65 Monroe Center

[dbrok]

Everyone keeps suggesting to keep the art deco feel. The art deco is NOT the original facade, but was added in the 30's

I thought the art deco design was part of the addition from 1937, especially the eagles out front. What is the type of design used for the expansion?

[mpchicago]

Everyone keeps suggesting to keep the art deco feel. The art deco is NOT the original facade, but was added in the 30's

I think we all understand that the art deco was not original, but I like it and think its a nice contrast to the other Italianate buildings in that block. While in most cases I prefer when a building is brought back to its original design, I believe this is one case where keeping it in this era is ok.

Here in Chicago the restoration of the Rookery Building included restoring the Frank Lloyd Wright interior in lieu of the original Root design. I know there is a big difference between Wright and who ever designed this deco renovation back in the day, but in my opinion the art deco works.

[andrew.w]

I also like the black and art deco for a little variety on Monroe, despite not being the original design. Since, a total building restoration to its original appearance is probably out of the question I would much rather see the front section remain as it is.

As for the third floor, if the design and style is not already set, I would suggest reppeating the elements that are already existing. Windows would be large in the style of the large windows on the side of the building and instead of separated by black stone, I think that white glazed brick (with maybe a stripe of black brick) would be very appropriate and help to ballance the heaviness of the existing black.

-Just a thought.

[joeDowntown]

That still makes the facade 70 years old...

Everyone keeps suggesting to keep the art deco feel. The art deco is NOT the original facade, but was added in the 30's

[civitas]

Not much left...

[Rizzo]

Not much left...

2nd pic, he looks very authoritive! I'd like to have one of thoes in front of my residence.

[GRDadof3]

Not much left...

Ugggh! What a mess the renovation made back in the 30's with the original arched windows and their pattern. But it's kind of like "Well, we're committed now....." That highly reflective mirror glass has to go, IMO.

That still makes the facade 70 years old...

..and this facade was probably 50 years old. Worth keeping? To me, I don't see much difference between the two. They're still very poorly applied makeup.

[Allison Slater]

Yes, the windows may not line up with the original. But regardless, the current black design of the building is a style which is now unique, and not very ugly either (as opposed to the siegel's facade which looks horrendous) and, imho, has become a bit of a lesser-focused upon but still present icon of the area. I'm not one to cry 'preserve!' on many buildings. However, I do feel the art-deco style here with the black facade is something which should indeed be preserved, and on top of that, given a little attention.

[andrew.w]

I was going to reply to this alst night but I was too tired...

For me, I see quite a difference between Siegel's and 65 Monroe.

Siegel's is definately poorly applied makeup. (1) The material is cheap, (2) except for this facade and the cornice, all of the original building was kept intact and (3) even a large section of it can still be seen on the side. Furthermore, though it may be 50 years old today, it didn't last that long before the facade was restored (and it may have been replaced before the restoration when the whole building was covered). And that doesn't even cover the style of the applied front, which I do think is ugly.

65 Monroe was pretty much new construction/extreem remodeling. (1) The material is not simply a cheap coverup but was meant to permanently replace the original brick. (2) The entire original building was destroyed in making this 1937 design; two floors were removed, the interior completely remodeled, all that's left is some old brick and the top of some arched windows. (3) The buildig is unique on Monroe Center and IMO certainly isn't that unnatractive.

GRDad, what do you suggest be done with the building? A full restoration is out of the question as far as cost goes since it would end up being an entire reconstruction (even the bare bones of the original building are hardly there). Although it is kind of cool being able to see the original construction of this building and how it was altered, the brick is a mess and I don't think much can be done with it other than painting it or covering it up with the same or new material.

[GRDadof3]

I was going to reply to this alst night but I was too tired...

For me, I see quite a difference between Siegel's and 65 Monroe.

Siegel's is definately poorly applied makeup. (1) The material is cheap, (2) except for this facade and the cornice, all of the original building was kept intact and (3) even a large section of it can still be seen on the side. Furthermore, though it may be 50 years old today, it didn't last that long before the facade was restored (and it may have been replaced before the restoration when the whole building was covered). And that doesn't even cover the style of the applied front, which I do think is ugly.

65 Monroe was pretty much new construction/extreem remodeling. (1) The material is not simply a cheap coverup but was meant to permanently replace the original brick. (2) The entire original building was destroyed in making this 1937 design; two floors were removed, the interior completely remodeled, all that's left is some old brick and the top of some arched windows. (3) The buildig is unique on Monroe Center and IMO certainly isn't that unnatractive.

GRDad, what do you suggest be done with the building? A full restoration is out of the question as far as cost goes since it would end up being an entire reconstruction (even the bare bones of the original building are hardly there). Although it is kind of cool being able to see the original construction of this building and how it was altered, the brick is a mess and I don't think much can be done with it other than painting it or covering it up with the same or new material.

As I said before, it's hard to tell what to do until all the Albarene comes off. And I'm not suggesting that it not be covered over with new material or painted. That might be the only answer. I have no problem with that, because there are a lot of repainted brick buildings downtown that I have no problem with. But to me, the FAKE art deco facade is not MUCH better than what was on the Aldrich building. The Albarene also did not stand up to the test of time, since it has to be replaced.

In fact, the eagles look a bit silly to me. I chuckle every time I walk by there and happen to look up at them. It's great to have diversity in architectural styles around downtown, but this building is/was not an architectural style.

But do you want a big black glass cube at that corner?

[joeDowntown]

Wow, you hate this building as if it had called your mamma fat.

I still think it is a nice contrast to what is on the rest of the street. I'm not saying keep it "as-is", but the building definitely has some aesthetics to work from to come up with a better, modern design.

And honestly, I'd rather have this building as-is over the renovation of the Jimmy John's next door.

Joe

As I said before, it's hard to tell what to do until all the Albarene comes off. And I'm not suggesting that it not be covered over with new material or painted. That might be the only answer. I have no problem with that, because there are a lot of repainted brick buildings downtown that I have no problem with. But to me, the FAKE art deco facade is not MUCH better than what was on the Aldrich building. The Albarene also did not stand up to the test of time, since it has to be replaced.

In fact, the eagles look a bit silly to me. I chuckle every time I walk by there and happen to look up at them. It's great to have diversity in architectural styles around downtown, but this building is/was not an architectural style.

But do you want a big black glass cube at that corner?

[snoogit]

But do you want a big black glass cube at that corner?

[cubey]

Every monkey needs its monolith

[DwntwnGeo]

Wow, you hate this building as if it had called your mamma fat.

I still think it is a nice contrast to what is on the rest of the street. I'm not saying keep it "as-is", but the building definitely has some aesthetics to work from to come up with a better, modern design.

And honestly, I'd rather have this building as-is over the renovation of the Jimmy John's next door.

Joe

Maybe the HPC should contacted and they can explain how it should be reconstructed to their orignal standards to preserve the downtown historic core.

[civitas]

I agree that the black is a poor example of any style and should be trashed. I could easily live with a proper reconstruction of the original building. I could also live with a well designed modern building. The former is much easier to do than the later.

I always thought that the Crate and Barrel on Michigan Ave. in Chicago did a pretty good job of a new building on a historic street - but at a significantly different scale than 65 Monroe.

[BigPlayJ]

Two questions:

1. Anyone know why the third story was removed?

2. Dad, where did you find that old picture?

For the record, I'm glad the black facade is coming off, and hope they don't replace it with something similar.

[GRDadof3]

Wow, you hate this building as if it had called your mamma fat.

Joe

"Hate" is such a strong word...

civitas: The Crate and Barrel flagship store is one of my favorite examples of well designed modern architecture in a rich historical setting. I love it. I'm trying to remember who designed it (Lohan or Perkins+Will???)

edit: Solomon Cordwell Buenz I hear they may be bringing another design/project to Grand Rapids.

BigPlayJ: I got that picture from the "Grand Rapids Then and Now" thread. I think it's civitas'.

[civitas]

BigPlayJ: I got that picture from the "Grand Rapids Then and Now" thread. I think it's civitas'.

And I got it from the GR Library online photo collection.

Hey, a birdie told me that this building may be a flagship store for a major retailer too...

[civitas]

edit: Solomon Cordwell Buenz I hear they may be bringing another design/project to Grand Rapids.

Alright, that's enough playing my rumor is bigger than your rumor. You cannot just drop a suggestion that the designer of C&B is coming to town without giving every detail you know.

I'm going to count to 10 and those details better be posted by the time I'm done or else.

[Edit: ]

[mgreven]

Wal-mart? Trying to take this Wal-Mart loving board off topic? Just think of how many people will post now singing the praises of the WM! Just kidding!

I do like the drawing, though. Nice job!

[GRDadof3]

That is a great drawing, and the Wal-Mart is too funny! Paint the brick dark green like the Kirby in GH.

And it'd be nice to see it at 4 or 5 stories to provide a "book-end" for that little block. Pick pick pick..

[Veloise]

...

Now that's funny.

I see they got their variance approved on zero bicycle parking...

[civitas]

Now that's funny.

I see they got their variance approved on zero bicycle parking...

Get serious! How would customers push the shopping carts to their cars with bikes in the way?

[Budgie Frisket]

Get serious! How would customers push the shopping carts to their cars with bikes in the way?

Bikes can have baskets, too.

[BigPlayJ]

And I got it from the GR Library online photo collection.

Hey, a birdie told me that this building may be a flagship store for a major retailer too...

Now that's comedy!

Thanks for the info on the photo source.

[GRCentro]

Welcome, intovb. I look very much foward to watching this project unfold. Good luck!

Highlight the architectural friezes with silver leaf (I laughed about the gold plating commment earlier), but keep the art deco feel, even if some re-skinning has to be done. If this facade goes away, a few years from now, people will be lamenting how we lost such a great building.

I agree. I used to hate this building, but have since come to appreciate it's (potential) aesthetic beauty. Of course detailing is expensive, but a few extrior garnishes could go a long way. An otherwise boring black cube becomes quite classy: