To Save $300,000? Or How To Spend It? Tonight's ARB.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Tonight on the Architectural Review Board

At 5:30pm will talk about the plans for the new schools.

One of the many topics that has popped up is the use of which bricks for the outside.

Small bricks, generally used in smaller buildings and residential buildings, or larger bricks
used in commercial or large structures.

To see the difference for yourself, go to the corner of Warren and Madison and look at the
two buildings, Sherwin Williams, and Walgreens.


The smaller brick.


The larger brick.

Now while looking at those buildings ask yourself. Is it worth $300,000 - $350,000
dollars more for the smaller brick?

Again...


Smaller


Larger

The school architects have said on the record, the smaller brick could easily be $300,000 to
$800,000 more, and be more expensive in the long run with upkeep.

What do you think?

It is rumored that the cost of a new running track needed by the schools is about the same
amount. Bricks? Running Track?

Stop by Warren and Madison...

.

[Sandra Donnelly]

Maybe I'm missing some advantage of small bricks, but this seems like a no-brainer. I'm amazed that a meeting had to be held to discuss the issue.

[Amy Martin]

Note to the ARB, School Board, Council and Mayor:

DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO SAVE US MONEY!!!!

A fine example of our government at work. And, the ARB is a joke anyway.

[michael gill]

Surely there are people who know more about this, but I don't think the distinction that big bricks are used for big buildings and small ones for small or residential buildings is accurate.

Small bricks were the standard when Lakewood was built. Big bricks ... Aka Jumbo bricks ... Have lately been used to save money for some projects, like Home Depot buildings.

In the Warren / Madison example, I believe the ARB demanded smaller bricks for the second building after seeing the cheaper jumbo brick in place.

Small bricks look like Lakewood. Big bricks look like Westlake or something.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Small bricks look like Lakewood. Big bricks look like Westlake or something.

Michael at lunch yesterday I was sitting with someone that knows Lakewood, loves Lakewood and
pointed out the most Lakewood Block in Lakewood, Detroit Ave. Warren to St. Charles. 4 distinctly
different buildings using four distinctly different bricks and styles. It is the faux look so many other
cities are trying to create overnight to be cool. In fact it is this feel that was being copied, not
"Lakewood" when it popped up in Crocker Park.

Recently the ARB has once again decided that all new buildings will look alike, and look at the new
buildings that have been built, CVS, Family Dollar, Drug Mart, Walgreens, you know the hall mark
of recent City Hall's success stories, and they all look the same, and together brings on the crappy
mall look of the 70s.

You can tell me that most people can tell the difference, but most people cannot. Stand on the
corner and do a survey of people walking by. Opinion will be about 50 - 50 with Walgreen's crappy
sconces getting the nod more than Sherwin Williams. If you do not mention the brick, no one else
will either. You have to point it out to them. Well at least the people I spoke with.

If you really believe big brick is westlake and small brick Lakewood, then we are already too
homogenized and losing the feel that made Lakewood, Lakewood.

OK how about running Track at High School, or small bricks?

.

[Scott Meeson]

Larger

The school architects have said on the record, the smaller brick could easily be $300,000 to
$800,000 more, and be more expensive in the long run with upkeep.

What do you think?

It is rumored that the cost of a new running track needed by the schools is about the same
amount. Bricks? Running Track?

Stop by Warren and Madison...

.

Jim,

Are you saying that small brick usage could be "cost prohibitive" to the district?
If so, sounds kind of familiar:
http://www.lakewoodcityschools.org/districtNewsArticle.aspx?artID=2804#sthash.QW50QSSq.dpbs

How many millions of dollars does it take before we start throwing the words "cost prohibitive" around?

Small bricks all the way!

[Sean Wheeler]

For $300,000 the district could purchase 1000 laptops for our students. Let's put money into learning tools instead of bickering about bricks. I look forward to a time when we care more about the learning inside the building. Analog classrooms can't prepare our students for the digital world and workforce. Bricks? This is what we want to spend money on?

[Amanda Tabor]

I agree, spend money on the IMPORTANT things - the brickwork will look nearly the same whichever is chosen.

Does anyone know what the outcome of the meeting was?

[Scott Meeson]

For $300,000 the district could purchase 1000 laptops for our students. Let's put money into learning tools instead of bickering about bricks. I look forward to a time when we care more about the learning inside the building. Analog classrooms can't prepare our students for the digital world and workforce. Bricks? This is what we want to spend money on?

The finer nuances matter...I guess.

http://www.wikipedia.or.ke/index.php?title=Lakewood,_Ohio

Excerpt: Garfield Middle School - A new middle school building that was formerly an elementary school, re-opened in 2007. Efforts were made to retain the original facade of the school, which was constructed in the late 1800s.




I don't think the construction money can be spent on the purchase of computers.

[Amanda Tabor]

Even so, that's a lot of money that could go towards other construction costs aimed to improve the educational aspect of school, not just the asthetics of it.

[Paul Schrimpf]

A few thoughts --

The Garfield project was purposeful retention/restoration, and I was all for it. Every day I go by it I still think it was worth it.. .one of the best preservation projects ever taken on within a city that's destroyed so much of its historic architecture. We're starting from scratch with the new school, and while smaller bricks might be more authentic the school board needs to pick its shots. The city residents generously passed two consecutive levies. Making imprudent construction spending decisions will be a "brick in the wall" for passing the next one, in my opinion. There has to be better places to spend it, if it must be spent at all.

I think the Walgreens and Sherwin Williams buildings turned out fine. I'd be curious if the same people who did not notice the brick size on the building would, when asked how they feel about either of those buildings, would respond with "crappy." Lakewood can't help that its historic design serve to "inspire" (encourage architectural plagiarism) in other suburbs.

Paul

[Will Brown]

It seems to me that decisions like this should consider functionality of the building, including costs of maintenance; and how long it will last, and whether we want a longer lasting building.

We live in a country where it seems we don't want our buildings to last. We cut corners because we think it is likely that things will change in perhaps 20 years, and we will have to raze and rebuild. So paying more for construction that will last 30 or 40 years may be wasteful.

The few architects I have known understand these concepts, and while there have been some fantastic mistakes made, the profession generally gives you what you want. All you have to do is set the targets, and select among the options they present. But the people making those decisions should be the school board and their administrators, not an ARB.

I can't recall reading from anybody who is happy with what schemes the ARB comes up with. I guess some obstructionists view them as a useful tool to delay some projects, but the projects seem to go on anyway. Do we really need an ARB.

Are the members of the ARB paid? If so, perhaps we could do away with the ARB and use the saved money to buy better bricks.

I don't recall voting on the Garfield boondoggle. Perhaps the advocates should have put it before the people. Or better yet, perhaps they themselves could have ponied up the extra costs.

[Paul Schrimpf]

We all pay for things we like and don't like, require and don't require ... my son goes to St. Edward so my ongoing support of levies is purely a function of my commitment to education as the way to maintain a viable and civil society. I think the public was given more than enough input on the designs of the buildings and I am glad they chose to preserve the historic façade. Those more interested in tearing things down and starting from scratch have had much to cheer in this town over the decades.

Garfield is one of the nicest "boondoggles" in Lakewood.

[Paul Schrimpf]

Speaking of demolition ...

http://www.cleveland.com/parma/index.ss ... se_ba.html

Another one bites the dust...

[David Westlake]

Harding, Hayes, and Harrison schools were the only ones that were entirely rebuilt from the ground up. I don't think anyone would argue that the finished product at these buildings was nothing short of fantastic.

Funny thing is they were built using "jumbo" bricks without any detriment to the surrounding neighborhoods. They fit in just fine.

I would hope that common sense would prevail and the ARB okays their use and saves taxpayer money that could be put to better use actually educating our youth.

Harding School

Harding.png (323.54 KiB) Viewed 3860 times

Hayes School

Hayes.png (200.38 KiB) Viewed 3860 times

Harrison School

Harrison.png (202.17 KiB) Viewed 3860 times