The Monroe Cluster Site was in the possession of the City of Columbus (WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE CITY OF COLUMBUS ,THE TAXPAYERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE CITY).
The City of Columbus wished to have the Monroe Cluster Site developed with tax generating development coming from buildings with a mix of Residential,Commercial, and Retail.
Glaven Blackwell ,LLC with Glaven Feher Architects were selected by the RFP (Request For Proposal) Committee in 2006.This RFP Committees recomendation of the Concept Design as done by Glaven Feher Architects as best suiting the Monroe Cluster Site and the wishes of the surrounding community (in particular N. Monroe Ave surrounding the site), resulted in The Department of Development of Columbus agreeing to the RFP Committee choice of Glaven Feher Architects.
Concept Design:
This is when the Architect/Developer (in this particular situation) developes a design to meet certain requirements by the Land Holder (in this instance the City of Columbus which is us the citizens of Columbus) in hopes of being selected to actually complete the project.Glaven Feher Architects Concept Design was thought paltable by the community.So the Community awaited a nicely concieved project resembling what the architect showed and told us he would do.
However Glaven Feher Architects intial Concept Design was altered to such an extent that the N. Monroe Ave. residents ,King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association,and Near East Area Commission Zoning Committee all said this is a different project then we were told and shown that we would get.The numerous negative comments and large Area Resident turnout in opposition on a cold,snowy Saturday Morning by the community, KLBNA, and the Near East Area Commission are duely recorded in the December 8th ,2007 NEAC Site Zoning Meeting minuets.
I will now compare the Concept Design from 2006 to the latest rendition from Dec. 2007 and show that the design of these 2 projects are indeed very different and why this neighborhood stands in opposition to the current design as promoted by Glaven Feher Architects.
With my comparison I will refer to the Concept Design from 2006 as (Concept Design 2006) and the latest rendition from Dec. 2007 as ( Latest Rendition 2007)
- (Concept Design 2006) The large single building actually has a rythum that compliments the street.Looking at the black and white xerox from left to right one can see the dark area is brick, and the light area of building exterior skin is some other color and or material.So the building goes dark, light,dark,light,dark,light,and dark.This is a very old trick of the architecture trade to make the building appear more elaborate and feel like several different buildings very close together, while it is really only one building.This compliments N. Monroe Ave. between E. Broad St. and Mt. Vernon Ave. because the over whelming number of existing house front facades change from house to house as you move down the street.Creating the pleasant,friendly,unexpected quality of N. Monroe Ave. as you walk down the street.How many times have we residents on N. Monroe Ave been stopped by somebody walking or driving down the street and hear them say in an envious tone ,”I could live on this street.are there any houses for sale on this street?” It is this changing varied look of the houses that attracts people to our street.
- ( Latest Rendition 2007) The large single building actually feels larger than it is.This massive, monolitic look does not recognize the existing varied quality of the existing housing stock.It feels out of place.This building seen from down the street will in fact loomover the street and overwhelm the surrounding houses. Its Monolithic nature will negate the playful,unexpected,pleasant rythum of this pedestrian friendly street.This is in fact a building that would be compatible on many streets in Columbus such as Morse Rd.
- (Concept Design 2006) The roof profile is broken up and has a changing rythum that recognizes the wide variety of roof pitches on the street and that some Queen Ann houses on the street have roofs doing all kinds of variable things that are a pleasure to look at This roof contributes to the animated feel of the street.
- ( Latest Rendition 2007) This long building has a very pedestrian roof that is not recognizing the cues on the street.Another old trick of the architecture trade is to take existing design features from surrounding buildings add them to your new building and then it will feel like the neighborhood.This is the case with the 4 little dormers popping out of the front facade roof.They are almost exactly like dormers on any number of houses on N. Monroe but on a roof of this length and bulk they look akward and to small. These dormers appear to be placed on the roof to make the neighborhood think that this building is repeating architectural features from existing houses and therefore is compatiable with the existing street.This architecture design trick did not work.
- (Concept Design 2006) Front entry door is reached by going up 3 steps this repeats the character of N. Monroe St. The houses up and down the street between E. Broad St. and Mt. Vernon all have several steps up to the front porch entry deck.This creates a feeling of security at each residence.This is defensive space,and this is what the front porch provides.When we residents are on our porch decks we are above the street,the house feels protected and under our control.Passerby are in the subserviant position the homeowner is in the power position.This is why a lite front porch at night feels like a safe haven for pedestrians walking down a dark street like N. Monroe that does not have Pedestrian Street Lighting.Raised front porch decks create look outs on the street. Bad things are less likely to happen on streets where residents actively use their front porch.
- (Latest Rendition 2007) This front entry door feels exposed.One step above the sidewalk and very few feet from the pedestrian sidewalk. Not a safe feeling.Most home owners would feel akward and exposed to the street sitting on such a porch.In fact most people would never use such a porch except to tie up their guard dog to protect the vunerable feeling front door. At the Mt Vernon Plaza one floor subsidized housing, this works because the units are well back from the street,the renter feels like they have some defensible space between them and passerby on the sidewalk.What mother is going to feel protected on this porch if she has small children? Who is going to have potted plants,porch furniture,and all the things that make a porch a porch sitting on this porch? The architect has created a porch nobody will use.New developments all around the USA are including useable front porches as a design feature. But here on N. Monroe where existing houses have front porches and if they do not they have a raised porch deck ,we are getting something again that one sees up and down Morse Rd.porches that nobody uses that become an architectural decoration rather than a functioning porch.
- (Concept Design 2006) and ( Latest Rendition 2007) Green Sustainable Architectural Features have never been discussed with the surrounding neighborhood. Columbus Housing Partnership has done much to link new construction and sustainable architecture in our Bronzeville Neighborhood with their infill housing project on 21st St.Infill housing projects from San Diego,Ca.,Austin ,Tx Chicago ,Ill.,to Boston , Ma., are promoting their green sustainable architectural features with their projects at the Conceptual Design Phase when they talk to the community and go for necessary reviews of their project.We on N. Monroe want new constuction such as The Monroe Cluster to reflect the latest social,environmental,and urban trends that are at the forefront around the USA. Columbus,Ohio what good is Mayor Colemans Green Initative if Architects/Developers are not bringing to the table these issues? The architect is amiss in any infill project around the country ,who does not discuss sustainability, this is the future.
- The Near East Area Plan, adapted by City Council on September 19, 2005, is the city’s offical guide for the Near East Side.
page 4 “Introduction”
paragraph 2 “The plan addresses land use and zoning, housing and historic
preservation,……….An important part of the plan is design guidelines for
commercial districts, East Broad Street, and housing. The primary goal of
these design guidelines is to educate both community members and developers
about appropriate development for these particular areas. While the guidelines,
along with other plan recommendations, are not a mandate, it is hoped that they
will form a basis for consistant, informed decision-making regarding proposed
development.”
page 114 ” Implementation
Development Review Checklist
The Development Review Checklist is a summary of the development standards
and recommendations found throughout the Near East Area Plan. The checklist
is designed for application by stakeholders in the review of development
proposals for consistency with plan provisions. It is intended for use with zoning
and variance requests,…………or requests impacting the built environment in
the community. It is also intended as a means to provide a clear, concise record
of stakeholder input in each stage of project consideration.”
page 118 ”Development Review Checklist
II . Residential Proposals “
page 119 “Do porches repeat the proportions of other nearby homes? (p.77)”
page 77 “Porches
Design new homes with porches that repeat the proportions,depth ( seven (7)-
ten (10) feet), and materials of nearby homes.As previously indicated a new
porch should be as high as nearby porches. The decorative detailing does not
need to duplicate historic porches, but the new porch should have support posts
and balustrades that repeat the shape, thickness and spacing of nearby
porches. New decks and unfinished pressure-treated lumber should not be
visible from adjoining streets or sidewalks.”
( Latest Rendition 2007) Clearly the porch height matches nothing on
N. Monroe Avenue from E. Broad St. to Mt. Vernon, where houses have several
steps up to the porch deck. Since there is only one step up to the porch deck ,
the porch ceiling feels squatty and lower than the surrounding porches We have
many different types of carefully designed and elegant porches on N. Monroe
Ave.
This is a clumsy ,unsophisticated porch to be built on this porch rich street.
Clearly this porch design has a deck stuck on the roof .The
entry cover at the front door is really a patio deck with columns below .The
columns clearly look like an attempt to make the neighborhood think they are
getting a porch, but it feels more like a deck on Morse Rd. Also this
deck (porch) is more appropriate for the parking lot side of the building .
Porches on the front of the house and decks on the back of the house where
they are not visible from the street.
page 119 ” Are the roof pitch, height, and slope compatible with surrounding
structures? (p. 77)”
page 77 “Massing
The size, proportions, and massing of a new building should be compatible with
nearby structures. Carefully studying the size, shape, and massing of
neighboring buildings contributes to a successful compatible new structure.”
(Latest Rendition 2007 ) The massing of this building is alien to N. Monroe.
The mass of this building is compatible with no building on N. Monroe Ave. from
E. Broad St. to Mt. Vernon.
page 77 “Roof Pitch
Roof pitch, height, and shape should be compatible with those on surrounding
structures. Generally no roof pitch less than six over twelve is appropriate.
Optimally, new construction should also repeat the predominant dormer and
chimney features found in the immediate area.”
( Latest Rendition 2007 ) The (4) dormer features are the wrong size and make
this roof feel huge and unlike anything on the street.The roof shape does not
feel like the street with its long unbroken ridge line running the long length of the
building. This long unbroken ridge line looks like a Morse Road building .
” Letter From The Director “ no page number but is the 3rd actual page.
“I am pleased to present the update of the Near East Area Plan.On behalf of the City’s
Department of Development, congragulations to the Near East Side on completion of the
Near East Area Plan.
Representatives of the Near East Area Commission, civic associations, buisness
associations, and other stakeholders put in many hours of hard work in the development
of this plan and I would like to thank them for their leadership in the development of the
plan……….
The Development Department looks forward to continued cooperation with the Near East
Side as we work together with the community on the implementation of this plan.
Sincerely
Mark Barbash, Director
Department of Development “
Dana Moessner
Near East Area Commission District 1