Check out these fresh renderings of a $30-million student housing project planned for Indiana Avenue near IUPUI. The plans
by Trinitas Ventures of West Lafayette call for 250 apartment units at 1201 Indiana Ave, between Montcalm and Milburn streets
south of 14th Street. The architect is Dallas-based Humphreys & Partners. An earlier story from IBJ.com is here. What do you think?
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
70 Comments
Add Comment
Whereas I think that the addition of more student-geared (they're just apartments, right? Rentable to anyone but geared towards students??) housing for IUPUI is a great idea for both the school and the city, I'm not much impressed by the design. Activation of this area of downtown will be beneficial no matter WHAT design is used, but I think that this version of vanilla architecture will add much in the way of aesthetics. It looks like a principally new urbanistic design without much flair.
This belongs in Carmel, not downtown IMHO.
Lets hope that it just gets developed
In response to MikeW's comments on the architecture, I would like to ask which buildings you're speaking of? I don't disagree, but there hasn't been much conversation here about IUPUI's campus in general, so I'm always up for debate. Much of the masterplanning, as well as the library (and maybe the natatorium...can't remember) were designed by famed and recently deceased (2005) architect Edward Larabee Barnes. The library is a wonderful piece of architecture, though I think it's certainly a bit outdated...
(FYI, Barnes also designed Christian Theological Seminary near Butler's campus, which has a beautiful and acoustically marvelous chapel. If you're interested and in the area, I strongly suggest that you check it out)
Well, it's not too bad and it's better than nothing.
Why cannot we demand excellence? Why is it always good enough. I mean, look what they got - our NFL stadium looks like a giant grocery store.
Most local developers aren't interested in the legacy of what they construct. They just want to build the project and maximize profit and make it look not ugly.
rant off
As for the design... as a plain, old vanilla guy (and I'm not old), I like the design. And here's something to think about... if it's for student housing (primary target), you can't build it out of the price range of students.
Well said, HarveyF. Indianapolis-ans (hm, maybe Certrarian Hoosiers?) demand so little from their architecture. With beautiful pieces of architecture such as the capitol building, Soldiers and Sailors monument, City Market, Scottish Rite, Columbia Club, etc etc etc, you'd think that we'd like to continue that tradition of wonderful architecture. Yet, here we are with buildings like LOS and projects like that above that are very mediocre in their design and limited in their architectural vision. I'm not sure what my point is here, but I think we'd all like to see Indianapolis emerge as not only the home of the Indianapolis 500, but also great and NEW architecture.
If you built an entire neighborhood like this -- 4 stories tall, to the sidewalk, with retail -- from Fall Creek to 16th to the White River, you'd probably have the most vibrant neighborhood in the entire city. THAT is what this kind of architecture can do.
Let's just hope there's more than 10,000 square feet worth of retail along Indiana Ave.
I peeked at the Trinitas website and it’s obvious that they don’t dabble much in Architecture (with a capital A). This project seems to be their entrance into a new chapter, so good for them. I’m a little jealous that they picked an out-of-state architecture firm, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Humphreys is a good design house, good enough that they won’t be putting this project on their website. Also, I sit on a legislative subcommittee for Transit-Oriented Development, and Mark Humphreys is fairly well-known in this arena. I would be interested to know how much TOD theory is incorporated into this project (if any). You would think bike lanes, but have you ever seen a student ride in a bike lane when there are perfectly good sidewalks present?
One caveat; about 10 years ago, I designed a very similar mixed-use/college apartment project in Trinitas’ home town of West Lafayette. The developer removed most of the sexy details late in the game to save money, and while the finished project is ok (sorry, BLOGojevich, no Applebee’s, but it does have a Scotty’s), much of the potential was lost. I will be interested to see how much of this project’s non-traditional elements (like the balconies and that 2nd story pergola) are left once construction administration begins. It could become very plain very quickly. Overall, though, I guess I’m hopeful.
True success for this area will involve a commitment by the city, university, and other developers to not let this be an island but as CorrND stated a vibrant neighborhood. I am aware of planning by the city and IUPUI for this area, but expect only commitment will make this successful. Still too many examples of blight on the surrounding blocks.
Locations along Senate, Capitol, and Illnois just east of campus would make for better student geared appartments. Not sure, but I suspect parcel price tags are preventing this. Too bad because the area is mis-/underused and has more potential for greatness than the northern end of Indiana Ave.
Besides, its a FREAKING student housing complex!!! I think someone pointed out already that the cost to build does kinda need to stay in line with what the intended TENANTS are going to be able to afford.... basic concept, right?
Some of you people are just so damn negative! And when it comes down to it I don't think half of you even know what you speak of.
The point of these boards is to disagree and discuss. Some of us want the envelope pushed further and want expectations higher, and maybe dream a little in the hopes that it will make our city more attractive. Others want to settle for mediocre and vanilla architecture which neither inspires not adds to the architectural character of the city and the surrounding landscape. I don't expect everyone (or even half of you) to agree with me, but there's something to be said for progress. There is nothing progressive in the current architectural vocabulary in this city, though I would agree that the Mariott is a step (somewhat) in the right direction.
There is no reason why we can't push the envelope...we just keep getting stifled by people who are find with the norm.
Expect more from your city.
Call it plain vanilla, but when vanilla replaces turd, it's progressive. Just not revolutionary, which is what you seem to be calling for...and which will just never happen in Indiana.
My point is obviously this: architecture is part of culture. We want culture to continue to evolve for the better, right? So why do we desire to house culture in faux-representations of the past?
And if you want to refer to things like that... well, when you walk to any ice cream store/stand/cart... what one flavor are you guaranteed that you will find? Other flavors may come and go, but vanilla will always be there. My point is that not everything changes... some things do stay the same over the years. And there are some people that like that. It's not settling for mediocrity or setting low expectations... it's a personal opinion/preference. And just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't make them someone who settles for mediocrity. Maybe their tastes come out in their preference for music, theater, etc.... and it's just not architecture.
The question that needs to be argued is what is the value and aesthetic to the student’s creative environment? In a region that offers very little to its students in terms of innovative careers, dynamic environments, and diverse opportunities, it is no wonder why we’re losing more than our brightest and innovative…we’re losing a critical mass that is vital to creating and supporting the type of environments that mirror those real world scenarios. Till then, we can expect simplification as the market base. (on brain drain: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88772898)
When we reduce the conversation to simply a design solution for some “kids†that live in a space, that have a window, and a light, and a bed…then it is easy to trivialize architecture and deconstruct it to a “ready made†thought . It becomes easy to justify its off the shelf nature or place neutrality (meaning it could be in Carmel, Iowa, or Texas) within our culture.
I will be the first to support the idea that neutrality is a condition that confirms what we know already. Neutrality keeps the mind from moving forward and cripples us from researching, comprehending or observing the “real†needs that students have and the incredible price and privilege they pay to live in an environment that no longer exists. So for me…this is a “film setâ€â€¦ it is a re-creation of yesterday…and does not represent the city, its future, and it’s highly educated students, who leave here for places which disseminate the type of environments that Daniel Libeskind notes, “reaches the human heartâ€.
If the correct homework was done, the architect/developer should had developed a complex story about how a student’s time at the university is a very complex idea…how their lives are complex…schedules are complex…and students desires are complex. These ideas then should tell a story with dimensions, correct proportions, light, materials, and responsibility. When presented this design on-line yesterday, I took the evening to think about its design. I can honestly observe, assess, and critique that it indeed has a story, a short story, which says, “I have no story at all to tell you†(Libeskind).
I’m indifferent as to what the design shows and to whom it talking to on the street. I know that when I walk past it, I will not invite it to be friends with me. We simply share different values and I enjoy stories with beginnings, middle, and ends. This one for me is an open book, and while the front cover is nostalgic and hand rendered, I know I enjoy stories that engage with me. That tell me who I am, what I may value, and where we are collectively at.
I will not listen to its story because its story lives somewhere in Carmel, in a studio in Hollywood, buggies and horses, knickers, cobblestone streets, powdered wigs, and romantic peccadillo’s.
We’ve all come to admire architecture for its ability to offer the unexpected story…after all the city lives best in the future, a story many of us could use some reading up on.
-w
(these views and opinions do not reflect the position of our firm or its leadership)
The argument that contemporary architecture tends to leak/require more maintenance etc. is utterly false in the face of Dryvit (as just one example): it's easily molded to look like generic history but we all know it's going to fail in a very few years. Whereupon it will end up in a landfill.
Great post, Wil. The brain drain aspect is a HUGE problem and aspect of this project. I'd like to question: how many people posting on this blog right now are in their late teens/early 20s, and what do YOU think of this project?
I'm 20 years old a freshman in college and a HUGE fan of Indy. Personally, I think that this building is fine for the most part. Sure, it could be more contemporary or awe-inspiring but overall I think it is solid infill. Especially, since it is currently in a rather blighted area near downtown. What we need to do is embrace people willing to develop in these areas and not shut them down. Besides, they're not asking for tax-incentives and at least the desigin looks like they put some time into it.
Now let's just hope the retail along Indiana Avenue is pretty solid! Thank you.
One day, I imagine the buildings eulogy will read as follows:
I was concieved as a building...not architecture. There is a difference.
I was fine for the most part, but could have been better, infact more awe-inspiring and at the very least more contemporary, but here I am wearing the same suite, but considerably more layers since1900...I was created as a knock off...cause everyone was to intimidated to allow me to be my own unique architecture.
I'm exist to help out an area that most perceive is in the dumps and has some challenges. My claim to fame is that I put some workers to work, help keep some architects busy, winked at a few engineers, and caused a great deal of problems for the environment. Oh...i also didn't challenge local developers to want more, but everyone made fat cash and we all are better for it.
As a building...this is how i behave and this was my contribution. I just sit on valuable land and all my friends look like me...act like me...read like me. We have the same group of friends downtown and uptown. I can say in all honesty that all of my other building friends also relish in the same thirst for the qualitative.
No on interesting ever lived near us, although chain restaurants loved my rent prices and stayed for years. I can not remember ever inviting other interesting forms of architecture to join me here (except the Madam Walker, who is the orginal real thing and I'm ashamed for trying to copy her) because I was led to believe that a world of homogeny and old world charm was loaded with distinction and privledge. I regret it all.
I am just a building...no one cared enough to encourage me to more or to be my own architecture because just wanting to put a hole in the ground and make people live inside me seemed like an okay idea at the time. I had a lot of life in front of me...I made no difference at all. I was just a building.
RIP The Building
2010 - 2020
Sometimes a well worn pair of jeans is all you need -- I accept this building as perfectly suited to its time, place and purpose. And I also hope for lots of inspiring architecture in Indy's future.
I for one love great architecture but I also realize that without massive subsidies that is often times unattainable, especially in this economic climate. What we should be thankful for is something is getting built here. And if somebody decides to build a building across the street in a few years that building should be of better quality and design. But you can't go from ground zero to the sky being the limit in one instance. Good things take time. And I think that this student housing building is a definate good first step.
If folks knew how high rent was in places like this, they'd expect a little more. Some time check out how much it costs for kids in the new student housing apartments at Butler. Ouch.
Why Hoosiers push the idea of creativity like they do for no good reason is beyond me. All I know is that in many places in the midwest are leaving us behind because they understand the value of the arts, etc. Here, as long at the Monster Truck show sell out, all is is well.
I wonder what the weather is like in Austin this time of year.
BTW, Wil has got is figured out. Wow.
Until we realize that we have to do our best at everything as individuals and as a society, reinstate some class in how we dress and act, quit relying upon government, cancel the dependency upon Uncle Sam, stop allowing lawyers to run up the price tag on all aspects of life, and spend enough time reading and learning throughout our lives instead of wanting to constantly be entertained, well as a society - we'll be through in a few short years.
Oh and did I mention throw all the rascals out of Washington?
We deserve where we are because we have accepted mediocrity in leadership, in schools, in government, in business, in finance, in the way we appear and act. And in the buildings we build.
Enough of where we are. Let's use this forum and others as a means to be wiser. We should demand and expect more from those in positions of influence whether it comes to building design, clothing design, teaching our children, or federal government meddling in public schools.
We're better than what we've been and accepted. It's high time to show it!
Every dorm can't be Hill House. Even in Columbus, Indiana not every school looks like McDowell, Lincoln, or Richards, nor every fire station like #4, nor every church like First Christian and North Christian, nor every house like the Miller house. Every museum can't be a Guggenheim (though Gehry is certainly trying).
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't build houses, dorms, schools, fire stations, churches, and museums.
Sometimes a house is just a house, and an apartment just an apartment. There are people in the world concerned about form and function more than stories and art (the difference between an engineer and an architect?)...to deny that is folly.
Not everyone has the heart or soul of an artist.
Not every BUILDING has to be great ARCHITECTURE. Just as not all great ARCHITECTURE necessarily makes a great BUILDING.
And to touch once more on your comparison of our football stadium to a grocery store, you DO realize that it was honored as THE sports facility of the year for 2009 by Street and Smith's SportsBusiness Journal, right? And that it also won a Grand Award from the American Council of Engineering Companies for its engineering? Maybe you missed that in your rush to judge things by the cover....
Thou dost protest too much, and you had me persuaded until the sneering post in #37. You do yourself no favors by assuming everyone is a slack-jawed yokel; the vigorous debate on this thread proves otherwise. But if you want to start an architectural review committee for Indy, I know that I (and maybe some of the other hicks around here) would be happy to jump on board to support you. Changing project of this scale, however (and in an area this is clearly the butt side of downtown), is probably a pipe dream. I agree that you'll have to point out these other marvelous cities with visionary architecture. I was in Austin a few years ago and saw plenty of humdrum infill--the best that could be said is that it was generally urban oriented.
Okay, I've thought of a place with visionary designs for its student housing: Cambridge, MA, where MIT consistently pushes the envelope on its buildings. (Conversely, Harvard is more conservative than the stuff we're seeing on this thread.) Simmons Hall (http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/8/7/3/i/4/6/3/o/Simmons-Hall-MIT.jpg) is undeniably eye-catching, and it since it sits across desolate, windswept parking lots and athletic fields, it almost makes you forget that MIT remains one of the most abominably master-planned campuses in the country. 80% of the campus looks like service entrances for semi-trailers. You always feel like you're on the back side of campus.
Another visionary building that hopes to add spice to MIT's dreary campus is the Stata Center (http://dev.eitc.org:8080/Plone/conferences/eitc-2009/stata-center-mit.jpg), which hosts classes and labs and is designed by the perennially over-loved Frank Gehry. The result? A building that in just five years has such significant leaks and water intrusion that the university is suing Gehry to the tune of $200 million. These meretricious vanity projects haven't always worked to MIT's benefit.
I'm not sure we always have to be careful what we wish for, but I think we do have to remember that the developer has to know its market, while we can wax poetic about innovative design all we want. Moderation is in order.
http://www.marshsunfresh.com/images/storeSm.jpg
http://www.foodretailworld.com/Gallery/Schnucks.JPG
http://www.skipconverse.com/Kroger%20Store%20Alexandria%20011.jpg
http://www.inglewoodrna.org/images/KrogerRenovation.gif
http://www.v1cinc.com/pages/images/kroger_Exterior-big.jpg
http://iu-iusm-emer.ads.iu.edu:8081/iuem/divisions/out-of-hospital-medicine/lucas.jpg
Indianapolis' priority is not the arts. Ruschman gallery is closing, the Symphony needs serious fund raising and grants to stay in business, etc. ad infinitum. Artists leave Indianapolis at alarming rates as the public does not support them. Settling for run of the mill architecture in a city of this size is just another indicator that the creative class has left, is leaving or has given up and lost interest. We have an incredible musem system in this city and they work very hard at getting people interested in the arts. But to be interested in the arts one must get past the idea that vanilla is good enough. I love a good tractor pull as anybody, but we need to raise the bar if we are going to compete in the new economy. IMHO, of course.
Sorry about the sneering. I realize that all Indianapolis residents are not a bunch of yokels. I know plenty that are not. But the Hoosier mentality is pervasive, an incredible number of people in Indianapolis do not see the value in art and it drives me crazy.
ndianapolis' priority is not the arts, it is professional sports. Ruschman gallery is closing, the Symphony needs serious fund raising and grants to stay in business, etc. ad infinitum. Artists leave Indianapolis at alarming rates as the public does not support them. Settling for run of the mill architecture in a city of this size make no sense, to me anyhow. We have an incredible musem system in this city and they work very hard at getting people interested in the arts. But to be interested in the arts one must get past the idea that vanilla is good enough. I love a good tractor pull as anybody, but we need to raise the bar if we are going to compete in the new economy. IMHO, of course.
Sorry about the sneering. I realize that all Indianapolis residents are not a bunch of yokels. I know plenty that are not. But the Hoosier mentality is pervasive and an incredible number of people in Indianapolis do not see the value in art and it drives me crazy.
At the end of the day, it's a dorm. Dorms have the reputation of being too noisy. Students can go to to other buildings on campus for inspiration. The dorm is a place to shower, sleep, and stow one's stuff.
And just yesterday, I heard about a Purdue grad, chemical engineer, who accepted a job in the Midwest. He had interned near San Francisco last summer and decided it was too expensive. He preferred the Midwest.
Though I like to think I can recognize great architecture -- this project is clearly not great -- I freely admit to being a novice. I'm an engineer/scientist by trade, so function often trumps everything.
So: what's wrong with this design?
Things I don't like about this design (written by an architect):
1) The design is excessively rectalinear, with no engaging or figural elements.
2) Main entrance? As the building is entirely based on one continuous system of rectalinear voids and extrusions with no figural entrance, it's impossible to tell WHERE the user goes.
3) Student housing + Private balconies = BAD idea. Hint: Don't walk on the street under those things at 1am on any given Saturday/Sunday morning. You might be hit by errant projectile vomit...or maybe even errant human beings.
4) Materials: So, face brick, EFS (likely), and/or clapboard siding? Seriously...talk about the Carmel palate. It's a standard set of material finishes...nothing special. And BELIEVE me, I'm not a believer in metalic finishes (Ghery-ish garbage). I just want some...variety.
5) The corner. I'm not sure how anyone could be impressed by the corner rendering shown, design-wise. Sure, I'll give props to whoever rendered it. However, when you look at it, do you REALLY think Indianapolis, or city/downtown, or do you think Carmel/Suburbia? It's blocky, boring, and uninspiring. Sure, it IS student housing, but if you gave me time (and I really didn't mind wasting my time t educate people), I could find you dozens of examples of student housing done over the last 10 years that were both well-designed and affordable. I guess you'll just have to trust me...or drive up to Ball State/Purdue/ND/Illinois/Cincinnati/etc.
That's all I have right now. Just saw that this was getting a lot more feedback, so I thought I'd respond.
One thing I'd like to point out: Whatever happens with this project, it will be 10 times better than what's there now, and will certainly be a positive addition to the area. I believe very strongly that IUPUI is an essential asset to the downtown.
However, regardless of whatever anyone says, this project will be a step in the right direction, which is exactly what that area desperately needs.
But as I've said repeatedly: if this is an improvement over what is there now, it is a net gain for the city. Then the next building across the street can be even better, and so on. Progress in urban design is incremental and progressive...not revolutionary.
High jumpers and pole vaulters don't raise the bar (the origin of that phrase) a foot or two at a time. They raise it in small increments.
Let us give the developer some credit. This project is a big step up in terms of urban design from what is usually proposed locally. We are now treated to something that at least makes an attempt to respect the rules of urbanism.
However, this notion that it is replacing a vacant lot and thus is better than what was there before; as well as the idea that it is good enough are the two notions I have been fighting against for the last 10-15 years.
I respect that those are legitimate value choices and that they in fact perfectly embody the values of the community at large. I don't think there is anything evil or wrong with them.
But I believe they are the values that hold the city back. There are many great things about being a Hoosier, a title I am proud to claim. The Midwest culture has a lot of goodness to it. But also a lot of problems and things that have brought its communities into terrible situations.
I was thinking recently on what the most destructive aspect of Midwestern culture is. I have come to the conclusion that it is the active championing and defense of mediocrity as the preferred outcome. I think this discussion provides the perfect illustration. It isn't just that some think the building is fine. Some of them also criticize anyone who dares to ask for better. It is outright active discouragement of the pursuit of excellence that I find so troubling.
My father was berated by his father as an idiot when he decided to go to college. I was just chatting with a high school friend with a master's degree about how he had been told by the guidance counselor that nobody from such a small school could possibly make in college and that he should consider being a welder instead.
Indiana demands of its people that they surrender ambition and aspiration. That, more than anything, is why it cannot attract or retain people who have a thirst for more than the status quo.
This design might indeed be the best we can hope for given all the tradeoffs. But we should have a rich awareness of the choices we are making, and the implications for where they are taking us as a city and state.
When Indianapolis throws up a corporate office park building behind a classic library, how can the planning and zoning folks ask for anything better and keep a straight face and some sense of integrity?
I think you're applying the do your best standard in the wrong place here. That should start with civic architecture, or projects with significant government investment: government offices, the Canal, Cultural Trail, libraries, museums, airport, stadia, Convention Center, JW Marriott. And the record there is mixed; most of those recent structures fit in the nothing special/good enough category.
Until we hold the public entities' feet to the fire, there is absolutely no reason to expect better of a private developer.
I'm not even saying that we need to make everything Taj Mahal grade, but we at least need to have the discussion about what we can afford and demand within the context of the world we are in, what the competition is doing, and what perfection might in fact look like.
I haven't heard any mention of where the 650 students' cars will park. I would think that would be a huge factor in the overall success of this project as an urban development, as well as the prospects for creating a vibrant community along this portion of Indiana Avenue.
The bottom portion of the detailed rendering is probably showing Indiana.
Hopefully this will kick off a lot of higher density development. Maybe they'll get some more commercial space or school office space north of of fall creek. If you look at the area on Google Maps, there is VERY LITTLE development in this general area north of campus. It works so well b/c there are trails by the creek and a bridge to cross over to IUPUI. The city could also redo Blocks Park and make it a more inviting area for students to hang out and study. I think this is incredible news, when I was driving through that area I didn't think development would possibly cross over Fall Creek so soon.
New Urbanist design = hide the parking inside or out back. :)
What I will say is that there is a student design competion sponsored by creative young developers with ideas on how to grow Greece in a new way.
Imagine that! The first line of the competition brief reads:
OLIAROS, a young property development company, is calling architects up to 35 years old to submit proposals for the construction of a student housing unit in Kerameikos and Metaxourgeio (KM), an area in the historic centre of Athens, Greece.
Now...we can deconstruct all the reasons why an historic Athens (ORIGINAL) can do it...and why (INAUTHENTIC) Indianapolis can not...
Their is a disconnect....If a place with a deeper history than Indy can do it...what is the problem? Critical Regionalism has us strung up, bottom line.
A2S04 will be doing the competiton...we'll consider the global nature of student, and why that tiny detail is important for all universities and cities to consider when openly recruiting international students to visit and contribute to our international city.
http://www.upto35.com/