137 Year Old Historic Saint Andrew's School Slated to be Demolished

[GR Jackson]

I thought the article in the Press mentioned that a group was willing to pay for the remodel and run a school there. The church could rent it to them, or if the donors to the school have enough money they could buy it.

[AlexPKeaton]

It's only costing them $3000/month now. Selling it gets them more money than what they'd pay to tear it down.

Maybe it has more value to them as a parking lot than anyone would be willing to pay for the building intact?

[Veloise]

Just got a notice of a special public hearing (a few edits for space).

A Special Meeting of the Planning Commission will be held in association with the regular City Commission meeting on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. ...in the City Commission Chambers on the 9th Floor of City Hall... accept testimony on the appointment of a Study Committee for potential historic designation of the Saint Andrew’s School building at 318 (a.k.a. 302) Sheldon Ave. SE and on the issuance of a moratorium to prevent alterations to or demolition of the structure for a six-month period.

The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to accept public testimony regarding the Special Land Use request of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Grand Rapids to demolish Saint Andrew’s School and replace it with a landscaped plaza, and the related request of St. Mary’s Health Care/Trinity Health to demolish an existing office/warehouse building at 245 Jefferson Ave. SE and replace it with landscaping and a surface parking lot (PC-SLU-2011-0010).

The Planning Commission will hold an additional public hearing and consider the matter at their regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, March 24, 2011 at 1:40 p.m. or soon thereafter in the Public Hearing Room, 2nd Floor, 1120 Monroe NW...Decisions rendered by the City Commission may affect the ability of the Planning Commission to make a final decision. ...

Interested parties are invited to examine the proposed requests. The plans may be viewed during regular business hours at the Planning Department, 3nd Floor, 1120 Monroe Ave. NW, Grand Rapids, MI 49503. The public is invited to attend the public hearing to express concerns or support. Written comments may be submitted to the Planning Commission in lieu of a personal appearance. For further information, phone (616) 456-3159.

[GRDadof3]

Maybe it has more value to them as a parking lot than anyone would be willing to pay for the building intact?

Based on the renderings, it looks like they want it to be a pedestrian plaza, not a parking lot.

[AlexPKeaton]

Based on the renderings, it looks like they want it to be a pedestrian plaza, not a parking lot.

What's the difference?

[GRDadof3]

What's the difference?

Aesthetically, in this case, not much.

[GRDadof3]

I just found out yesterday that the Diocese wants to tear down Saint Adalbert School for a parking lot. That's why Child Discovery Center was moved (kicked?) out of it.

[RegalTDP]

I just found out yesterday that the Diocese wants to tear down Saint Adalbert School for a parking lot. That's why Child Discovery Center was moved (kicked?) out of it.

http://farm3.static....5b84963fb_z.jpg

That's not a small building, either. Is the diocese out to ruin every block they're on?

[Prankster]

I just found out yesterday that the Diocese wants to tear down Saint Adalbert School for a parking lot. That's why Child Discovery Center was moved (kicked?) out of it.

This would be a very sad day for my family. My grandfather, grandmother, uncle, mom, brother and I all graduated from there. My nephew is currently going there, until they are booted out at the end of the year. All of this because of some cowboy bishop comes riding into town and decides to get rid of any history that the Catholic Church has in this town. Guess that way it will be easier for him and his cohorts to put leave their own mark without it being overshadowed by the past. What a joke.

[GRDadof3]

Now Commissioner James White is saying that the building is an eyesore, inside and out:

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2011/03/city_commissioners_vote_5-2_to.html

The good news is that there will be a public input session on March 22nd, and it looks like the HPC will get a 6 month moratorium to study the historic status of the building for possible historic status.

[Allison Slater]

I remember going through that area with my dad during ArtPrize. He was wondering what the building was, and I told him. He said he was surprised the catholic school here was that nice, especially compared to the catholic school he went to in Muskegon. That doesn't sound like a comment one would make about an eyesore.

[Raildudes dad]

Isn't this thread named wrong, St Mary's School . Actually IMHO, the school looks pretty good on the outside for it's age. Even the "energy efficient" windows fit the the character of the building. If the old Union High can be rehabbed as it was, certainly this school building can be.

[jas49503]

I really hate those "energy efficient" windows and I think they are the worst thing to happen to schools everywhere. Larger windows make a school look so much better not to mention improving the environment for the students trapped inside.

[joeDowntown]

Looks like it. Not exactly being good stewards to the surrounding neighborhoods. They should at least put them on the market and see if private developers step up. Then, a year from now if they aren't sold, they have a more compelling (albeit lame IMHO) case for destruction (demolition seems to clinical of a statement here).

Joe

That's not a small building, either. Is the diocese out to ruin every block they're on?

[GRDadof3]

Apparently the cost to demolish the school is slated at $250,000 (not verified, but rumored). At a cost of $3000/month carrying costs, the Diocese could hold on to the school for 7 or 8 years and still be ahead of the game. They could sell the building to a developer for $1 and still be ahead of the game.

[x99]

They could be ahead financially by selling, perhaps, but not otherwise. Look at this thing on Bing maps using the birdseye. Your prior post regarding the plaza and rain garden that replaced Sheldon was right on point. You can no longer see the front of their cathedral from the street, which I would suppose they don't really care for. You also can't see the front of St. Andrews, either. What is left from the street really is an eyesore because it was never designed to be an exposed facade. That insipid nincompoopery (in the Press article) about building "another park and ... a safe, well-lit area for all of our neighbors" is simply window dressing designed to convince the City Commission with something more palatable than "We want people to be able to see our pretty cathedral without having to look past the rear end of this building we no longer use." Frankly, I can't blame them for wanting the thing gone at this point--it actually does create a serious sight-line problem from an aesthetic perspective (which, granted, they themselves created).

If--and this is a big if--they landscape this properly all the way out to LaGrave and dump all of the parking lots to create a real park type of area, it could be a fairly significant improvement. Unfortunately, that isn't like to happen because there are also buildings to the north and to the east which probably preclude making the cathedral an island unto itself ( a plan I think would actually be quite nice). Scrap those buildings, dump the rest of Sheldon, and put in a circular drive off of LaGrave, and you could have something quite impressive indeed ... if this were Chicago or New York. But is isn't. The area is already an oasis of parking lots and low-slung buildings. It needs a big, impressive greenspace vista like a hole in the head.

Apparently the cost to demolish the school is slated at $250,000 (not verified, but rumored). At a cost of $3000/month carrying costs, the Diocese could hold on to the school for 7 or 8 years and still be ahead of the game. They could sell the building to a developer for $1 and still be ahead of the game.

[MiGuyz]

A couple points:

The building is currently the responsibility of the parish of St. Andrew, not the Diocese of Grand Rapids. $3,000 a month is a huge amount of carrying expense for a parish that is already expensive to maintain. If the demolition could take place in the next few months, the Diocese will use bond money that they will otherwise lose - in other words, this is a savings to the parish. The hope of the parish is to have the option to build a modern school in the future or construct a community gathering building if the parish can someday afford it.

The building is steps from the front doors of a Cathedral and next to a High School and gymnasium. Who would buy a condo or office there with teenagers milling around outside their windows during the afternoons and evenings for school activities? Any use other than an outdated school (no technology systems) has been studied with a cost in the 7 figures $$. Not practical.

The parish has held public meetings to discuss the plan. The parish members - who this most affects - seem saddened, but very realistic about the expense to maintain the property vs. an extension of the already very successful Cathedral Square development. Let's remember that the Diocese moved its offices to an otherwise abandoned corner of Division and Wealthy - bringing hundreds of jobs (about 300), retail and a new commitment to what is becoming an important crossroads in Grand Rapids (i.e. ICCF announcement, Grocery Store, Year-round urban Market, The Hope Lodge, Heartside Health Center, etc).

The sentiment of saving an old building that is nothing close to its original form or structure is, frankly, silly. I say this as someone who has received historic preservation awards from three different cities. I am committed to the preservation of historic structures, but the need to save St. Andrew's is a stretch. Will we need to save every old school building in the city now?

[jwazzz]

@MiGuyz - Couldn't agree more - thanks for your views on this topic. To all the naysayers, the Catholic Diocese has done an exceptional job of improving the area surrounding St. Andrews cathedral. I can't wait to see the school demolished and work on their master plan continue.

[GRDadof3]

A couple points:

The building is currently the responsibility of the parish of St. Andrew, not the Diocese of Grand Rapids. $3,000 a month is a huge amount of carrying expense for a parish that is already expensive to maintain. If the demolition could take place in the next few months, the Diocese will use bond money that they will otherwise lose - in other words, this is a savings to the parish. The hope of the parish is to have the option to build a modern school in the future or construct a community gathering building if the parish can someday afford it.

The building is steps from the front doors of a Cathedral and next to a High School and gymnasium. Who would buy a condo or office there with teenagers milling around outside their windows during the afternoons and evenings for school activities? Any use other than an outdated school (no technology systems) has been studied with a cost in the 7 figures $$. Not practical.

The parish has held public meetings to discuss the plan. The parish members - who this most affects - seem saddened, but very realistic about the expense to maintain the property vs. an extension of the already very successful Cathedral Square development. Let's remember that the Diocese moved its offices to an otherwise abandoned corner of Division and Wealthy - bringing hundreds of jobs (about 300), retail and a new commitment to what is becoming an important crossroads in Grand Rapids (i.e. ICCF announcement, Grocery Store, Year-round urban Market, The Hope Lodge, Heartside Health Center, etc).

The sentiment of saving an old building that is nothing close to its original form or structure is, frankly, silly. I say this as someone who has received historic preservation awards from three different cities. I am committed to the preservation of historic structures, but the need to save St. Andrew's is a stretch. Will we need to save every old school building in the city now?

No, not every old building needs to be saved. And if you've been on this forum for any period of time, you know that no one here advocates for every old building to be saved.

And no one is faulting the Diocese for renovating the old warehouse and tearing down Uptown Cleaners (an old building) and cleaning up the site. No one here at least. Although I have heard people question the wisdom of the Diocese spending $22 Million on their new campus when they're running out of money. Plus, they're not exactly amenable to anyone other than their own people spending time on their "public" plazas they've built. So their offer of building something for the "neighborhood" seems a bit disingenuous.

And while there have been some good additions to the area, it has also become the largest collection of parking lots in the city:

http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r4snn77vv2vv&lvl=17&dir=0&sty=b&where1=La%20Grave%20Ave%20SE%20%26%20Wealthy%20St%20SE%2C%20Grand%20Rapids%2C%20MI%2049503&q=lagrave%20and%20wealthy%2C%20grand%20rapids%2C%20mi&FORM=LMLTCC

I think if you added it all up, it'd be about the same as Rivertown Crossings Mall:

http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=r4cz3p7vm8tm&lvl=17&dir=0&sty=b&q=rivertown%20crossings%20mall%20&ss=cl.rivertown%20crossings%20mall~pg.1~rad.0,316447185966431&FORM=LMLTCC

There is an old school that is now condominiums in East Grand Rapids on Wealthy, RIGHT next to an elementary school. I wonder if those people mind the school being next door? I rarely, rarely see any of those go up for sale, so they must not mind.

If I can't afford my house, our neighborhood would never allow me to just tear it down. It'd be up to me to get myself out of my financial mess.

Hopefully the HPC will deem it historic, and then I too look forward to seeing the master plan come to fruition (without tearing down the school).

[MiGuyz]

With all respect, GRDadof3, I've been on this forum since the Project X days. I take issue with flighty facts.

As for the amount of parking spaces: St. Andrew's, the Diocese of Grand Rapids and St. Mary's Healthcare are three separate entities. Yes, they are all Catholic organizations, but they should not be treated as one. The new plaza is a joint effort to combine resources and create a neighborhood space for all, yes all. At a recent meeting the parish discussed their current effort to welcome the homeless at Cathedral Square, afterall God's Kitchen is another Catholic organization on Division. (They could probably use the $3K a month more than an empty building.)

As for the money spent on Cathedral Square, I am frankly startled that on UrbanPlanet.org we are discounting the risk-taking investment made in a LEED building in an previously "run down" corner of Grand Rapids. Cathedral Square has become exactly the catalyst that most forward-thinking urban dwellers would love to have close to their home or work.

As for the building becoming condos: two companies in town - an engineering firm and a prominent real estate firm - have evaluated the building and stated that it is not financially practical. These reports are available to the public.

Finally, the school is not in a historic district. If it becomes a historic property then every old building might also be considered to have historic value. The A&P Warehouse being torn down to build the new GVSU College of Business is very appealing to me as a historic structure. Why shouldn't we save that? (No need to respond.)

[grmetro]

MiGuyz is the voice of reason I've been longing for on UP. But don't take any stock in what I say because I have very few official posts here.

[Allison Slater]

From what I understand, the interior is nothing like what it used to be, right? Nothing inside truly worth saving? IMHO, they could allow it to be demolished under the conditions that the facade is taken down with care and stored with a long-term future use in mind. It's been done with what is now the Chase(?) bank in Gaslight Village.. sure the brick arranging can be re-created with ease and all that'll need to be saved is the minimal amount of stonework. Whenever they plan any sort of 3-storey building, they grab the saved stonework and replicate the cross brickwork to allow it to continue to live on for another purpose.

People would, eventually, have something to remember the school with, the architectural design can live on and grace the neighbourhood, and the cathedral can have an unobstructed vista without any undecorated walls blocking it.

That's what I imagine would be a good compromise, anyway.

[GRDadof3]

With all respect, GRDadof3, I've been on this forum since the Project X days. I take issue with flighty facts.

As for the amount of parking spaces: St. Andrew's, the Diocese of Grand Rapids and St. Mary's Healthcare are three separate entities. Yes, they are all Catholic organizations, but they should not be treated as one. The new plaza is a joint effort to combine resources and create a neighborhood space for all, yes all. At a recent meeting the parish discussed their current effort to welcome the homeless at Cathedral Square, afterall God's Kitchen is another Catholic organization on Division. (They could probably use the $3K a month more than an empty building.)

As for the money spent on Cathedral Square, I am frankly startled that on UrbanPlanet.org we are discounting the risk-taking investment made in a LEED building in an previously "run down" corner of Grand Rapids. Cathedral Square has become exactly the catalyst that most forward-thinking urban dwellers would love to have close to their home or work.

As for the building becoming condos: two companies in town - an engineering firm and a prominent real estate firm - have evaluated the building and stated that it is not financially practical. These reports are available to the public.

Finally, the school is not in a historic district. If it becomes a historic property then every old building might also be considered to have historic value. The A&P Warehouse being torn down to build the new GVSU College of Business is very appealing to me as a historic structure. Why shouldn't we save that? (No need to respond.)

There is a process whereby structures/buildings are deemed to be "historic" or not. It's not just based on someone saying "Why yes, I think I'd like my favorite building named a historic site." You keep throwing that argument back as if anyone is making that claim. And if you have been here since Project X, you would know there are a lot of older buildings that have been torn down that nobody made a peep about (for good reason). WAM, the old garage where VAI's parking lot sits, Israels old store on Pearl, the old Saint Mary's hospital where Lacks Cancer Center sits, Towers office building, etc..

Secondly, there are a lot of historically significant properties that do not sit in a historic district. Lighthouses, farms, bridges, schools, churches, and on and on.

I only brought up the $22 Million that was spent on Cathedral Square because it has been brought up by other people, that how can an organization that spent $22 Million on a new HQs claim "hardship" over a $36,000/year bill? I understand that they are separate organizations, but I am also Catholic and understand that if a parish was in dyer straits, they could probably get the money from the Diocese.

Again, if your financial house is not in order, and you can't support your current infrastructure (Saint Andrews), then I don't see how spending a bunch more money is the answer. In addition to the $250,000, how much is it going to cost to build the plaza? $500,000? $1 Million? Bonds or no bonds, it's still money coming from somewhere. The Diocese? Those bonds have to be repaid I assume?

I'm not lumping all three organizations together. But when they unveil a "campus plan" that incorporates all three organizations, they are lumping themselves together. As I've said, yes so far they've added some new projects in the area. They've also pretty much wiped out any traces of the original neighborhood, other than the churches.

Finally, if a report is available to the public, why is it not being made available to the public? Where is it? Is it in the same place that showed the school being torn down five years ago? Only available through a FOIA?

Sorry, one last question: if, IF, this demolition has nothing to do with the Diocese, and is all Saint Andrew's call, as the Bishop is claiming, then how can Saint Andrew's be using bonds that the Diocese got for Cathedral Square for the costs of demolition and the plaza? Who's writing the check for demo/construction?

[GRDadof3]

MiGuyz is the voice of reason I've been longing for on UP. But don't take any stock in what I say because I have very few official posts here.

Duly noted.

[GRDadof3]

I took a picture of the building's North face. If a future user did not want to have the entrance on the plaza as the main entrance, this side of the building looks perfectly fine: