.

To your second point, there is a lot of misinformation about the Templar-Masonic link. Unfortunately, even some freemasons seem to believe there is a direct chronological tale from the Templars to modern masonry. There is a slightly more plausible, although still challenged, theory that the remnants of the Templar order fled to Scotland as King Robert The Bruce was at the time excommunicated by the Pope. This was regarded as a safe haven for the knights outside of papal authority. Looking for a place to carry on their practices, the Templars found a home in the guilds of stonemasons where secrecy was encouraged. Evidence for this claim points at Rosslyn Chapel which is (supposedly) covered in Templar symbolism allegory.

The problem with this theory is zero evidence of French-speaking knights appearing in Scotland which would likely have been documented and caught the attention of the royal court. The less romantic, although more plausible, theory is that the Templars were objects of fascination by Freemasons in the 18th and 19th centuries thanks to their strict moral code and devotion to it.

You mention ceremonies surviving into Freemasonry which is unfortunately not quite right. The first written piece of evidence relating to a masonic initiation is in 1646 by Elias Ashmole meaning lodges were in existence before that- this is a topic for another day but you can probably argue "speculative" Freemasonry (as opposed to actual operative stonemasons) starts to emerge in the mid-late 16th century in both Scotland and England. This is a long time after any, somewhat spurious, connections to Templars so there is no easy chronological timeline connecting the two in both foundation and ritual.

I hope this helps- a key take away should be how masonic ritual and allegory coalesce. It is very much a mix of all sorts of theories, practices, stories, history, and proto-history moulded together to aid in the exploration of man. We do not follow one path but use a wide variety to try and take us to a destination. The Templars and many other legacies are just one part of that.

Sources:

Napier G, A to Z of the Knights Templar (London 2020)

Nicholson H, A Brief History of The Knights Templar (London 2010)

Slavin P, 'Landed Estates of the Knights Templar in England and Wales and Their Management in the Fourteenth Century', Journal of Historical Geography Volume 42 (2012)