Grand Rapids Urban Renewal in Slides

[AlexPKeaton]

I believe Providence's entire downtown is "artificial," particularly the river. There was a really interesting thread with aerial photos of the changes in the Providence section a few years ago.

[andrew.w]

Since we are on the subject of the City Hall, I found these images in the Historic American Building Survey: CityHallGR The pictures look to have been taken just prior to demolition (Old Kent building is complete and the rest of the block has already been cleared).

I would have to say the outside was definitely showing signs of age, but it is hard to look at the pictures of the main stair and call it a dump...

I was looking for the right word in response to tSlater's post. "Artificial" is it. It might be nice to rebuild some of the classic buildings, but they'll be artificial. It's just not the same. Even new construction that tries to emulate the past (rather than exactly replicate) just comes off really hokey. You know it's not historical, but it tries so hard to appear that way. Maybe it falls into the uncanny valley?

Maybe it could be done well, but I've just never seen it.

[LA Dave]

Thanks for the walk through time walker. This summed up something I was going to say in response to Paramaribo's response. Many of the people in the audience gasped in horror at some of the mass clearing that went on, but urban renewal was so popular back then to "save" downtowns that it swept the nation. Many well-meaning people, who were probably in the audience, probably nodded their heads in agreement back then that the 40 acre area in downtown Grand Rapids had to go, and it was the only way to "save" downtown from becoming completely deserted. To this day, I'm not sure if it was wrong-headed policy or not. Can anyone think of a city that was not part of the federal program? That has its downtown almost completely intact from pre-1950's?

[LA Dave]

Regarding the reconstruction of old buildings: Yes, it can be done. Dresden is doing it wholescale, with the incredible Frauenkirche perhaps the best example. Potsdam is not far behind. Warsaw did it after World War II, rebuilding the entire central city area.

The Ohio State University (gotta make sure that definite article is in there or the Buckeyes will beotch) simultaneously tore down and rebuilt University Hall, the first large campus building as part of a Bicentennial program in the 1970s.

It is too late to rebuild City Hall. It would have been nice to have kept at least the clock tower, but even that was too much for the time, and would be prohibitively expensive now.

Victorian architecture had a bad reputation in the US in that era, and there was little sentiment to maintain those old buildings. Raildudes Dad is right about their condition. Of course, with restoration, the building could again have been made magnificent. Look at the State Capitol -- it was in terrible shape, divided into a rats nest of little rooms, before restoration.

So, we have to be thankful for the remaining treasures of 19th century and early 20th century architecture downtown, including the Michigan Trust Building, the Ryerson Library, the churches and St. Cecilia Auditorium.

[AlexPKeaton]

Actually, yeah, now that you mention it I did see some reconstructed buildings when I was in Bremen this summer. One I remember in particular had the date of destruction (1944 or so) along with the date of reconstruction (1948 I think). But, you're also right that it's expensive and hard to do well. Just look at the renovation--not even reconstuction--of 201 Monroe, which as somebody pointed out in another thread, is using a different window from the original that lacks depth and just looks awful on that building. Not to mention all the other stuff being done to beotchize the building.

[Raildudes dad]

Since we are on the subject of the City Hall, I found these images in the Historic American Building Survey: CityHallGR The pictures look to have been taken just prior to demolition (Old Kent building is complete and the rest of the block has already been cleared).

I would have to say the outside was definitely showing signs of age, but it is hard to look at the pictures of the main stair and call it a dump...

[LA Dave]

The problem of historic reconstruction is a thorny one. In Dresden, for example, the Frauenkirche was rebuilt almost exactly to the same condition that it existed prior to destruction in February 1945. On the other hand, some buildings (201 Monroe is a great example) have been "reconstructed" in name only. University Hall at OSU was rebuilt in a sort of ersatz 1970s style, with only a partial attempt to capture the original architecture.

I am confident that had there been a will and a source of funds, the GR City Hall could have been saved and all the interior accretions could have been demo'd in a fashion that would have left the building quite attractive to look at. A good and close example is the 1909 GR Federal Building -- it, too, was full of interior "improvements" by the 1970s, but when the Art Museum took it over, much of that was swept away to construct galleries.

[Veloise]

Mentioned this to Tony the other night. In Ann Arbor, the historic preservationist have created free-standing clear images that show an old building. These are positioned in a location where you can stand (atop bronze footprints on the sidewalk) and see how things used to appear.

Here's one next to the orange barrel (progress must continue).

aastreets/site7/frame7a'>aastreets/site7/frame7a

Another one, near the silver SUV's passenger mirror:

aastreets/frame3'>aastreets/frame3

Whaddya know, there's a link to the whole program on one of my old prof's page.

Also included: wall displays with more detail.

Adding exhibits like this would help complete the urban renewal block streets.

[Explorer55]

I recall being in the old GR City Hall as a child. To my eyes, it looked like a good candidate for a fairy castle and I was very disappointed the inside didn't fit the outside. I seem to remember later, in my early teens as the controversy about tearing it down was covered in the paper and the news, that I recalled the inside of City Hall looked/felt like many other old public institutional buildings - lots of worn out linoleum on the floors and stairs, and ugly paint colors. By then I was out in Cascade and hadn't been inside the City Hall for 4-5 years. But now I'm trying to remember memories of memories from many years ago!!! I'm not too good anymore with memories of what I saw or did last week.

But I did think about joining that woman on the wrecking ball.

[walker]

But I did think about joining that woman on the wrecking ball.

[Explorer55]

This woman?

Mary Stiles

[joeDowntown]

Great images! One thing that must be said about City Hall. Did it start to get tired and worn partially because they wanted something new and thought its days were numbered.

It still makes my stomach turn when I see this building in a more modern setting (with the Fifth Third building already built). It would be an absolute gem had it survived. Especially with the Old Federal building sitting across the street. I bet the whole landscape of that area would be different had that one building been saved (let alone some of the other buildings lost at the same time).

I do however agree that you can't rebuild the past, and it would be nearly impossible to re-create what was lost.

Joe

Since we are on the subject of the City Hall, I found these images in the Historic American Building Survey: CityHallGR The pictures look to have been taken just prior to demolition (Old Kent building is complete and the rest of the block has already been cleared).

I would have to say the outside was definitely showing signs of age, but it is hard to look at the pictures of the main stair and call it a dump...