schnitzelbank

[DwntwnGeo]

That's why civil engineers should stick to figuring out how to move fluids from point A to point B and leave aesthetic issues to those of us who actually understand them.

What does moving fluids have to do with "Civil Engineers"? I would think Civil Engineers deal more with buidlings, bridges, roads, structural componets of any of these. While fluid processes or would fall more under another Engineering disipline. Or at least this was how the courses were laid out at the Engineering college I attended.

I would rather see the land used for something. I don't think it will "make" or "break" my life in Grand Rapids if this would be torn down. I would hate to see St. Mary's campus expansion come to a hault so when we have gray hair and stand on the street to look the half deteriorated Schitzelbank to say to ourselves, "I remember eating great traditional German food here once." I would rather remember the site as it looks now with my good memories, than to see it in bad or worse shape down the road.

I don't think Schintzelbank will reopen their doors, so whatever will go into this building will probably not be up to anyone's standards on this board. Sometimes we have to bite reality and understand that the Schnitzelbank that we know and love is gone.

Correction:

Civil Engieers do deal with water and sewage transport in cities. I guess more of my main point was that Civil Engineers deal with a lot more than just water and sewage flows.

[GRDadof3]

I've actually heard civil engineers use the saying "Can't build a building unless you can get the crap-out". That must be where the fluids (and solids) is coming from...

In the case of the Schnitz though, I just don't see how you could incorporate that into another project.

[Mark Miller]

It is not so much that they want to tear down the Schnitzelbank, but rather that they want to replace it with yet another surface parking lot.

Whether or not they are building a $60 million LEED building on their campus makes little difference to those of us that see the continued replacement of buildings with surface parking as an anti-urban endeavor.

St Mary's is an urban campus, which happens to border a historic district. They need to be more sympathetic to that and stop acting as if they are out in Byron Center.

The civil engineer comment was more of a joke than anything else. I realize that civil engineers do other things, but I for one, do not want them making aesthetic decisions, because their training has not prepared them for it, just as my training as not prepared me for sizing a sanitary sewer line. The exception to that is the one civil engineer that I have met who actually got it, Peter Swift in Colorado.

[DwntwnGeo]

It is not so much that they want to tear down the Schnitzelbank, but rather that they want to replace it with yet another surface parking lot.

Whether or not they are building a $60 million LEED building on their campus makes little difference to those of us that see the continued replacement of buildings with surface parking as an anti-urban endeavor.

St Mary's is an urban campus, which happens to border a historic district. They need to be more sympathetic to that and stop acting as if they are out in Byron Center.

The civil engineer comment was more of a joke than anything else. I realize that civil engineers do other things, but I for one, do not want them making aesthetic decisions, because their training has not prepared them for it, just as my training as not prepared me for sizing a sanitary sewer line. The exception to that is the one civil engineer that I have met who actually got it, Peter Swift in Colorado.

I guess the point that I am trying to get across to people is that everyone seems to think or see in the "now" verses several years out. I know that I have not seen St. Mary's "Master Plan" for their downtown campus. Maybe you have and if that is the case than you have more insite than I do. What would you say if in 3-5 years they want to build a new part of the hospital on the lot that the Schnitz is on now. Would you have a problem than? I don't like the see surface lots either. From a buiness stand point there may be factors that we don't know about. Factors that are and will not be public knowledge to us. Nothing states that everything has to be approved by the members of this board. Maybe since there is already demolition going on at the site, and they might have the extra cash now, the hospital thought they could remove the building thus making it easier for them to build their now " Sceince Center" or whatever it will be in the future. We don't know and maybe St. Mary's doesn't know either, but in 3-5 years, maybe every building will need be torn down in the LEED way today. Thus this would rise the cost of making their new "Science Center"

My point is that we don't always know everything that is going on behind the doors of large buinesses. I find it hard to believe that St. Mary's doesn't have a Master Plan for all their land downtown. If they have no plan for the site and just want to tear it down to spite the neighborhood and citizens in Grand Rapids, than that is poor planning on their part, and someday it will catch up to them.

[DwntwnGeo]

An additional note in regards to St. Mary's. I am sure they have paid very close attention to one of their peers in town (Metropolitian Hospital). Metro Hospital is totally surrounded by residental in an older part of Grand Rapids. Metro had used up most or all of their land available and needed more to expand. When they tried to buy up additional land around their site, they found great opposition. They were than forced out to the subburbs to build a new campus. When they annouced they wanted to reduce or shut down the old site on Boston, all heck broke out again with the neighboorhood and thus forced to maintiain some of their facilities at the old location. What is a Hospital suppose to do in a every growing chaning world that demands more and more each and every day?

St. Mary's has seen all this and probably is trying to prepare itself so it won't have to go through what Metro Hospital has done in the past several years.

[GaryP]

If/when this decision by the HPC is overturned will it impact their legitimacy at all? Does this building really meet historic requirements?

[Mark Miller]

Their track record somewhat speaks for itself. They are expanding outward with large expanses of parking lots.

In addition to this, they have recently been unsympathetic to the historic context around them. A case in point is a small brick storefront on State Street that had two bays of traditional shopfronts and a third bay that was boarded up. St. Mary's proposed to "rehab" this third bay in a very inappropriate way saying that there was no way that they could make a more contextual solution work. In the end, after being prodded (and denied) by HPC they did the right thing. The building is now a proper traditional storefront and looks pretty decent. This is indicative of their view of the context in which they sit.

Certainly the leveling of the historic McCauley is another example of this, along with the cartoon replacement, which will never have the stature of the original, IMO.

All of that said, their new proposed facilities should help to make the overall street frontage better and certainly their mere presence can help to spur further development along State Street, which could be a huge benefit to the surrounding neighborhoods. Currently State Street is an underused hollowed out shell, but it has the potential to be great.

There is always a silver lining in situations like this one. I feel as though they need to tread lightly over some of the existing urban structure and be more sympathetic to their location. An urban hospital can work, but it needs to understand that it is urban and is relating to a larger area than just its own campus.

I also feel that it is time for them to begin to build at a level of Spectrum, which means stopping surface parking lots and building a parking deck. There is no reason why they should continue to utilize surface parking, considering their size and future expansion.

[GRDadof3]

Their track record somewhat speaks for itself. They are expanding outward with large expanses of parking lots.

In addition to this, they have recently been unsympathetic to the historic context around them. A case in point is a small brick storefront on State Street that had two bays of traditional shopfronts and a third bay that was boarded up. St. Mary's proposed to "rehab" this third bay in a very inappropriate way saying that there was no way that they could make a more contextual solution work. In the end, after being prodded (and denied) by HPC they did the right thing. The building is now a proper traditional storefront and looks pretty decent. This is indicative of their view of the context in which they sit.

Certainly the leveling of the historic McCauley is another example of this, along with the cartoon replacement, which will never have the stature of the original, IMO.

All of that said, their new proposed facilities should help to make the overall street frontage better and certainly their mere presence can help to spur further development along State Street, which could be a huge benefit to the surrounding neighborhoods. Currently State Street is an underused hollowed out shell, but it has the potential to be great.

There is always a silver lining in situations like this one. I feel as though they need to tread lightly over some of the existing urban structure and be more sympathetic to their location. An urban hospital can work, but it needs to understand that it is urban and is relating to a larger area than just its own campus.

I also feel that it is time for them to begin to build at a level of Spectrum, which means stopping surface parking lots and building a parking deck. There is no reason why they should continue to utilize surface parking, considering their size and future expansion.

There is a 425 car ramp planned for Cherry & Lagrave as part of the Hauenstein addition:

http://www.mibiz.com/absolutenm/templates/...&zoneid=168

Quick question: The Schnitz is being leveled by Mary Free Bed and not St. Mary's, correct? Aren't they separate entities?

I agree that they have undoubtedly taken over an entire region of downtown, from Wealthy to Oakes, and from Sheldon to Heritage Hill. The density in that area is paltry.

It will be interesting to see what they do with the Eerdman's land across the street.

[Mark Miller]

If/when this decision by the HPC is overturned will it impact their legitimacy at all? Does this building really meet historic requirements?

The HPC is here to protect historic resources, through the interpretation of Federal and Local Guidelines. Its legitimacy will not be compromised over issues such as these, as long as these guidelines are in place.

The HPC takes heat everytime something like this happens. They are routinely misquoted in the press along with having erroneous reporting in the press. The perception of this committee is, as a result, not neccessarily good. An example of this is a recent report about how HPC has held up the process of repair of the Fulton Street Cemetery wall. This is flat out not true. Any delays in this process is the result of the city engineering and their consultants dragging their feet on this project. The project has never been formally before HPC.

As far as the building meeting historic requirements? It was built in 1938, so by default, since it is over 50 years old, it can be deemed a historic resource. There are certainly other qualifiers, but the minimum threshold has been met.

[GaryP]

The HPC is here to protect historic resources, through the interpretation of Federal and Local Guidelines. Its legitimacy will not be compromised over issues such as these, as long as these guidelines are in place.

As far as the building meeting historic requirements? It was built in 1938, so by default, since it is over 50 years old, it can be deemed a historic resource. There are certainly other qualifiers, but the minimum threshold has been met.

Its a cool old building IMHO, but I side with DwntwnGeo in that I'd rather have the economic development effect from the hospital than an empty building. I get the feeling that Mary Free Bed was anticipating a fight with this and have factored that into their plans.

I also get the feeling that the HPC was more against tearing this building down because it was going to be replaced with something they didnt like. Are they allowed to take such things into consideration?

I want to categorize the Schnitz building as being about as valuable as the Israel

[twoshort]

I want to categorize the Schnitz building as being about as valuable as the Israel

[GRDadof3]

I want to categorize the Schnitz building as being about as valuable as the Israel

[Mark Miller]

From my perspective, I feel that the Israel's building was more valuable as a resource. I also felt it was a better building. But that is all just my opinion.

As far as the decision being influenced by what is replacing it, that should not technically be considered and is most certainly inappropriate. Since this is outside of a district, the HPC can only look at the historic merit of the building and make reccommendations to that effect.

It is totally different in district, where all things, including what is replacing the proposed demolition must be considered.

Does what is replacing it have an effect on judgements? The commission is made up of human beings, all of whom have strong feelings about preservation and most of whom have direct ties to it in the form of property ownership and residence within district.

The two homes, which are also proposed for demolition are just as questionable. I would go as far to say that these two residences are no different than much of what you find in Heritage Hill and as such need to be looked at more carefully than by an engineer from Dreisinga. That is the basis for the recommendation.

At the same HPC meeting, as an advisory opinion, the commission gave a positive nod to tear down a few homes in Wealthy Heights (in district) in order to help make the neighborhood better and possibly spur economic development.

The commission is clearly not standing in the way of economic development, as evidenced by the large number of buildings which have been torn down in the last few years, including the Milner Hotel.

The fact is that the Federal and Local guidelines, the HPC and the preservation districts create more economic development than many other things. It seems to me that I heard that only hospital construction rated higher in job creation. It should also be noted that properties within district have, across the board, faired extremely well in appreciation of their value as compared to similar properties outside district. This appreciation has been consistent for many years and is not a coincidence.

These districts have created more home ownership, higher home values, safer neighborhoods and much more stable neighborhoods in our city.

[GR_Urbanist]

Maybe this parking lot in question will be another Hospital expansion in the next few years? I am not one for tearing everything down, but I would rather see it used as a parking lot than to see the Schnitzelbank that I remember sit there empty and rot away. Don't forget the hospital is a business of sorts and is looking to aquire land around its core when the opportunity presents itself. I do not know the "master" plan of the hospital, but maybe there are plans to build something other than a parking lot on that particular spot. We all, including myself, cannot expect to see and have everything happen in an area overnight. It takes time and most of all lots of money.

You might of just given a blank check excuse to demolish any building in the dt area for parking lots. All they have to say is that "oh, we'll build something cool there later on if only we can use this as a parking lot for a little while". I'm sure this is the same reasoning that was given when "urban renewal" took place or the attempt to bulldoze Heritage Hill back in the 60s and 70s. Does anyone think losing all 100+ of those buildings downtown in those old photographs was worth what we ended up with today? Many of those "temporary" parking lots didn't get filled in until the past 7 years. Some still are parking lots almost 40 years after they buildings there went down!

If you fast forward 10 or 20 years, that temporary St. Mary’s lot is still going to be there with any plans for an expansion totally forgotten. A similar thing happened with the old Purple East building on Fulton. Park Church, which had spent the past decades buying every piece of land on their block and turning it into parking, told the city that they wanted to tear the Purple East building down so they could build a youth center. They said the current building was just too unsafe. The city didn't buy their story, but the church got a judge to force the demolition. Park Church has made ZERO plans for their youth center and instead has expanded their parking lot all the way to Fulton. That whole block consist of nothing but that church, and parking lot! A horrid eyesore!

I simply do not believe that St. Mary's has any plans to expand an inch on these parking lots, existing or planned. Whatever plans they say they have is only to make it easier for people to let them take down yet another DT building for yet another car coral.

[mejane]

An additional note in regards to St. Mary's. I am sure they have paid very close attention to one of their peers in town (Metropolitian Hospital). Metro Hospital is totally surrounded by residental in an older part of Grand Rapids. Metro had used up most or all of their land available and needed more to expand. When they tried to buy up additional land around their site, they found great opposition. They were than forced out to the subburbs to build a new campus. When they annouced they wanted to reduce or shut down the old site on Boston, all heck broke out again with the neighboorhood and thus forced to maintiain some of their facilities at the old location. What is a Hospital suppose to do in a every growing chaning world that demands more and more each and every day?

OR, if you're a cynic like me, you can believe the story I heard that Metro got exactly

what they wanted, that they wanted to move to their property (they already had it) but

had to meet the requirements of the state on moving a hospital which required proving

they needed more beds and couldn't produce them on their current site. The buyout

they put out there to purchase and demolish an awful lot of homes surrounding their

site was crap and the homeowners rejected it wholesale, for the most part. Michigan

Christian Home wasn't budging, and I was told Metro knew that and were banking on

their offer being rejected by the neighboring homeowners - so they really got what

they wanted all along - their hospital in the burbs off the soon to be constructed

6 - all this in order to stay solvent and be able to compete with the big boys in town,

mainly, Spectrum.

[DwntwnGeo]

Whatever happens to the "said" property, it doesn't change the fact that St. Mary's or Mary Freebed physically paid money for it and now owns it. If your HPC won't let them tear it down for whatever reason, what do you think they will do to it? My guess is they will do nothing and let it rot and decay in place and in 10-20 years, go back again and apply to tear it down to for parking or maybe they will place a building on it. Eitehr way it doesn't change the fact that the building is vacant and the hospital ownes it.

I have an idea... Why doesn't the district set up a council to approve or disapprove of any parcel with a building over 50 years old on it. Before the parcel can be sold the potential owner will have to show the council what he or she will do with the property if anything. That way the council will know ahead of time what every developer's plans are in the given historic district and we won't have to spend so much time talking about it after the property is sold and money changed hands.

There will come a time, if it hasn't happened already, when developers will over look certain areas, because of all the rules, restrictions, loops holes and politics that he/she will need to go through to get anything done. I am not saying that you give everyone the right to do anything they please, but the tigher the ropes, I think the less developement you will welcome.

[DwntwnGeo]

OR, if you're a cynic like me, you can believe the story I heard that Metro got exactly

what they wanted, that they wanted to move to their property (they already had it) but

had to meet the requirements of the state on moving a hospital which required proving

they needed more beds and couldn't produce them on their current site. The buyout

they put out their to purchase and demolish an awful lot of homes surrounding their

site was crap and the homeowners rejected it wholesale, for the most part. Michigan

Christian Home wasn't budging, and I was told Metro knew that and were banking on

their offer being rejected by the neighboring homeowners - so they really got what

they wanted all along - their hospital in the burbs off the soon to be constructed

6 - all this in order to stay solvent and be able to compete with the big boys in town,

mainly, Spectrum.

mejane,

You may very well be correct. I am not a member of Metro Hospital and do not claim to know the details behind their move to the burbs. I just like to try and open on topics and try to see the situation from both sides of the table. If this is the case, than they must have really planned this out and researched on how decisions would be voted and portrayed by the public.

[mejane]

mejane,

You may very well be correct. I am not a member of Metro Hospital and do not claim to know the details behind their move to the burbs. I just like to try and open on topics and try to see the situation from both sides of the table. If this is the case, than they must have really planned this out and researched on how decisions would be voted and portrayed by the public.

I think it was an easy call, that neighborhood is very neighborhood-y, if you know

what I mean, plus, it borders on EGR. That plat, or at least the area right across

the street, was named "Eastgate" because it was thought of as being the gateway

into East Grand Rapids.

[mejane]

As an aside, some of you may be aware of the series of drawings/watercolors

I have done of favorite Grand Rapids landmarks which are used by (realtor)

Amy Miller for her personal business postcard mailings. Anyway, coincidently,

I've nearly completed the Schnitz which I started back in March, and 12x18 giclee

prints of it will be available through Eyekons Gallery, as will all the others, come

this November. Not looking to advertise here, but some of these places are very

sentimental to many of us Grand Rapidians - made painfully so by disappearing -

so I thought you all might like the info.

[numstead]

Th planning commission approved the demolision and parking lot without much fight. The only thing that came up that any of the commissioners balked at was the decorative fence that was proposed around the site.

The commissioners echoed the jist of the HPC's findings; that the Schnitzelbank had historical significane as a business, not as a building.

[AlexPKeaton]

What about the houses? Are those going as well?

-nb

[numstead]

What about the houses? Are those going as well?

-nb

what houses?

here's something I noticed at the meeting... more than 75% of the property is already surface parking anyway.

[civitas]

what houses?

here's something I noticed at the meeting... more than 75% of the property is already surface parking anyway.

If they only gained 25% parking while loosing the streetwall, is it possible that the cost outweighed the benefit?

I was surprised that the fence wasn't a bigger concern. MFB's arguement that they needed the fence to keep people from stealing their landscaping was really lame.

[AlexPKeaton]

what houses?

here's something I noticed at the meeting... more than 75% of the property is already surface parking anyway.

On the first page of this thread it was mentioned that there were three other structures that would be razed for this parking lot. Are those going to be part of another hearing, or was the whole thing approved?

-nb

[GRDadof3]

On the first page of this thread it was mentioned that there were three other structures that would be razed for this parking lot. Are those going to be part of another hearing, or was the whole thing approved?

-nb

We're getting cross-contamination of discussions here. The houses are on Cherry St and are eyed for demolition by St Mary's as part of their expansion plans across the street.

This discussion is mainly about Mary Free Bed demolishing Schnitzelbank to build a parking lot.