The building whisperer: John Martens
By Peggy Nolan
After buying the historic Madison Candy Company building (former home of Eldorado Grill and Ground Zero Coffee) about 30 years ago, Madison architect John Martens spent 10 years analyzing its every nook and cranny. “I wanted to learn the history of the building and what the building wanted to be,” he says. That unique approach – acting as a sort of building whisperer – sets John apart from most architects.
Click images to view full screen
John Martens
Who or what sparked your interest in historic preservation? When?
Before buying the Madison Candy Company building at 744 Williamson St. (which John sold in November 2022), I did residential remodels of homes in historic districts, along with remodels of a number of restaurants. Most of my work has focused on remodeling, whether the building was historically significant or not. I love old buildings. It’s why I do what I do.
How did your work on the Madison Candy Company building change the way you think about historic preservation?
Joe Lusson, then-president of the Madison Trust for Historic Preservation, invited me to join the organization around the time I finished work on the Madison Candy Company building. I started asking myself what exactly I was trying to preserve as the owner of a historic property, and why I was doing it. Was it the building? The history? I realized it’s about the building’s stories of the people; it’s about buildings as the embodiment of what humanity wrought. Understanding the past, manifested by these buildings, is an important part of being alive.
Photo of Madison Candy Company by MTHP
Answering my own questions didn’t change how I did things. It made me more focused.
What are you most proud of in your historic preservation work?
I’m most proud of my work on the Madison Candy Company building. Being self-employed, I could work on it for as long as possible. We did an intensive survey and selective demolition. We needed to understand what the building went through. We didn’t just study the mechanics; we learned the history. I even talked to people who worked there and learned their stories. That effort meant there were no surprises in the remodel. And we came in under budget. The front-end time was well worth it. You can’t impose your own will on the building; it should be an iterative process.
I’m also proud of my work to save the Theo Kupfer Ironworks, now home to the Goodman Community Center on Waubesa Street. My work on the Garver Feed Mill adjacent to Olbrich Botanical Gardens also gives me a sense of pride. The railroad corridor connects many of these historic buildings.
What’s been your biggest challenge with historic preservation work, and how did you overcome it?
Budgets and time pressures create challenges. Another challenge is the public perception of what buildings are worth preserving. I was able to buy the Madison Candy Company building because back then, no one wanted to buy a warehouse. Now they do. The less special the architecture, the more people want to knock a building down. We may be really sorry about that way of thinking 50 to 100 years from now.
In your opinion, why is historic preservation important?
I believe historic preservation is important because it preserves genuine craft in the buildings themselves but also ultimately gives us insight into our own behavior. As fake and superficial versions of “information” clutter our consciousness more and more, the authenticity of these old buildings, the repositories of both genuine craft and real history, is more important than ever. It doesn't matter if one is interested in historic preservation or not; I have never met anyone who doesn't resonate in the presence of a wonderful old building, especially after hearing the stories of what went on about and within them.
What do you think are some current threats to historic preservation in Madison, and what do you think can or should be done about them?
The biggest current threat to preservation in Madison is the so-called "housing crisis." There is an unquestionable need for more housing, and there are plenty of places where it could be built. The problem is that developers are cherry-picking the most desirable areas, often those with historic character. If our Landmark ordinances were enforced as they are intended, development would still take place in other areas and ultimately would create desirability of its own.