Convention center design: Early schematics show 3 options, Monroe County CIB sets Sept. 16 for input
At its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, Monroe County’s capital improvement board (CIB) received three preliminary schematic designs for the planned expansion of the Monroe Convention Center at College Avenue and 3rd Street.
The three design concepts are labeled City, Quarry, and Go Big.
The existing facility includes about 40,000 square feet. The preliminary schematics, which were presented by David Greusel with Convergence Design, show a 60,000 square foot facility. That would make for 100,000 square feet of convention space.
Convergence Design is helping Schmidt Associates with the architectural design.
According to Greusel, the new 30,000-square-foot main ballroom space is big enough to accommodate a sit-down dinner for 2,000 people, four basketball courts, eight volleyball courts as well as 170 exhibit booths.
One element that is common to all three preliminary schematic designs is a skywalk across College Avenue, connecting the 40,000-square foot existing facility to the planned expansion.
One big takeaway from Wednesday is that a meeting will be held at the convention center on Sept. 16 from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to get feedback from the public on the preliminary schematics.
At Wednesday’s CIB meeting, the reason the architects included a skywalk connector in all the designs was drawn out with a question from CIB president John Whikehart.
Responding to Whikehart was Greusel, who started his answer like this: “It’s absolutely essential, from a convention center design point of view, that these two buildings function as a single building, which means that there is an enclosed, climate controlled connection between them.”
Greusel continued, “To operate them as two separate buildings, that you have to cross a street at grade to get from one to the other, essentially means you have two little convention centers instead of one big one.”
He added, “From a guest comfort and safety standpoint, it’s essential not to have to cross College, which is, frankly, a very busy street in Bloomington.”
The inclusion of a skywalk connection will likely pique the interest of at least some Bloomington city councilmembers, who object to the idea of including a skywalk. In an early June letter to the CIB, the council opposed the inclusion of skywalks, writing that a skywalk “would limit convention attendee opportunities to interact with and patronize downtown businesses.”
The council’s letter continues, “Skywalks would also undermine the quality of public space in the downtown, in contradiction to city plans and goals.”
Starting in late July, groups that met with the architects to work through the functional elements of the design included: staff from the Monroe Convention Center, Downtown Bloomington, Inc. (DBI), Visit Bloomington, Bloomington planning department, Bloomington Economic Development Corporation; members of the convention and visitor commission; the boards of Visit Bloomington and the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce; as well as representatives from the utilities Smithville, Comcast, Duke Energy, among other groups.
Three design concepts
The City design is supposed to be a nod to the architectural character of Bloomington’s downtown. The building would primarily be constructed from brick and masonry, with a straightforward rectilinear geometry, Greusal said. A standout feature would be the large overhanging cornice, which not only defines the building’s profile but also provides shelter and a sense of enclosure for those approaching it, Greusal said.
The Quarry design gets its inspiration from Bloomington’s heritage connected to limestone, Greusal said. According to Greusal, the design is supposed to reflect the rugged, industrial past of the area, including elements that evoke the stone masonry techniques prevalent in many of the city’s historic buildings.
Greusal described the facade as characterized by limestone panels that tilt outwards slightly, which are supposed to mimic the stair-stepping patterns seen in quarries. The projecting canopies in the design are inspired by gantry cranes that were used to move stone in quarries, Greusal said.
The name for the Go Big design was selected only because no good name could be come up with, Greusal said. The design is supposed to make a bold, dramatic statement. Even though it uses masonry, this design features steel accents, including an orangish canopy made of Cor-Ten steel, Greusal said. The canopy cantilevers over the street, extending to the corners of Third and Walnut, and Third and College, creating a significant overhang, Greusal said.
Reaction from CIB members
Reaction from CIB members to the three designs was mixed.
CIB member Joyce Poling said she likes the brick and limestone in the City design. But she added, “I wish it were a little more dramatic somewhere.” Poling liked the fact that the City design blends with the existing convention center and the 4th Street parking garage, which is across 3rd Street from the planned new expansion.
CIB member Doug Bruce, who is an architect, described the City design, with its brick and limestone as the one that “best compliments our downtown.” Bruce said he likes the fact that there’s an entry at the street corners in all the design options, in particular an entrance that is on the side closest to the downtown transit center.
CIB member Eric Spoonmore was least impressed with the Quarry option. Spoonmore called the cantilevered features of the Go Big concept “really cool and unique.” Spoonmore wished for a combination of the Go Big and the City option.
CIB member Adam Thies described the Go Big concept as an attempt to stand out as unique and different. The City concept is an attempt to make it fit into the rest of downtown. That led Thies to conclude that the CIB has to decide if it wants something that will be unique, or something that fits in.
Of the two options that don’t “fit in”, Thies preferred Go Big over the Quarry concept. For the Quarry concept, Thies said the block size is out of scale for the building, which would cause a pedestrian to feel “quite poor” standing beside it. Thies asked that in subsequent drawings, some attention be given to the perspective from a pedestrian at the street level.
CIB member Jay Baer described every convention center in the world as “a marketing assignment.” The question to ask, Baer said, is “What is a building that triggers the imagination of those who might be convinced to come down and spend money in this community versus another community?”
Based on that question, Baer told Greusal: “I think you should try to err on the side of something that’s dynamic, something that creates Instagrammable moments, and that doesn’t necessarily, ‘fit in for the sake of fitting in’ but actually has a vibe of some nature.” Baer wrapped up, saying, “I really do like the Go Big approach.”
Thies asked Greusal if all three designs were achievable within the hard construction budget, which has been previously identified as about $52 million. Greusal responded by saying that there is not a significant overall difference in cost between the three design options.
