I think the bigger question @KJPand something we probably don't know yet is if any of this work takes into consideration the possibility of CVSR or Amtrak utilizing Tower City as a station... It seems that if this level of investment is happening here, then this is the one chance we have for this to happen. 

27 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

I don't see how they would affect them, at least in the short term. Their conceptual images show an outdoor public space descending the hillside from The Avenue to the river. Any additional development that increases the number of people living, working and visiting whatever Bedrock plans should help boost Tower City Center.

Good to hear. Tower City is one of my favorite buildings downtown, so I’ve been trying to keep track of it in the midst of all of the other development news. Thank you. 

1 hour ago, mrclifton88 said:

I think the bigger question @KJPand something we probably don't know yet is if any of this work takes into consideration the possibility of CVSR or Amtrak utilizing Tower City as a station... It seems that if this level of investment is happening here, then this is the one chance we have for this to happen. 

 

*Maybe* CVSR will be extended north to Tower City. It's probably a $25 million project so the cost isn't insurmountable, there's multiple funding sources that can be tapped for it, and track owner CSX doesn't want the rails anymore (in fact, their disuse of the portion north of I-490 means ownership of that section reverts to the city if the city submits the necessary paperwork to the county). But for Amtrak service to come to Tower City would require the expenditure in the hundreds of millions. That isn't feasible when you've only got four trains per night serving Cleveland. A state or group of states including Ohio (which are the only entities under federal law that can initiate new/expanded Amtrak services) haven't shown any interest in initiating new passenger rail service.

 

Feel free to discuss this further here:

 

There has been some discussion about what Bedrock is thinking re: Tower City and Amtrak.  I thought KJP had given us some maps but couldn't find them.  But I found a good synopsis of KJP's past thoughts on the question of bringing Amtrak into Tower City.

On 9/16/2021 at 7:02 PM, KJP said:

[The Lakefront Amtrak station] can be scaled up gradually as high-quality rail infrastructure accesses the site from all of the directions and routes that Amtrak wants to serve. If they want to expand service on their existing routes with another train or two in the next few years (such as their Buffalo and Pittsburgh routes to New York City), they can do it with a relatively small amount of capital investment to the infrastructure (including a track or two at the station for trains to layover here between runs).

 

Then, if they want to add trains to the route to Columbus and Cincinnati in the next five years or so, Amtrak can add another track or two at the station, expand the station building and build a connecting track southeast of downtown to reroute a dozen daily freight trains off the lakefront to free up capacity.

 

Then, if they want to add trains on the route to Toledo and Detroit in the next 5-10 years, Amtrak can either add a third track to the NS mainline west of Cleveland or expand capacity to reroute a half-dozen or freight trains a day to a parallel NS route. And so on....

 

By comparison, there are no railroad tracks into Tower City/Cleveland Union Terminal (and haven't been since the late 1970s), just transit tracks that are incompatible for use by Amtrak (or Brightline) due to their sharp curvatures and lateral/vertical clearances. So everything has to be rebuilt from scratch to return passenger trains there.

 

Rather than come up with some convoluted way to get Amtrak into Tower City, it would be better to (1) bring CVSR to Tower City, (2) extend the Waterfront Line to make a downtown loop, and (3) build a new (and improved) Amtrak station near where it is now with an easy connection to the Waterfront Line/Downtown Loop to bring Amtrak riders into the city.

Great thinking on transit concepts @Foraker.  
We'll a lot of workable creative ideas like this pulled together to prepare Cleveland for the next 100 years.

Edited April 8, 20223 yr by ExPatClevGuy

4 hours ago, Foraker said:

There has been some discussion about what Bedrock is thinking re: Tower City and Amtrak.  I thought KJP had given us some maps but couldn't find them.  But I found a good synopsis of KJP's past thoughts on the question of bringing Amtrak into Tower City.

Rather than come up with some convoluted way to get Amtrak into Tower City, it would be better to (1) bring CVSR to Tower City, (2) extend the Waterfront Line to make a downtown loop, and (3) build a new (and improved) Amtrak station near where it is now with an easy connection to the Waterfront Line/Downtown Loop to bring Amtrak riders into the city.

I think this is the post you were looking for:

 

11 hours ago, KJP said:

One source said where Bedrock intends to build (nuCLEus). All of the others say that they intend to build, and want to build big, but don't say where.

 

Other sources at the city have cryptically said that Bedrock's new construction project will enhance the riverfront but decline to identify where the project will be built.

 

No sources have said HBSE is acquiring the nuCLEus site.

 

Guardians (which is a target to be acquired by HBSE) have a purchase agreement with the city to acquire 3.8 acres of land including the Gateway East parking deck.

 

Bedrock has publicly shared lots of conceptual renderings about the riverfront and nothing about the nuCLEus site.

 

Stark denies they're selling the nuCLEus site but my sources were told differently by Stark.

 

Stark and others tell Crain's they're looking forward to nuCLEus coming back from being "on hold."

 

Bedrock last year hired a geotech firm out of Toronto to analyze its riverfront properties and then told them to stand down. Has anyone seen a geotech rig on Bedrock's riverfront properties?

 

In a recent video about downtown projects, Downtown Cleveland Alliance shared a conceptual rendering of one big new building on the riverfront but shared nothing about the nuCLEus site.

 

I published the article about Bedrock buying SHW's R&D and shared it by social media. DCA, which often likes my tweets but seldom retweets them, retweeted this one. And former Planning Director Freddie Collier shared this same article on LinkedIn with a comment about how this acquisition will help transform the riverfront.

 

I should note that DCA never retweeted my Bedrock-buys-nuCLEus articles, even though they along with the SHW R&D story were based on anonymous sources. Why'd they retweet this one?

 

The city and Bedrock agreed last November to begin pursuing a joint development agreement for the riverfront. The approved framework says they hope to get a deal in place in 18 months but can request more time if necessary. What land is this for?

 

Does the lack of a development agreement preclude Bedrock from building on its own riverfront land? Or can they build a tower now next to Huron and away from the river's edge, knowing that the rest of the riverfront plazas, bulkheads and other infrastructure can be addressed later?

 

Yes, Rocket's expiring lease at Higbee is definitely a ticking bomb for Gilbert. If Gilbert & Co intends to move Rocket to their own building, and Bedrock owns no building big enough to accommodate them (including SHW R&D), they'd better start building a new one by the end of next year which means getting the planning underway ASAP.

 

Yes, there's confusing info -- primarily because it's incomplete. And some of it is contradictory (like the geotech firm being pulled back or the long time before the city-Bedrock deal is finalized). What does this all mean??

 

 

I'm moving my questions here. Why? Because I'm darned sure something big is brewing at Tower City. I'm told there were boundary and topo surveyors working all around the Tower City area today -- from Prospect down to the riverfront. That's a very strong sign that new-build is being considered in this area. The curious part for me is that this surveying work was done along Prospect too, all the way from Ontario to Superior.

I'm not against sparkly new (awesome and desired) development, yet I have always the enjoyed the elegant massing of the "big city" roaring art deco masterpieces of the three Landmark Office Towers over the bend in the Cuyahoga. 

 

Architectural character counts: As the new face for this edge of our city, Befrock'd new initial massing looks gratuitously hulking and weird to me.  I'll take it somehow, but this concept belies any attempt at sympathetic deference.  I'm hopeful for subsequent design iterations to offer cohesion and artful appeal to this prominent and wide Southern flank of downtown.

 

(...and after all this, I still dont see a hoped-for plan to complete Landmark with a finishing structure; one that will cover the awful and unfinished giant brick wall over Ontario, made famous by the S.W. LeBron mural.)

Edited April 9, 20223 yr by ExPatClevGuy

5 hours ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

I'm not against sparkly new (awesome and desired) development, yet I have always the enjoyed the elegant massing of the "big city" roaring art deco masterpieces of the three Landmark Office Towers over the bend in the Cuyahoga. 

 

Architectural character counts: As the new face for this edge of our city, Befrock'd new initial massing looks gratuitously hulking and weird to me.  I'll take it somehow, but this concept belies any attempt at sympathetic deference.  I'm hopeful for subsequent design iterations to offer cohesion and artful appeal to this prominent and wide Southern flank of downtown.

 

(...and after all this, I still dont see a hoped-for plan to complete Landmark with a finishing structure; one that will cover the awful and unfinished giant brick wall over Ontario, made famous by the S.W. LeBron mural.)

Let me start by saying this post isn't targeted at you per say, it just made me think of something that has been on my mind. I'm not against blocking the view of historical buildings anywhere throughout the city when it comes to new development. Too many times in Cleveland we see great designs (this is a massing so I'll reserve final judgement when a design comes) diminished just to be able to look at older buildings. The most recent example is the Bridgeworks project, the first design was amazing, it was told to be altered due to blocking a church and we good an above average design in its place. If we are building for the future we have to stop sacrificing future designs to appease lovers of the past, because 20 years down the line we will be looking at those designs with regret (to be clear I am pro-preservation because we can't replace those designs). To bring it back to this development as long as these are world class building and landscape designs I don't care what it blocks just be designed well and add properly to the area. 

Thanks @MyPhoneDead and you are right in every way.  Dont get me wrong. I understand massings, and simply feel it's never too early to start thinking about great design. 

I will lament losing the view of Landmark because in a very major way it tells the story of Cleveland at a glance, but it wont hurt so much if we get something great in its place.

Edited April 9, 20223 yr by ExPatClevGuy

As I’ve had more time to reflect, I really hope Bedrock is pursuing the riverfront first. With the way downtown is growing, the days of the NuCLEus parcel are numbered. Something will eventually go there, I have little doubt.

 

But the riverfront is much more awkward and problematic of a space that I could easily see languishing.

 

So if a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, I hope the riverfront is the problem being solved first.

Setting aside my personal bias for "big" and my agreement with ExPatClevGuy on the view of the classic Landmark building from the south looking north I do see a problem here. That being IF that view of the Landmark building was protected it would necessitate building several low rises from Ontario down to the river. What would be the point and what would that look like? I'll answer my own question. No point and not much. 

It seems like it would be a better look if the new building was slightly lower than Landmark. That way, at least the upper portion of Landmark would still be visible from the south.  And hopefully it will be designed to blend in with the surrounding buildings, not a glass box.

 

I know property owners/developers can build whatever they want, but IMO the best look aesthetically for a city's downtown would be for the tallest buildings to be in the center with gradually shorter buildings extending out to the perimeter.   

 

And yes, let's get something built on that unfinished parcel of Landmark!

 

Edited April 11, 20223 yr by LibertyBlvd

I’ll trade the view of Landmark from the Innerbelt for a dense urban cavern on Huron from Ontario to Detroit.  Since I’m sure Bedrock is thinking mixed use for the riverfront and we’re almost all imagining that Landmark’s conversion to residential (hopefully over retail) is a high probability with SHW moving out, Huron could become a mini Euclid of pedestrian activity.  Hopefully we shoot the moon and cut out a traffic lane so a sidewalk can be added to the south.. a bike lane couldn’t hurt either 😃

3 hours ago, Sapper Daddy said:

I’ll trade the view of Landmark from the Innerbelt for a dense urban cavern on Huron from Ontario to Detroit.  Since I’m sure Bedrock is thinking mixed use for the riverfront and we’re almost all imagining that Landmark’s conversion to residential (hopefully over retail) is a high probability with SHW moving out, Huron could become a mini Euclid of pedestrian activity.  Hopefully we shoot the moon and cut out a traffic lane so a sidewalk can be added to the south.. a bike lane couldn’t hurt either 😃

It's a great idea that Huron Road could become a mini Euclid of pedestrian activity with a series of new office, residential and hotel towers built on the Tower City parking lots with entrances off of Huron Road. 

 

BUT with the Landmark building's main entrances located on Prospect Avenue it allows little extra pedestrian activity on Huron Road.  Unless they redesign that side of the Landmark building with new rear entrances and hopefully some new retail and restaurants too.

 

Right now it's mainly a few entrances for employees, garage, loading dock, garbage, etc.

Edited April 9, 20223 yr by Larry1962
More details

 

Bedrock’s big riverfront project is active
By Ken Prendergast / April 10, 2022

 

There is increasing evidence that Bedrock Real Estate is advancing more quickly in developing its downtown Cleveland riverfront development vision despite earlier information that it would take a longer-term approach there. There simply is more visible activity happening here compared to a site in the Gateway District where real estate investments were reportedly in planning but now appear on the back burner.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/04/10/bedrocks-big-riverfront-project-is-active/

I love the Huron road concept and hope they focus on that. Leave the nuCLEus site for another developer.

 

2 hours ago, KJP said:

 

There is increasing evidence that Bedrock Real Estate is advancing more quickly in developing its downtown Cleveland riverfront development vision despite earlier information that it would take a longer-term approach there.

 

There was an article in the WSJ saying that developers are in a rush to nail down "cheap" loans and break ground before the Fed's rate increases really start to bite.  "Shovel-ready" projects go to the head of the list.

8 minutes ago, Dougal said:

There was an article in the WSJ saying that developers are in a rush to nail down "cheap" loans and break ground before the Fed's rate increases really start to bite.  "Shovel-ready" projects go to the head of the list.

 

That's part of the angle to another story I'm working on right now.

It’s exciting to see these projects, but one thing that is discouraging is that it would likely completely eliminate the possibility of Tower City again becoming a rail hub. As frustrating as the current situation is, at least there is nothing insurmountably blocking the rail RoW. That all changes if this project goes forward without specifically incorporating it. One of the reasons I was excited at the idea of Bedrock driving a new NuCLEus development first was that it would delay riverfront activities. I was hoping that might give Brightline enough time to look more in depth at Chi-Det-CLE and perhaps form a partnership with Bedrock in developing this area with its core being both local transit and a new rail intercity transit. And maybe it would also give CVSR enough time to fundraise the $25-35M needed to extend to downtown. If this project moves forward rapidly, it’s much harder to make those things happen. 

As always, thanks @KJPfor being way out ahead of any other media on this story and the great writing .
 

If Bedrock’s plans are really on the scale of the 4th graphic in today’s (April 10)  NEOtrans article, seems like this project could be Cleveland’s version of HUDson Yards - a completely transformative, bigger-than anything else in city history project. 

 

To imagine that scale of brand new development along the riverfront all being built is actually challenging  - I guess I’m cautiously watching developments like everyone else to see the actual specifics  and timelines - but, wow what an exciting time for the city if that vision - or a lot of it - is becoming reality.
 

Presuming that the 1st graphic represents the first structure to be developed - with its sheer bulk,  it  seem to really block the view of the former SW HQ  from the western perspective - and if redeveloped into residential, that buildings riverfront and western views.
 

. So my main critique, similar, I think, to@ExPatClevGuya bit earlier in this thread, would be a less bulkish  design  of the new riverfront tower to something leaner,  emphasizing the vertical   - or subdivided into two or even three mid rises  with open spaces  between them to allow for flow through to Huron Road and the old SW building, which certainly provides a stately presence of some importance. That would create both a new riverfront vista and a sense of depth on downtown’s  western flank. . 
 

I’ll look forward to more news from @KJPand feedback from forum members on this exciting developing story! 
 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 20223 yr by CleveFan

38 minutes ago, CleveFan said:

Presuming that the 1st graphic represents the first structure to be developed - with its sheer bulk,  it  seem to really block the view of the former SW HQ  from the western perspective - and if redeveloped into residential, that buildings riverfront and western views.
 

So my main critique, similar, I think, to@ExPatClevGuya bit earlier in this thread, would be a less bulkish  design  of the new riverfront tower to something leaner,  emphasizing the vertical   - or subdivided into two or even three mid rises  with open spaces  between them to allow for flow through to Huron Road and the old SW building, which certainly provides a stately presence of some importance. That would create both a new riverfront vista and a sense of depth on downtown’s  western flank. 

Agreed.  In Bedrocks's initial rendering for the area from last September, it looks like that site had two separate towers with an open space between them.  

Bedrock adds architect David Adjaye to its Tower City, Cleveland riverfront team 

 https://www.adjaye.com/

 

Adjaye, a Ghanaian-British architect with a global practice, has joined a group of consultants working on a multi-phase plan to revive the ailing downtown mall and create a mixed-use neighborhood on the east bank of the Cuyahoga River.

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/bedrock-adds-architect-david-adjaye-its-tower-city-cleveland-riverfront-team

I imagine this retention plus Michelle's disclosure that Osborne has recently been brought on board is further evidence in support of @KJP 's supposition that some sort of Phase 1 is going to happen on the riverfront sooner rather than later.

I believe that's the same firm associated with the redevelopment plans for Detroit's West Riverfront. While I'm sure whatever the plan for Cleveland their brewing up involves more residential and office structures, the planning for that park was very thoughtful and well designed. I for one am pleased with the choice of architect and would love to have that level of design and pedestrian access brought to our riverfront. 

^^ This is good news. I can’t say I’m a fan of a lot of his buildings and their monolithic style, but am also aware that these things are entirely subjective. Interestingly enough, one or two of his designs are not a million miles away from the OG Nucleus. One thing that does surprise me a little is that I’d imagine he’s not one to settle for compromise on materials quality. Given everything we know about ‘low-rent’ Cleveland and the cost of building here, I’ll be interested to see how that plays out. 

 

Bedrock hires ‘starchitect’ for Cleveland riverfront
By Ken Prendergast / April 12, 2022

 

More evidence emerged today that the riverfront development of Tower City Center in downtown Cleveland isn’t some distant-future exercise of Bedrock Real Estate and instead is an active development project. That evidence was found in Detroit-based Bedrock hiring world renowned architect Sir David Adjaye OBE.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/04/12/bedrock-hires-starchitect-for-cleveland-riverfront/

 

Plus another image for possible application here. This is Liverpool, England's waterfront, a result of a masterplanning effort that Adjaye guided. Liverpool is also famous for rock-n-roll and being a post-industrial city.

 

 

I hope Mr. Adjaye is a fan of regional scenic railways and incorporates that into his plan.

This is very exciting news.

So this solidified in 90 days we get more conceptual images, as estimated by KJP.

Also an interesting tidbit
“The city and Bedrock have entered a master
development agreement that calls for 18
months of due diligence related to the
riverfront plan”

The Adjaye Assoc. portfolio looks interesting:

 

https://www.adjaye.com/

The Adjaye Assoc. portfolio looks interesting:
 
https://www.adjaye.com/

Big fan of this portfolio, all interesting and different architecture


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow!  Adjaye's Smithsonian African American History and Culture Museum in DC* is a total delight to view and to visit.  One of his two DC Public library branches is full-on incredible. The Francis Gregory Neighborhood Library (shown) can easily be describes as the equivalent of an elegant World's Fair Pavilion.

 

Yay Bedrock!

 

*FUN CLEVO FACT: Significant elements of Sir Adjaye's Smithsonian building exterior were crafted in Cleveland.

It was a $41M contract, and the lacey bronze metal panels that comprise the museum facades look truly fantastic.

 

https://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/in-the-news/article/northstar-contracting-to-build-exterior-walls-for-smithsonian-museum

Edited April 12, 20223 yr by ExPatClevGuy
'Added a fun fact.

Wow! to the nth degree.  Let's hope this development can reach fruition. These riverfront properties are really the first impression of downtown by visitors or only those driving by on the highway.    Let alone the Clevelanders that will live and work in these spaces.   It's like the front door of downtown.    Did I already say Wow!?

woot!

 

great (and expensive!) choice and yes that makes it even more real -- adjaye is a first class baller.

 

here in ny adjaye has one of my favorites, the neo-brutalist harlem black rock -- not everybody likes it, but i love it.

 

 

 

he also has neo-gothic 130 william st wrapping up downtown, which everybody seems to love.

 

 

 

and last but not least, he has nyc's tallest res tower on deck (maybe) in hudson yards, 418 11th ave/1500'

 

 

 

I’ll echo the comments above me- wow! This has the potential to have a Hudson Yards-type impact on Cleveland. Also loved how they stressed the importance of Tower City’s part in this plan. It has the potential to be central hub of this entire city. Can’t wait to see this unfold!

Great designs but that last one pictured will always make me feel uneasy lol. I know it's totally stable but it just looks like it's close to toppling over with the top heavy look.

The more of this guy's stuff I look up, the more I love it. Here's a recent design from LA.

 

It seems like he's not a fan of boring glass facades. I'll be really excited to see what he comes up with. Fingers crossed this project is really happening, and soon.

 

@KJPDo you think this will help push the old-money family property owners on Scranton Peninsula to sell?  The peninsula itself is gonna look kind of weird with all the development taking place around it and it just sitting there waiting on God only knows.

Is it possible to build a swing bridge to allow easy pedestrian access to the Scranton Peninsula? I'm assuming it isn't with the climate and the ships. 

20 minutes ago, dski44 said:

Is it possible to build a swing bridge to allow easy pedestrian access to the Scranton Peninsula? I'm assuming it isn't with the climate and the ships. 

I'm sure there's some type of moveable bridge that would be feasible here. Looks like there's no way to get walk across (via Carter Rd.) without walking at least a half mile. So a new bridge might not be a bad idea assuming there's something to walk to and from.

There used to be a bridge (gone by the 1950s) that connected Scranton Avenue with Canal Road (and before Tower City eliminated it ... Seneca Street).

1 hour ago, Oldmanladyluck said:

@KJPDo you think this will help push the old-money family property owners on Scranton Peninsula to sell?  The peninsula itself is gonna look kind of weird with all the development taking place around it and it just sitting there waiting on God only knows.

 

I responded here....

 

 

In Curacao they developed a floating pedestrian bridge to connect both sides of their river across a busy shipping channel. Check out the Queen Emma floating pedestrian bridge. 

 

I've been on that bridge. It's a slow and tedious process for it to swing away when ships approach. But, it would be great to connect the peninsula with the Tower City development....and would probably benefit both of the projects! 

a co-worker friend across from my office at my main site happens to be from curacao and grew up there until he was a teen and they moved to nj. i asked him about that bridge today. he said its pretty famous there.

 

seems to me like the cuyahoga might be too narrow for something like that though.

 

btw it's interesting to hear him talk dutch carribean papiamentu to his relatives on the phone. you can hear the mix of dutch, spanish, english and african patois in it. of course besides english he speaks straight up dutch too and when he hears the dutch tourists he likes to talk to them. 

On 4/12/2022 at 11:08 PM, mrnyc said:

woot!

 

great (and expensive!) choice and yes that makes it even more real -- adjaye is a first class baller.

 

here in ny adjaye has one of my favorites, the neo-brutalist harlem black rock -- not everybody likes it, but i love it.

 

 

 

he also has neo-gothic 130 william st wrapping up downtown, which everybody seems to love.

 

 

 

and last but not least, he has nyc's tallest res tower on deck (maybe) in hudson yards, 418 11th ave/1500'

 

 

 

I’m excited like everyone else here about this project being  associated with “Starchitrect” Adjaye.
 

 The view of downtown with the reimagined riverfront would have major curb appeal .  Just like the view of the RHOF with the newer towers of downtown behind it. 
 

I’m also excited at the prospect of something more unique and interesting than the massing we saw in front of the Landmark building. 
Something distinctive and innovative to be a Cleveland signature. .  
 

As for the examples in the portfolio shared by @mrnyc- NY’s possible Affirmation Tower is huge, arresting and completely unique - but makes me feel off-balance - I feel like it’s going to topple over!   
 

For Cleveland, I personally would rather not see black or a very  dark colored buildings along the riverfront - I think the current infrastructure combined with our climate calls for something  with some  color.  My two cents anyway.  

Edited April 14, 20223 yr by CleveFan

^ anything but beige/brown!  😂

 

the main thing as someone mentioned above -- and by all these examples -- is adjaye's style is quite varied, so that bodes very well.

 

also, i am not sure he is doing individual structures here as much as overseeing the look/whole of the bedrock owned riverfront sites? 

 

but maybe he will get a building or two to design as well? as bill & ted used to say, that would be most excellent.

 

it would also be great if he helped out next door with the proposed bedrock ballpark city plans as well. 

 

anyway the big thing is, its in the hands of an actual creative, world class pro at this stuff.

 

I’m not sure whether its fate has been determined yet, but I’m interested to see if the old railroad depot will remain intact. If it does, I wonder if it would influence the architects to style other buildings along the riverfront in a similar industrial style? Almost reminds of that picture above from their Liverpool project. Fun times!