Twelve Weston (Formerly known as 35 and 41 S Division)

[Pattmost20]

28 minutes ago, Floyd_Z said:

How many apartments?  8-10? Why are developers so afraid to go big around here?

22

[joeDowntown]

It’s all fun and games until someone falls in the hole.

[GRDadof3]

On 9/2/2018 at 2:26 PM, joeDowntown said:

 

We've also got a jumper on the third floor in one of the renderings.

Joe

Those look like inmates Joe. Let's try to be more sensitive. 

[x99]

On 9/2/2018 at 8:48 AM, GR_Urbanist said:

Well...wow. That building design is just some crap.

 

You stole the words from my mouth.  The bright side is that it's an uninteresting brick people warehouse instead of an uninteresting metal panel people warehouse.  That's progress, at least.  Too bad they can't just recreate what was there.  Close to the same size, and much prettier.

EDIT:  Thinking about this, I realized another issue with this.  Previously, this was two buildings.  The best small-scale urban projects will often take a single building and put two or more facades on it to keep maintain a varied streetscape.  That probably would have helped. 

Edited September 10, 2018 by x99

[Kinkema]

Construction is underway for this project.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Kinkema

[Guest]

meh.

[GRDadof3]

On 9/2/2018 at 8:37 AM, GRDadof3 said:

Here's the new 12 Weston proposal. I assume this is a "starting" drawing knowing that a lot more detail will be required? 

 

 

 

This project is actually worse looking than the renderings, in my opinion. It honestly looks like a jail. Is the GRPD moving into it? 

 

[ironyisadeadscene]

A wasted opportunity for a great location. Put this stuff on the outskirts of downtown.

[GVSUChris]

15 hours ago, GRDadof3 said:

This project is actually worse looking than the renderings, in my opinion. It honestly looks like a jail. Is the GRPD moving into it? 

 

I really hate this building. I wanted to keep an open mind and just be grateful for infill, but as I just said to someone the other day, I'd seriously rather it be that nasty hole at this point. 

[Ted]

Funny. I rode by yesterday morning and thought it was looking great.

[egrguy]

Does anyone have a photo?

[joeDowntown]

Yep, it’s ugly. It’s a shame, because they could have done some very minor things to make it fit in with the neighborhood. 

I hope the street level doesn’t sit empty for years like other developments around town. 

Joe

[GVSUChris]

2 minutes ago, joeDowntown said:

Yep, it’s ugly. It’s a shame, because they could have done some very minor things to make it fit in with the neighborhood. 

I hope the street level doesn’t sit empty for years like other developments around town. 

Joe

Besides how ugly it is in general, I really can't stand that brick wall section on the ground floor along Division. And yes, to @GRDadof3's comment, it feels like some kind of detention center. 

[gvsusean]

1 hour ago, joeDowntown said:

Yep, it’s ugly. It’s a shame, because they could have done some very minor things to make it fit in with the neighborhood. 

I hope the street level doesn’t sit empty for years like other developments around town. 

Joe

Good lord, that’s horrible

[Prankster]

Looks like it was inspired by the police station (old city center). 

[andrew.w]

I seem to be differing quite a bit with the locals lately. I think the 200 Monroe building redo is pretty awful, but I am having a hard time calling this ugly, especially once the strong horizontal dark accents are done and the storefront is filled in. If it could be improved any, I think it could have used a more interesting brick - either texture or color variation or both, the windows could have been 4-6" wider, and one or two minor details to give it just a bit more texture and humanity. But I don't feel like it is that far off. Grand Rapids has been plagued with far more ugly residential developments in the last decade.

Edited August 13, 2019 by andrew.w

[joeDowntown]

I think my issue with it is mainly the narrow windows, the brick window sills (why couldn't they do limestone or concrete to give it a more traditional look). I also think the plain brick wall is pretty bad. It does look like the rendering, so I guess they stuck with the plan, I just think it's uninspired infill, on a street filled with interesting buildings. South Division has many issues, but the existing architecture has a lot of character. I think they could have tried a bit harder. 

Also, that corner needs transparency. I think they should have demanded a lot more transparency on the Weston side...

Joe

[GRDadof3]

8 hours ago, GVSUChris said:

I really hate this building. I wanted to keep an open mind and just be grateful for infill, but as I just said to someone the other day, I'd seriously rather it be that nasty hole at this point. 

I say we petition to have the hole brought back. At least with that painted wall ad it had character. 

When I was growing up I went to an Elementary School that was built in the 60's. Then the large nice windows were partially filled in as part of some energy savings idea out of the Carter era. That elementary school still to this day looks better than this project. 

I'm being harsh because this shit never should have been approved, especially by the HPC (maybe part of the problem). Once again, one more reason to write off South Division. 

[GR_Urbanist]

It's uninspiring, but it is salvageable depending on the ground floor use and signage used. That will go a long way towards making up for the blandness. Maybe it should be called the "old Battle-Ax" building in honor of the sign that have been covered up again....and the fact that the building is ugly as sin.

With Rockwell and the Republic next door, and being closer to the arena, I hope they will find a tenant that will complement  this block properly. No non-profits or homeless charities.

[Allison Slater]

It's not the greatest compared to the authentic older buildings in the area, but worse than the hole? Come on, now. It feels like a better version of some of the postwar stuff one street to the east. Not my favorite, but certainly not worth being overly dramatic about.

[Guest]

I also prefer the hole.

Perhaps this is the mediocrity we can all look forward to for Division?

[GRDadof3]

2 hours ago, Floyd_Z said:

I also prefer the hole.

Perhaps this is the mediocrity we can all look forward to for Division?

"Bring back the hole! Bring back the hole!"

[joeDowntown]

I think the reason people rather have the hole is that at least a hole has “opportunity”. Once a mediocre building is built, we’re stuck with it for a long time. 

I just wish building owners would spend a little bit more on the front end to build something that inspires. 

I always loved Daniel Burnham / Chicago’s thoughts on architecture:

  "Make no little plans, for they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably will not themselves be realized. Make big plans. Aim high in hope and work remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die."

I heard Daniel Burnham never actually said this, but I think it’s the spirit that made Chicago such a great architectural city. 

Not asking for the Taj Mahal, but small little details shouldn’t be ignored (on this building, or others”. Easier said than done, but it’s something Grand Rapids developers should aspire to. 

Joe

[wingbert]

If I recall, the HPC threw a conniption over the early designs for the Hinman project.  This is far more atrocious than anything that was ever proposed there and yet this is OK?  How does the HPC maintain any kind of credibility in light of that incongruity?

[GRDadof3]

7 hours ago, joeDowntown said:

I think the reason people rather have the hole is that at least a hole has “opportunity”. Once a mediocre building is built, we’re stuck with it for a long time. 

I just wish building owners would spend a little bit more on the front end to build something that inspires. 

I always loved Daniel Burnham / Chicago’s thoughts on architecture:

  "Make no little plans, for they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably will not themselves be realized. Make big plans. Aim high in hope and work remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die."

I heard Daniel Burnham never actually said this, but I think it’s the spirit that made Chicago such a great architectural city. 

Not asking for the Taj Mahal, but small little details shouldn’t be ignored (on this building, or others”. Easier said than done, but it’s something Grand Rapids developers should aspire to. 

Joe

Exactly. It's easy to move blocks and shapes around in CAD. In fact, you don't even need to be an architect to do it. 

Some people like modern architecture. I do, in fact. But I wouldn't hire a "modern" architect to do a building in an historic district. Although 38 commerce blends old and new well. So does the building with 40 acres in it.