jas49503

When does this go before the HPC? I imaging that there will be a horde of angry residents voicing their opinion there. Living only a block from this, I'll be there if I can as the new design is an awful use of the space. At least there is parking but why they think putting it facing the street is a good idea is beyond me. If the the propsed development at cherry and eastern was shot down, I don't think this stands a chance.

So no grocery then? I think a law office should be sinister looking. Clients will go there thinking "these folks don't take no s**t". That's who I'd want representing me.

His workshop is pretty impressive for someone who appreciates woodworking. He has about a hundred old planes back there. He definitely doesn't appreciate the hipsters with no money that have invaded his neighborhood.

Not officially. He is no hurry to leave but could probably be convinced for the right amount of $$$. I think there is a lot of potential in that spot but I don't think it's going anywhere soon.

We put an offer on the antique shop but he is asking way too much. Not as much as the antique shop next to the Meanwhile though. Truly mind boggling what they think they are going to get for that place.

i am optimistic they will come back with something that works. getting the design right is more about fitting in than standing out which should be easier I would think.

I doubt it would sell at that price. It would be great but there isn't any parking and it is over double what properties are going for at diamond and Fulton. I think it is substantially more than what the owner for the space previously occupied by Raad's is asking. I can't recall what they were asking but it was enough to easily say no for an investment property. It is still for sale 8 months later.

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.

Someone else here probably knows better than me, but i think I heard that there was a change of some key component in the composition of concrete that makes it less durable than what they used to use.

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.

There is one more floor to pour and then the roof.

The problem, and the reason there is a committee, is that the guidelines are very vague. Developers are somewhat at the mercy of the comittee members personal biases but at least with a comittee, you would hope that there is a discussion and an outlying opinion is overruled. Clarifying the guidelines would go a long way towards improving the process and making things easier for developers. Knowing expectation in advance would make the approval process much smoother.

I believe that prohibiting replicas is detailed in the secretary of the interior historic preservation guidelines. Maybe prohibiting is too strong a word. When I reviewed GR's HPC guidelines the first thing to "consider is height, form, massing, proportion, size, scale, and roof shape". Secondary concerns are, "Materials, building features, and details typical of buildings along the streets ape or block will provide additional vocabulary. .." Whatever that means. It is so subjective that you could put almost anything in there if your materials are compatible and the committee is feeling generous. There are tons of examples of modern looking buildings being approved that have nothing in common design wise other than high quality materials and the first requirements. That site is helped by not having any neighbors to be compatible with. The biggest obstacle would probably be window/door design since a glass tower doesn't have the proper historic window proportions.

I always liked those thin column buildings. They might look dated but that isn't necesarsarily a bad thing. Lots of classic buildings look old but have a timeless design. the bigger problem for grand rapids is we already have a couple of those, albeit much shorter. something like this should stand out as a statement, at least in the community. Keep in mind also that the HPC guidelines expressly prohibit things that look like they were original. They mostly dwell on topics like massing and materials. There is plenty of room for a more modern design. A lot of it does come down to local interpretation of the rules.

THats why this election is like a contest for worlds tallest midget. Or like a taste test comparing a cat turd and a dog turd I think this is going to be a great development for that area. It sure does seem to be going slow.