200 replies to this topic

[Mark Miller]

Glass block on the existing building appears to be original.

The upper addition will also have glass block to mimic the original building.  Although the original block is not available, a very close match has been selected.

As far as the sign, it was approved at HPC, although what the actual sign says is still up in the air, because it has been indicated that the building is being done speculatively.

The curve at the corner of the building will carry through all the way to the top.

It was also indicated that the building will have a green roof.

[GRDadof3]

There's a drawing of this project in the Planning Commission agenda this week:



Name is 12 S. Division, and they're going for approval for a sign along the roofline.

[torgo]

Whats going to be going on on the first floor?  Offices?  Retail?  Is there a tenant(s) already lined up for this one?
Overall it looks pretty good!

Edited by andy112129, 07 March 2006 - 06:22 AM.

[GR_Urbanist]

Bout time we got an ACME Design Co. in GR!

[Yankee Fan]

Am I just not seeing the glass in this drawing (noted in a posting above)?  I thought that there was going to be a continuation of the glass.  Anyone want to correct me on this?

[GRDadof3]

GR_Urbanist, on Mar 7 2006, 08:18 AM, said:

Bout time we got an ACME Design Co. in GR!

  


Yank:

Hopefully this close up helps.

[torgo]

GR_Urbanist, on Mar 7 2006, 08:18 AM, said:

Bout time we got an ACME Design Co. in GR!

All we need now is an Acme Oyster house and I can die happy

[Prankster]

Maybe that is what the big riverside development is - an Acme factory.

[Picture Michigan]

Prankster, on Mar 7 2006, 09:42 AM, said:

Maybe that is what the big riverside development is - an Acme factory.

I need a new anvil.

[Nitro]

Anyone heard any updates on this one?

[joeDowntown]

After visiting South Beach this weekend I am really bummed that they turned down the sign on the top. The Art Deco district has some great signage that would never be allowed with our zoning, but would really add character to downtown.

Joe

[Rizzo]

They turned down the signage!? that was my favorite part.    

Edited by Rizzo, 03 April 2006 - 07:33 PM.

[NorthEnder]

Rizzo, on Apr 3 2006, 09:33 PM, said:

They turned down the signage!? that was my favorite part.    

Doesn't the GVSU Cook-devos center have a sign just like the one purposed here that was shut down?

[gvsusean]

they had special consideration because they are a govt building at not a private building

[NorthEnder]

gvsusean, on Apr 3 2006, 09:51 PM, said:

they had special consideration because they are a govt building at not a private building

Maybe because the name Devos was involved?


Why give one special consideration and not the other, just because one is for profit, that is a horrible reason.  

[gvsusean]

thats not the reason they just have the ability to bend the rules or maybe that ordinance is in reference to only private buildings and gvsu found the loophole

[GRDadof3]

I believe the sign was shot down because of the building being in the Heartside Historic District.

[Occam]

Hmm... basic rule of building design, they should have a base, a middle, and a top.

The original building is the base, all the red brick is the middle, but without the sign, its sort of missing its top.

Give DTS Winkleman the sign back!  (And maybe we could get the middle to feel lighter than the base somehow, rather than all that heavy red brick?

(backseat designing... hah!  the folks at winkleman must be rolling their eyes)

[GRCentro]

NorthEnder, on Apr 3 2006, 08:46 PM, said:

Doesn't the GVSU Cook-devos center have a sign just like the one purposed here that was shut down?

Public university buildings can trump local code.

[MAU]

gvsusean, on Apr 3 2006, 08:51 PM, said:

they had special consideration because they are a govt building at not a private building

Quote

I believe the sign was shot down because of the building being in the Heartside Historic District.

Two words - Tini Bikini.