heightsfan

Did you read the above posts? I'm pretty sure I was called a cleveland.bomb poster b/c I had the temerity to criticize something.

Sorry, but the project does need to be scrutinized as a whole. It's a collection of 3 new buildings all fronting our City's signature street in the most dynamic part of the city. Let me start by saying I'm thrilled UH is making this investment. My only issue is that they missed what could have been a big opportunity. Of the 3 buildings, the cancer hospital is assuredly the best. But I'm still greatly disappointed that the old Mather dorms that fronted Euclid - a beautiful set of historic buildings - were razed and replaced by a banal parking deck set far back from the street, and the new ER facility, which looks like a shed set off from the street and screened off by heavy vegetation. I know I will undoubtedly be excoriated by the panel for having an opinion, but I just feel this Vision 2010 project really came up short. Sorry for wanting more for my City.

Like I said, to start, I'd like something that was more appropriately scaled in size and that interacts at some level with Euclid. I also would have liked something that was modern, but at least attempted to blend in a bit with the existing UH complex and other buildings in the area. Take the Gehry building. It's modern beyond belief, but at least it tries to respect its surroundings through its use of red brick, complementing the Dively building, Mather Memorial, Gund Hall, etc.

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture. And I wholeheartedly support that. My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking. I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years. I dont think it looks surburban looking considering it's setting. If it was built in the 'burbs with a parkinglot surrounding it, it would look ridiculous. Oh, I don't know about that. I could just as easily see the cancer hospital as part of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, or the new UH Ahuja Hospital in Highland Hills. And have you happened to notice the new ER addition fronting Euclid. I'd be curious as to your thoughts on that lovely piece of work.

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture. And I wholeheartedly support that. My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking. I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

I've seen it in context, and it's pretty awful. To start, the project is totally out of scale. While that is not atypical for hospital complexes, it seems particularly arresting here given that the cancer hospital has no setback from the street whatsoever. While I'm generally opposed to large setbacks, the enormity of the building pressed up against Cornell and Euclid just doesn't fit with the surrounding buildings on Euclid. And if it had to be this close to street, at least the architect could have made the building interact with Euclid at some level. Moreover, no effort was made to tailor the buildings to the surrounding area whether in terms of design or exterior materials. Not only does the skin of both buildings fail to integrate with the existing UH complex (i.e., Lerner Tower, Mather Pavilion, Lakeside), but the aluminum exterior of the cancer hospital is blinding to motorists heading East on a sunny afternoon. The windows are also already noticably streaking. Overall, a truly a missed opportunity in the most dynamic part of the city.

But "green" roofs are hot right now. :)

Well that would explain why they've apparently decided to just knock things off for the moment and keep the site fenced off. It's just irritating when folks tell you a fall completion was "never part of the plan," when in fact it was at one time anticipated. :whip:

From Steven Litt's article back in March: "The nonprofit organization ParkWorks, which is managing the project, hopes to complete Phase 1 by fall. This would establish the bones of the plan, which look solid, but would lack amenities including furniture."

It's certainly better without the frosted windows, but the tables and chairs look cheap and out of place. As do the planters randomly scattered around. All in all, the whole display seems like an afterthought.

Work seems to have ground to a halt here over the last few weeks. Anyone know when Phase I is supposed to wrap up. I thought there was supposed to be a fall opening. It would be nice to enjoy for the 2 or 3 weeks of decent weather we have left.

With all the focus now on improving the Mall, one has to wonder where things stand with regard to Public Square. It seemed like there was a lot of momentum going there for a while. But as with so many things in Cleveland, once the upteenth study is done and the conceptual designs released, the project withers on the vine and the city moves on to something else. I really hope that's not the case with Public Square. Anyone have any news on where things are headed here?

This looks great. Now if we could just fix up and find a tenant for the building between Cowell & Hubbard (now the KSU urban planning building) and the Idea Center.

If construction cost overruns are the responsibility of MMPI, what was the purpose of the contingency fund? Only to cover design issues pre-construction?

But what happens when there are the inevitable construction-related cost overruns, and no contingency fund to look to? Who's picking up the cost? No doubt the county will look to the taxpayer. I agree that the county undoubtedly low-balled the total cost of this project. But the fact remains that the commissioners sold this to the public based on the $435 million number. Now it's suddenly tens of millions more, with virtually no contingency fund left. The total lack of transparency on this project is shocking, as is the county's profligacy with taxpayer money. Full disclosure -- I'm a supporter of the project; just shocked at the incompetence of the county.

The existence of the contingency fund isn't the issue. It's the fact that it's being virtually exhausted before a shovel even hits the ground. Contingency funds exist to cover unexpected cost overruns during the course of construction; they're not meant to cover substantive design revisions pre-construction. Just another example of the poor planning that went into this.

Was at the Marriott this week for a luncheon. If they remodeled the lobby, you could have fooled me. Didn't notice any material differences from what it has always looked like.

So much for the world-class architecture promised by Toby Cosgrove. The architect for this project is Perspectus Architecture. Check out their website. They are responsible for designing such visionary projects as Legacy Village.

I would avoid Trattoria if I were you. The food is really second-rate, and you're likely to get a better meal at Maggiano's or Olive Garden. Etna is pretty good, as is Michaelangelo's on Murray Hill (although it is fairly pricey).

Anyone know whether the owners of the Truman Building (who from what I understand are the same folks who own Schofield) applied for tax credits for this project too, and if so, whether they were awarded? I didn't see anything about Truman mentioned in the PD's coverage today. I thought that the owners were looking to develop Schoefield and Truman in tandem, and I guess assumed they had applied for tax credits for both projects.

It doesn't happen "all over Philly" but it's in a few key places, mostly adjacent to parking lots. There are actually over 2,800 wall murals spread throughout the city.

I'd really like to see a mural painted over the solid brick wall on the west side of the building. Happens all over buildings in Philly, and really livens things up.

Yes, the plan was to make Hitchcock the new alumni center after it was moved. Ultimately, though, Case acquired an old house on Juniper next to Arabica and renovated it for the alumni center. You may be right about Hitchcock not being on the National Register; I just assumed it was given its age. The inside of the building has certainly been bastardized. For years it house the Case commuter lounge and some administrative offices. I think it was, however, recently renovated to accommodate a lounge for the GLBA community. While I hate to see historic structures like this fall to the bulldozer, I agree that it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if it had to be razed, especially if you could replace it with something that would make a real impact on that plaza.

Your idea was the original concept for a new student center. I believe the master plan from a few years ago called for renovating Excelsior (the eastern building of Thwing), moving and relocating Hitchcock Hall (the western building of Thwing that was built in 1897), and demolishing the 1980s glass atrium connecting the two buildings. The new student center would then be constructed where the atirum and Hitchcock were removed, and attached to the Excelsior. The idea was to have the entrance open up to the plaza in front of Kelvin Smith. While the idea is a good one, I suspect it is prohibitively difficult and expensive to move Hitchcock Hall, which I believe is on the National Register and thus can't be demo'd.

Freiberger was also a miserable place inside. When I started college at Case in 1994, there were 2 main undergrad libraries - Freiberger (on the north side) and Sears (on the southside of campus). Both were awful and really run down. For that reason, hardly anyone actually went to study at the library. The addition of Kelvin Smith was hands down the most impactful building project at Case in the last 15 years.