Redbeard1969

I'm really retaining my optimism, though I'm also worried that petty politics will get in the way of this project ... too many shareholders who are looking at Stark and saying, "where's my piece of the pie?" who don't care about the city as a whole, but what they can get out of it, either financially or politically. Volpe seems a bit like sour grapes, probably because he's not been consulted to design one of his uber-ugly slab-and-block townhouses which he's putting up all over the city (apparently the idea of designing something to fit into area architecture is a concept that he's never heard of). I'm also distressed to see the quote from the guy from CB Richard Ellis, because it seems from his quote that he ONLY is viewing this as a retail opportunity. What he's missing here is that by creating more critical mass downtown with more residencies, there will be MORE opportunity for retailers. The problem with Tower City and Galleria was that both were suburban-style shopping malls downtown ... and no one lived downtown then. After the novelty wore off, why would someone come downtown from the suburbs just to shop at exactly the same stores they could get in their malls? However, with this project (and Wolstein's project, and Stonebridge, and Lighthouse, and the Avenue ... etc. etc. et al), all happening (knock on wood), it will create a population of urban dwellers downtown who will be looking for retail. The market will then be there ... instead of putting the cart before the horse, now these projects are building on one another, putting the people into the new downtown neighborhoods, and then attracting the retailers to serve those people. And then, and ONLY THEN, will you get the Chicago-style vibe or New York-style vibe that people are looking for. That's the beauty of Stark's idea ... take these HUGE lots, put residencies and retail on them, AND parking, and you'll really remake the city. And as much as I, a lifelong Clevelander, love the city ... it does need a remake. And if these projects do happen, then this city will be remade in a way not seen since the Union Terminal project in the late 1920s, or even the Group Plan from the turn of the century. If Stark and these other developers can get past the small-minded newspaper and the petty-minded politicians, then what can result might actually spawn a hell of a beautiful, vital, exciting city to live in.

If the owners have "their own plan," why haven't they announced it sooner? They're just blowing smoke to get more money. There hasn't been a unified plan for the Flats in a long time. If Wolstein can't develop the East Bank the way he planned, I don't think anyone will for a long while. And any development there won't be planned well, but shoehorned in.

If there is some retail development, I would hope that it would be a sort of "third place" like a coffeehouse, bookstore, or other space where people could actually congregate and build up a nice little community feeling. Of course, it'd be awfully nice if it would be a local entrepreneur rather than a national chain, but I'm sure the developer's pushing for a chain. Much safer investment. Now if only some of those vacant storefronts on Madison could fill up ...

No, there's probably not too much stuff designed by the International Architects ... though anytime Litt reviews a new building, if it has not been designed by the latest "hot architect du jour" he laments how once again Cleveland is passing up the opportunity to be cutting edge. Do we need to be cutting edge? The guy really doesn't like Cleveland's architecture as it is. And while there are plenty of bland buildings in town, I don't think the answer is having every new building being a post-Mies glass swoopy thing. That's not going to bring jobs to Cleveland, that's not going to turn the economy around. I live in the University Circle vicinity, and I don't see the Peter B. Lewis building at CWRU really increasing the quality of life for everyone here. I do think good architecture can be inspiring ... but what is "good" architecture? Everyone's got a different view. I admit, my view is pretty old-fashioned, and people don't seem to build old-style buildings anymore, though I think you can draw inspiration from them. Look at Cesar Pelli's Key Tower ... it's a new building, but it really draws inspiration from the classic old-school skyscraper, with setbacks and a muscular appeal. But as a contrast, look at all the new townhouses going up in various neighborhoods and inner-ring suburbs. Bland slabs with an occasional embellishment. Why not draw inspiration from some of the classic apartment buildings on East Boulevard overlooking Rockefeller Park? Or some of the 1930s apartments on Lake Road and Clifton Boulevard? I know the new townhouses have to have huge bathrooms and closets, along with granite countertops and stainless steel appliances ... but why should they just be bland boxes? As excited I am about the idea of Rockport Square in Lakewood (and believe me, no matter what they put there, it's MUCH better than the car lots), the buildings are ... blah. There's tons of new construction going up in Chicago, and even the most newest buildings draw inspiration from the classic townhouses, apartments, and brownstones of Chicago. Can't Cleveland have that?

I just wish that when it comes time for new buildings, developers and architects would look around Cleveland, and try to come up with buildings that reflect the local architecture a little bit ... quit listening to Steven Litt and his fetish for having only international architects who like to build glass-clad swoopy buildings. Let's push for inspired architecture, but architecture that's a bit more organic, with a little "form follows function, " just a bit (okay, I'm a fuddy-duddy architecturally ... but with all this development going on, there's a lot of potential happening ... but I fear most of the architecture on these projects is wholly uninspired, and completely ignoring the surroundings that the buildings are going into).

Good luck; he tends to hate the CSU campus architecture, and loves constantly writing that it represents Brutalism at its worst. Which is odd, because he often prefers very modern, slab-sided or abstract architecture, even if it sticks out like a sore thumb. He may hate brutalism, but he seems to like the mentality of "destroy the old, create the new" that was behind it.

well, it's not the most inspired design, but geez, it's got to be better than the "I Love the 70s" Westgate Mall.

well, aside from Sloss Furnace in Alabama, I don't know of any preserved blast furnaces open to the public in the US, though there are a few around that people are trying to save. The trouble is the sheer cost ... when they first announced a museum initiative in Bethlehem (the "Bethlehem Works Project") I was there at an industrial museum conference, and we asked the question how much it would cost to save the blast furnaces, and were told $6 million. That's an awful lot of money ... I love the steel industry and the history of the industry, but that's money that might be better served in other ways. And while they're impressive structures, I don't know how much you can learn from a big dead structure. Interpretive centers can give you a lot of information both in text, images, and a/v, but it's just so darned hard to capture the sheer feeling of being in a mill. I've toured about a dozen mills in operation, and they're a spectacle that defies description, or even Hollywood hyperbole. When I was at WRHS and we were working on ideas for a steel mill exhibit for the now-dead Crawford Museum of Transportation and Industry, we did bring in some Hollywood folks to see the charging of the BOF at then-LTV Steel, in hopes that we could make a 3-D large-format movie of the process. They were blown away, and even wondered if they could truly capture the whole spectacle on film. I'd like to see a few preserved for posterity, but the price is so daunting.

Well, I can't speak for the Huletts, because when WRHS sat down with First Interstate about the "steel heritage center," that was never brought up. The Hulett supporters wanted the surviving disassembled Huletts reassembled at a canal basin park. Though actually, the Steelyard Commons site would be a good place, as there were Hulett Ore Unloaders there on the river, and even earlier, some brownhoist units that Otis Steel used when it was their mill (pre-Jones and Laughlin, who bought Otis Steel in 1942). As much as the Huletts are indeed impressive, the sheer cost of reassembling them and maintaining them is going to be daunting. Some preservationists were also upset with ISG/Mittal's recent demolition of one of their blast furnaces. However, I took issue with them because while they were pushing for "someone" to save the blast furnace and preserve it, none of them seemed to have any idea how much it would cost. Their view was just to save it and not worry ... but I worried, so I called Sloss Furnaces in Birmingham and talked with their curator about how expensive it was to save and maintain the furnace, even as an inoperable hunk of metal. He also clued me in to the liability costs, the costs of making it accessible to all visitors, etc. It would have cost upwards of $5+ million dollars just to stabilize the blast furnace, millions more to make it accessible, and upwards of a million a year to maintain it, paint it, etc. While I appreciate industrial archaelogy, who can afford that nowadays? The City of Cleveland? What private group? And until it's made safe, who would have been responsible for liability if someone would have decided to climb the fence and go exploring and gotten injured? I know plenty of urban archealogy fans who have explored those mills at night when they first closed ... as much as I would have LOVED to have seen a blast furnace preserved and turned into an interpretive center, it just isn't economically feasible at this time, and in this city. And besides, a blast furnace not operating is just a big hunk of metal. It's no longer alive. Seeing a steel mill in full operation is like riding in a steam locomotive ... it's worlds apart from just seeing a static old locomotive sitting dead in a park.

yep, don't put too much hope in the steel exhibit. I used to work at the Western Reserve Hysterical Society, and I was in on meetings when the Steelyard folks brought over their plans. Essentially they saved a tiny shed, and would like to put some pictures in it. That's it. We countered by pushing them to make it a larger structure, and include not only historical photos and exhibitry, but also to include space for student activities, a gallery where local artists and photographers could display their works that were inspired by the mills, and even a small outdoor performance space for living history reenactors to do performances for visitors. They were taken aback, and it was clear that they not only had thought about doing anything of that scale, but that they really didn't intend on doing much more than just save the little building, move it off to a corner, and put up some old pictures. I have more hope for an idea Tim Donovan at the Ohio and Erie Canal Corridor floated, to put a steel exhibit in a building near the Towpath and Zeleznik's Tavern. The building he wanted to do this in had plenty of room for all sorts of exhibits and activity spaces. and regarding the site as brownfield, steel mills are pretty dirty, but portions of those areas are often not; the worst culprits are around any former coke works, because of the chemicals used there, and the coke byproducts. I don't think I'd want to live on a former steelworks site, but there are definitely "dirtier" industrial sites around.

Hey guys, the reason the name is "Tyler Village" is becuase the the complex is the old C.E. Tyler Company complex, and home to their production facilities before they moved out to Mentor years ago. It's a great old building ... a friend of mine has a glassblowing studio located in it. The place is a fortress, and built quite well. The only downside is that RIGHT next to the building is a live train line, so if you're living in the building, particularly on the eastern side of the building, you better like trains, because they're going to be coming by day and night, about 3 feet outside your window.