Jump to content

Hinman project - new 13 story hotel at 10 Ionia


GRDadof3

Recommended Posts

Sorry, I'm just not feeling the love of preserving historic stuff.  Be my guest, bulldoze away, out with the old, in with the new (even if it's less than 12 storees).  That's progress!  Oh, that includes the Keeler building.  Pretty please, let me pull the switch to demolish that POS.  Yes, I know they're trying to preserve it for some reason.  If you think I'm tired of all this touchy feeley talk, you're right lol. Yes, some people are going to get butt hurt and deplore their new view.  Ok fine, life's not fair.  Live with it.

Edited by arcturus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


That's great if you don't like old things and I would agree that many things are preserved that don't necessarily merit preservation but the problem is that there are some structures that are, for all practical purposes, irreplacible, that some developer or idiotic homeowner, will want to alter/demolish, and replace with something that is truly tasteless/disposable. Witness the crap that was put up in heritage hill before it was a historic district. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, arcturus said:

Sorry, I'm just not feeling the love of preserving historic stuff.  Be my guest, bulldoze away, out with the old, in with the new (even if it's less than 12 storees).  That's progress!  Oh, that includes the Keeler building.  Pretty please, let me pull the switch to demolish that POS.  Yes, I know they're trying to preserve it for some reason.  If you think I'm tired of all this touchy feeley talk, you're right lol. Yes, some people are going to get butt hurt and deplore their new view.  Ok fine, life's not fair.  Live with it.

I don't agree or disagree, but just because something is old doesn't meant it should be saved due to that arbitrary distinction. If it truly is timeless or historical, great. Save it. If not, let it go. 

 

The Keeler Building... mixed on. I'd be all for it getting replaced with a new highrise or something. But not just to get rid of it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, jas49503 said:

That's great if you don't like old things and I would agree that many things are preserved that don't necessarily merit preservation but the problem is that there are some structures that are, for all practical purposes, irreplacible, that some developer or idiotic homeowner, will want to alter/demolish, and replace with something that is truly tasteless/disposable. Witness the crap that was put up in heritage hill before it was a historic district. 

What was put up there?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, destijl said:

WOOD TV studios, all of the medical buildings along State Street and Cherry Street, the old Kent Skills Center, multiple nondescript apartment buildings, to name a few..

WOOD TV is a good example. Knocked down some of the grandest houses in the hill to build that building.

Joe

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually like some of the postwar apartment buildings in HH, and hope those are treated with the same preservationist respect the older houses are.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.969589,-85.6603413,3a,75y,110.3h,82.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sK7UbJYeZc70zSZHYhhCPTg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9653278,-85.6617436,3a,75y,43.97h,89.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sY72SrG1OG_g86EF6Ed-fMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

We don't exactly build like that anymore, either, and after this long they're just as much part of the neighbourhood as anything.

WoodTV studios are a tragedy, however.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, arcturus said:

What was put up there?  

The aforementioned buildings plus all the design choices for remodels. The asphalt shingle siding, there is a home with faux "logs",  numerous terrible additions. Walk around for 5 minutes and you'll see more examples than you can count, even on the nicest street. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop the press! Hundreds of homes in HH, a number of which are in various states of disrepair and/or showing the financial stress of maintaining 'properly', yet people complain about a few apartments (ironic as most houses are rented) and commercial structures mainly on trafficked streets, many of which serve a vital social role in the community?  What's the mixture?  10% commercial/90% homes?  OMG it's a plague!  What neighborhood doesn't have a mix .. and in far greater proportion? Let me guess, relocate them to other neighborhoods, right?  But wait, this is HH, land of rentals and street parked cars. Our designation empowers our NIMBY'ism, window views, and inflexibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jas49503 said:

The aforementioned buildings plus all the design choices for remodels. The asphalt shingle siding, there is a home with faux "logs",  numerous terrible additions. Walk around for 5 minutes and you'll see more examples than you can count, even on the nicest street. 

In defense of the log house, those are claimed to be original.  I have never seen another house like it.  Now to segue back to the skyscraper (thanks, joe!)... I don't recommend going with logs.  I don't think there are any log buildings in Heartside.  :D

The designation of historic, whether in HH or Heartside, does not "empower" the inflexibility.  It mandates a certain degree of inflexibility.  Kind of like, oh , zoning rules, subdivision covenants, and lease restrictions.  Restrictions aren't exactly unique to historic districts.  People get NIMBYish about that sort of thing because they have an expectation the rules will be followed and enforced.  And the restrictions aren't what get in the way of buildings and additions--what gets in the way is the seemingly insatiable desire of many architects to push, ignore, or openly flout those rules.  The architectural profession is far more to blame than any historic commission or commissioner.  Whent he architects follow the rules, the buildings sail right on through, so there is good hope for Hinman.  It's not a big challenge.

There's another common misperception about historic districts worth mentioning, too, and that is that the recently built stuff matters.  It doesn't.  Whether they are good or bad, predated the historic designation or not, or were approved by HPC in the past, generally does not matter one iota.  Like it or not, new buildings and additions have to be compatible with the historic architecture for which the district was designated, end of story.  Fortunately, historic architecture in almost all of Grand Rapids' districts was very diverse, and putting a "modern" (whatever that means) spin on one of those styles can result in very beautiful buildings, if a more "modern" look is what you're after.  I hope Hinman goes in a more sympathetic direction than they have so far, and I can't wait to see what they come back with.  If they follow the rules, and have an architect who is talented at working within them, they should have a spectacular building on their hands.  Or they can just move this building across the street.  Either works, really.  

Edited by x99
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, x99 said:

In defense of the log house, those are claimed to be original.  I have never seen another house like it.  Now to segue back to the skyscraper (thanks, joe!)... I don't recommend going with logs.  I don't think there are any log buildings in Heartside.  :D

The designation of historic, whether in HH or Heartside, does not "empower" the inflexibility.  It mandates a certain degree of inflexibility.  Kind of like, oh , zoning rules, subdivision covenants, and lease restrictions.  Restrictions aren't exactly unique to historic districts.  People get NIMBYish about that sort of thing because they have an expectation the rules will be followed and enforced.  And the restrictions aren't what get in the way of buildings and additions--what gets in the way is the seemingly insatiable desire of many architects to push, ignore, or openly flout those rules.  The architectural profession is far more to blame than any historic commission or commissioner.  Whent he architects follow the rules, the buildings sail right on through, so there is good hope for Hinman.  It's not a big challenge.

There's another common misperception about historic districts worth mentioning, too, and that is that the recently built stuff matters.  It doesn't.  Whether they are good or bad, predated the historic designation or not, or were approved by HPC in the past, generally does not matter one iota.  Like it or not, new buildings and additions have to be compatible with the historic architecture for which the district was designated, end of story.  Fortunately, historic architecture in almost all of Grand Rapids' districts was very diverse, and putting a "modern" (whatever that means) spin on one of those styles can result in very beautiful buildings, if a more "modern" look is what you're after.  I hope Hinman goes in a more sympathetic direction than they have so far, and I can't wait to see what they come back with.  If they follow the rules, and have an architect who is talented at working within them, they should have a spectacular building on their hands.  Or they can just move this building across the street.  Either works, really.  

No logs!??? Are you insane?? ;)

 

I'm anxious to see what they come back with, but the original renderings weren't that far off, IMO. I liked it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I predict that Hinman will come back with a design that some people love, some people will hate, and some people will just shrug their shoulders.  One thing to keep in mind is that that yutz Afendoulis and his puppeteers are likely waiting to pounce on the HPC if they get a bit dodgy on this thing.  It will make a great nugget for their anti-historic district crusade.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hinman's going before the Planning Commission to get approval for the pedestrian bridge. The plans for the 2nd floor are interesting, since they're thinking it may be the primary entry point of the building particularly in colder months. Looks like quite a big reception area with conference rooms?10 Ionia Pedestrian Bridge.JPG10 Ionia Pedestrian Ramp.JPG

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
11 minutes ago, GR_Urbanist said:

That top ruins the form.

I guess we will have to see a full color drawing. Maybe it's glass?

That was my thought as well. Glass panels might actually be a good look. Just random sheets of metal...Not so much. 

Edited by GRLaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, GRLaker said:

That was my thought as well. Glass panels might actually be a good look. Just random sheets of metal...Not so much. 

Admittedly, I don't know too much about the HPC or its standards, but I would guess random sheets of metal would not survive the Commission's scrutiny.  More likely to be a brick or stone facade to enclose mechanicals??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • 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.