Frieze Tag
Neighborhood groups have been complaining for years about the inability of the university to stash its students far from their sight, but we’ve always known that as soon as there was any definitive plan for new housing, no matter where the location, it would somehow be all wrong. The soon-to-be-demolished Frieze Building isn’t in a residential neighborhood, but instead of the NIMBYs, a perhaps even more formidable lobby has risen up to protest the dorm plans: local preservationists. (But don’t worry, the Old Fourth Ward Association isn’t sitting this one out.)
The Daily describes the building, which the News praises for its “neoclassical architecture, such as its low pitched roof and arches above windows and doorways,” as “one of the ugliest buildings on campus, often said to resemble a juvenile detention center.”
I’m probably going to get into trouble for writing this, but after reading the article I can say with absolute certitude that things like this makes me hate the Country Club mentality of this stupid town.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: sooner or later UMich is going to wise up and put an Olympic-style village on North Campus, and all the downtown businesses are going to be crying all the way to the poorhouse.
Yeah, one things for sure, Ann Arbor doesn’t need anymore clean and affordable housing in the downtown area.
Maybe we can see if the 4th Ward would like this moved into their neighborhood?
posted by Anonymous on October 8th, 2004 at 1:10 pmforgot to fill out my name for the comment above….
posted by todd leopold on October 8th, 2004 at 4:49 pmTodd- I bought a six of your Red a couple weeks ago, and it tasted like vinegar, what’s up with that? Thumbs down!
posted by js on October 8th, 2004 at 4:58 pm(And can the 4th Ward just change its name to the Anti-Student Lobby from here on out? It’ll save a lot of confusion, I promise).
Todd, I usually agree with you, but I don’t think that UM should necessarily demolish the front portion of the Frieze Building. They will replace the older building with something ugly and cookie-cutter, if the recent past is any sort of predictor. To the extent that Ann Arbor can be considered attractive, it’s because of the interesting mix of oldish and newish buildings, and because Michigan is so young, there aren’t many of the former.
It’s also nice to have a theater where student productions are easily accessable right on North State street. I’ve seen some productions there that I’d never have gone all the way to N. Campus to see, and I think that it’s good for theater students to have audiences to perform for.
Although there’s a clear need for space for students to live in town, I wish the UM could leave that front part of the building and demolish the horrendous blue-panneled addition on the back in favor of a newer, bigger building. That part could hardly look worse. (Or what about that hiddeous MLB? Demolish and put three buildings on that wasted plaza space around it).
posted by Anna on October 8th, 2004 at 5:30 pmI do agree with you, Todd, to the extent that the preservationist comments in this are exceptionally (even for AA) obnoxious. But I’m with Anna in that I wouldn’t want to see the exterior go given the dearth of distinctive architecture here. The inside could certainly stand to be gutted - really grim in there. What I don’t get (and I’m no expert on the subject) is why it’s more expensive to gut the existing structure and turn it into dorm space than to rip the building down and do everything from scratch. Is this some organized-labor thing I’m unaware of?
posted by Nick on October 8th, 2004 at 6:05 pmI’m certainly down with historical preservation, but I can’t see all that much value in the Frieze building (although the little staircase leading to the Trueblood–is that the one that isn’t in the basement?–is curiously attractive). I saw a hideously awful “Basement Arts” production there a few weeks ago, replete with moronic “topical” and sexual references that would have embarrassed the writers of “Friends”. Maybe I’m not into “neoclassical” architecture, so I may be missing something. I’ll say this, though–Anna’s totally on target regarding the “blue-paneled addition”/”derelict seems-like- it’s-a-former-location-of-some-ill-fated-’Great Society’-government-program.” That thing’s hideous and it’s nearly impossible to find the can (if it was impossible, I’d probably be dead right now).
And an apology to Todd, after reading his post and js’ reference (I totally should have connected the dots). I was the guy at the bar this afternoon in the filthy work-stained shirt who complimented you on the jukebox. I definitely wasn’t potentially violent. I was probably just incredibly excited at (a) the jukebox with Saturday Looks Good To Me’s latest and (b) that the pint of Red was the first beer I’d tasted in nearly three weeks (I’d had a tooth out). Maybe I’ll stop by this evening and watch the closed-captioned debate (as my housemates will presumably be watching “My Roommate and Me Fighting Over a Bachelorette On A Desert Island While Fending Off Super-Intelligent Pickles.”) Okay, that last part I’d definitely watch.
posted by Lazaro on October 8th, 2004 at 6:27 pmThe Frieze needs work inside, but it is not “one of the ugliest buildings on campus, often said to resemble a juvenile detention center.” Is this an architectural genre? What does a juvenile detention center look like? Guess I overlooked the razor wire and watchtowers surrounding the Frieze all these years.
posted by Laura on October 8th, 2004 at 7:25 pmI too wish the original part of the building on State Street could be preserved. The rest of it, though? Awful midcentury modernist junk, which deserves to be trashed.
posted by Brandon on October 8th, 2004 at 10:54 pmAnna, my reaction to this article comes from the simple fact that I see the city of Ann Arbor in a state of crisis when it comes to housing. We have discussed this before on this site. Anyone not earning 100K+ has left this town in the past ten years….and they took common sense with them. You can’t build in this town, and that’s a simple as it gets.
Something has to give….and if giving up one “historical” building puts another 500 people in the heart of downtown (less sprawl, no commuters), then give me the keys to the bulldozer and I’ll do it myself. Personally I think that we should adopt Europe’s definition of historical. A 75 year old building isn’t historical…it’s OLD.
JS, sorry…come by and I’ll refund your dough. Without going into detail, I can assure you that you won’t have to worry about spoiled bottled beer in a few weeks. You aren’t the first to complain….we have to use a distributor according to State law. This has killed our bottled beer.
posted by todd leopold on October 9th, 2004 at 8:09 amTodd- Thanks, I appreciate that. Getting a new distributor?
posted by js on October 9th, 2004 at 10:47 amI do agree with Ann and Nick that the Greek revival should be saved if possible, and that the architects chosen to redo the building should note how poorly the last “modernist” addition was recieved.
And c’mon, colleges look better when they’re latinate, as opposed to the stalag look of most “modern” buildings.
But having a dorm there should be good for downtown in that area, and hopefully will bring some more life to the surrounding area (which now just kind of trickles off)…
Todd, The oldest buildings in the US are only 300 years old, and if we’d adopted the European criterion, we wouldn’t save any buildings from the past at all — and in 300 years, the 300 year old buildings will be 600 years old, and the MLB will be historic — it’s all relative. Michigan wasn’t settled (well, yes, but you know what I mean) until the 1850s. 75 is old in Michigan years. It’s not old in CT (or London) years. But all the historic buildings in the world were fewer than 75 years old at one point or another — Relative.
I am totally with you about needing more space for bodies downtown, but there are a lot of things that UM could demolish to make space for students. For example, the Modern Languages Building, behind Frieze, is an entirely dysfunctional building. Bad architecture, bad layout, bad classrooms, bad bad bad. But also big with space around it. One could put a number of buildings in that space.
Another eyesore is South Quad. More bad architecture, dysfunctional space, and just bad, bad, bad design. It currently houses students, but UM could create a complex that would increase the number of beds pretty easily. It takes up a pretty big plot of land. And did I mention it’s bad?
Anyway, I’m with you on one point: the “preservationists” — many of them — don’t have these issues in mind. Opposing the demolition of the Frieze is just another way of trying to keep students out of the N. State area.
Oh, and Lazaro, I agree with you, too — I almost put “bad productions I never would have gone to N. Campus to see” but I didn’t want to be mean. The theater and film world will weed them out in good time, anyway.
posted by Anna on October 9th, 2004 at 11:35 amI would just like to point out, since we’re on an architecture kick here, that the orange LS&A… thing is one of the most hideous edifices I’ve ever seen. And the UGLi is a disturbingly appropriate name too. Don’t get me started on the Art and Architecture building’s decision to weakly immitate the Bauhaus (you’d think the place with all the architecture students would be well designed, huh?).
And it is always a source of amazement to me how relatively nice Mosher Jordan and Stockwell look on the outside, while being pretty rundown on the inside (at least MoJo was). That said, I took a bunch of pictures and showed them around to my nonUMich friends last year. They were impressed. They had expected Michigan to be all highrise dorms and concrete slabs, along the lines of UMass Amherst. We may not be Harvard or Brown when it comes to architecture, but we’re not nearly as hideous as we could be.
posted by art student on October 9th, 2004 at 6:15 pmMan, if you think the Ugli is ugly now, you should have seen it BEFORE the beautification project of 8 or so years ago.
posted by Anna on October 9th, 2004 at 10:01 pmMy biggest pet peeve– kids nowadays calling the computing site “fishbowl.” Alas, I’m old enough to remember an uglier UGLi. As I recall, its hideous blue paneling sort of reminds me of our Frieze…
posted by placebo junkies on October 10th, 2004 at 9:34 amI’ve been trying for years to figure out what the “fishbowl” really is… lots of folks refer to the Angell Hall computing site as the “fishbowl,” while to others the “fishbowl” is the entrance area on the east side of Haven Hall.
posted by Brandon on October 10th, 2004 at 1:23 pmthe fishbowl is the computing site in angell hall, you idiot.
posted by genius on October 10th, 2004 at 6:11 pmWhat a polite response to an innocent question. Shame on you, “genius.” There are 2 “fishbowls.” One is the computing site. One is the entrance area facing the Diag. And yes, the LS&A building is an eysore–as is the tacked-on newer part of the Frieze. I just wish they’d save the beautiful old section facing State Street.
posted by Laura on October 10th, 2004 at 7:29 pmI always thought that the fishbowl was just the computing site. And my relative youth prevents me from recalling this alleged uglier UGLi, but I’m a little frightened at the thought that it used to be worse.
posted by art student on October 10th, 2004 at 9:29 pmYou young kids — before the Angel site, the lobby was the fishbowl. It only got co-opted after the computers went in. Both names are still used sometimes.
I am sure there are pictures in the UM archive of the UGLi — it did, indeed, look just like the blue-panneled building at the back of the Frieze. A number of years ago they encapsulated it in a new outter brick shell.
posted by Anna on October 11th, 2004 at 8:00 amAnna, I get your point, but we are talking about 500 beds right downtown vs. an old high school. This is an easy one, IMHO.
There’s ALWAYS a reason that buildings like these can’t be built in Ann Arbor. I’m fed up.
Thank god UMich doesn’t have to deal with the city for this.
posted by todd leopold on October 11th, 2004 at 9:11 amMaybe somebody’s suggestion is right. The University should just put the students in an Olympic village type thing and watch as the restaurants and what not go out of business.
YOu’re right, there’s always a billion reasons not to do something.
posted by Kozzie on October 11th, 2004 at 10:25 amI understand your frustration, Todd, but I don’t think the old high school and the 500 beds are mutually exclusive.
BTW, I know a town on the East Coast that is a) growing and b) not yet gentried, with the mistakes of AA 20 years ago still not yet made (but waiting to be made without voices like yours), and c) that needs a good brewery.
What do you say?
posted by Anna on October 11th, 2004 at 12:32 pmThanks, Anna. Whew. I was sure I wasn’t hallucinating fishbowls!
Angell before computers is before my time, yet I remember when uniqnames were optional, when email was available on a need-to-know basis but hadn’t quite caught on yet. If I’m not mistaken, prior to the late-90’s major reconstruction project on Angell/Haven/Mason Hall, the diag-facing entrance had been said to resemble a fishbowl, hence the name. It seems to me that the cohort arriving during the renovation would have been the ones to start the fishbowl rumor/renaming, a reasonable conclusion, seeing that the computing site does sort of look like a fishbowl, as well.
Forgive me if I’m a little hazy on the details; I was away, and while I was gone it’s like they’ve managed to wipe out a bunch of key defining moments of my undergraduate experience, like “fishbowl,” not to mention a couple of tarnished Basketball legends, expunged with hardly a trace. Brave New World…
posted by placebo junkies on October 11th, 2004 at 1:50 pmwow, todd, Anna and js in the same thread…we just need Boris and we can party like it’s November 2003!
Come on, someone, start a flame war.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on October 11th, 2004 at 2:08 pmJS’s mother… oh hell, I’ve lost my touch.
posted by Anna on October 11th, 2004 at 2:48 pmI also don’t think that North Quad will necessarily be ugly modernist crap–I think that everybody ought to spend their time saying, “Hey, design North Quad in the style of Frieze”, not “Hey, don’t knock down Frieze!” The first will have a lot more of an effect, since there’s really no way in hell they’ll change their minds.
I was talking to Sue Gott, the Campus Planner (just to name drop a little) this morning and told her that I really don’t like the design of the new art museum addition and don’t like that the architecture of Frieze is going to be lost–but that I strongly support the University filling in space they already have rather than continuing the trend of buying up Wolverine Tower, Tower Records, and every other decent space in town and forcing other folks out. So I’d like to see North Quad built in an attractive style reminiscint of Frieze, but I support the decision even if its not.
If enough other people try phrasing their protests like that, maybe they’ll actually pay attention.
posted by Murph on October 12th, 2004 at 9:03 pmWere you successful in getting Gott to change her mind? Is the new addition to the art museum going to be reminiscent of the er… art museum?
posted by Anna on October 13th, 2004 at 8:46 amI read somewhere that the old facade on State Street is going to be preserved… I’m in agreement about not wanting to see that go.
The funny thing is as a kid I remember my dad showing me the Freize building and mentioning how ugly it was. I thought it was kind of quirky. Then I actually enrolled at UM.
Personally, I can’t imagine a UM without spending twenty minutes trying to find the staircase that went down to the basement classroom, and then an entire semester in a stifling hellhole. That needs to be preserved. Heritage, kids, heritage!
posted by Jen on October 13th, 2004 at 8:23 pmHi all! I was intrigued by the name of this website which is why I checked it out…but how appropriate that you are discussing the Frieze building.
posted by Tricia on October 18th, 2004 at 6:13 pmI am a Historic Preservation student at Eastern, and before you all tell me to go back to Ypsi-tucky and mind my own business, I’d like to make a comment.
If they really do intend on preserving some portion of the Frieze building, if not the entire building, I’m all for it.
There are several categories of Preservationists: those that would aspire to preserve their environment as a means of exclusion, i.e. what someone mentioned above as the country club mentality of Ann Arbor wanting to preserve their neighborhoods by keeping students out; those that would aspire to preserve anything and everything 50 years and older; and those that realize that not everything can or should be saved, that sometimes (and I do stress sometimes) it is enough to save, at the very least, a portion of a structure to remind us of our past, but also to show how far we’ve come in regards to architecture.
Those in the first category do the field of Historic Preservation and themselves an injustice by hiding behind the term preservation in an attempt to exclude others. Those in the second category: I understand them, but I don’t see how saving everything is realistic. Those in the third category, in my humble opinion, are living in the real world, or at least willing to see compromise.
Adaptively reusing the Frieze building will remain my number one choice for the structure: somehow making it into housing for students(much like the old Ypsilanti High School was turned into housing for the elderly) However, if all they can or are willing to do is preserve the facade of the building I can support that as well. It would be a shame to see the whole thing demolished. As someone else said above, I can’t see how money will be saved in tearing the whole thing down and starting from scratch.
I’m a failed historic preservation MA candidate at EMU (never finished, decided to spend the tuition money on more practical things, like a house). I can tell you what my response to a proposed Historic District up on the north side of Ann Arbor where I live was - get my 104 year old (not historic, just old) house resided before I’d have to explain myself to the door and window Gestapo, aka Historic District Commission, on community access TV. Sometimes old is just old. A quick look thru the before, during, and after pictures would convince a die-hard preservationist I did the right thing.
Tricia from EMU (and my fellow former colleagues from when I was studying at EMU) seems pretty level headed and in the majority opinion of preservationists that are coming up. I got nothing but love for saving meaningful old historic buildings but the Frieze is mostly a sentimental favorite and the greater good of more student housing on campus seems to outweigh keeping it. I do wonder if UM looked into adaptively reusing it… maybe doing so wasn’t worth the hassle, time to rehab and retrofit, and cost.
posted by Thomas Cook on October 19th, 2004 at 4:05 pm