Downtown project delayed by commissioners’ absence
By Ken Prendergast / December 3, 2021

 

City Planning Commission today was unable to advance a major downtown Cleveland project toward design approval, despite its members enthusiastically supporting an earlier conceptual version of the plan. In recent months, multiple commission meetings had be ended early before important agenda items could be addressed, resulting in those projects being delayed to a future meeting where the applicants had to sit through another hours-long session.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/12/03/downtown-project-delayed-by-commissioners-absence/

 

Lots of renderings in this article

Absolutely unacceptable   Maybe we need a letter writing campaign, or social media blitz or something! to let the city planning Commission know that there’s a lot of unhappy people watching them and their lack of process   

I noticed that AJ Rocco's in the old Huron Point Tavern space is adding signage today. Hopefully that corner will be alive again by the NBA ASG. 

 

Really worried about the impression of the empty spaces of Panini's and Winking Lizard though.

3 minutes ago, GISguy said:

I noticed that AJ Rocco's in the old Huron Point Tavern space is adding signage today. Hopefully that corner will be alive again by the NBA ASG. 

 

Really worried about the impression of the empty spaces of Panini's and Winking Lizard though.

 

Does anyone with a clue *not* know what the last year and a half has done to the restaurant biz, particularly in entertainment districts?

Just now, E Rocc said:

 

Does anyone with a clue *not* know what the last year and a half has done to the restaurant biz, particularly in entertainment districts?

 

Still not a great look, that's all I'm saying. Unfortunate luck to have the event during COVID but I hope some popup stuff is developed so it doesn't look so dead on 9th and Prospect.

Well that's ironic. The planning commission has to postpone a development because a member of the commission had to leave a meeting to speak at the City Club about development. Brilliant!

According to the city code, there's supposed to be 7 members (6 appointed by the mayor and 1 council member). There are ALSO supposed to be 2 alternate members appointed by the mayor who will take the place if a member "is unable to act or is self-disqualified because of personal interest."

 

So why is it that we only have 5 members and with no alternates, leaving things like this to happen more frequently? Am I missing something?

17 hours ago, KJP said:

 

Downtown project delayed by commissioners’ absence
By Ken Prendergast / December 3, 2021

 

City Planning Commission today was unable to advance a major downtown Cleveland project toward design approval, despite its members enthusiastically supporting an earlier conceptual version of the plan. In recent months, multiple commission meetings had be ended early before important agenda items could be addressed, resulting in those projects being delayed to a future meeting where the applicants had to sit through another hours-long session.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/12/03/downtown-project-delayed-by-commissioners-absence/

 

Lots of renderings in this article

 

I'm happy to see development, but not a fan of this type.  This reminds me of developments in Atlanta, Uptown-Dallas, Houston's Fourth ward and Midtown areas, The area's south and west of Charlotte's City Centre.  Its not innovative. 

 

Do I hope it's successful for the greater good of the city, absolutely.  Do I think these suburbanized developments contribute to making the city bland and soulless, absolutely.

8 stories of residential over retail with no surface parking?  Not sure how you can get more not suburban than that.

2 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

I'm happy to see development, but not a fan of this type.  This reminds me of developments in Atlanta, Uptown-Dallas, Houston's Fourth ward and Midtown areas, The area's south and west of Charlotte's City Centre.  Its not innovative. 

 

Do I hope it's successful for the greater good of the city, absolutely.  Do I think these suburbanized developments contribute to making the city bland and soulless, absolutely.

A lot more like DC if you ask me. 

14 minutes ago, X said:

8 stories of residential over retail with no surface parking?  Not sure how you can get more not suburban than that.

I hate parking, but not having parking does not make the design - on the surface - less "suburban".  Especially when I compared it to other developments in other cities which are suburbanized from the inside out.

11 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

A lot more like DC if you ask me. 

DC can also be added.  The Noma area adjacent to union station along First street and the area in SE DC where are the black and gay clubs were located are full of these types of bland "human warehouse" developments.

2 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

DC can also be added.  The Noma area adjacent to union station along First street and the area in SE DC where are the black and gay clubs were located are full of these types of bland "human warehouse" developments.

I hear the criticism in that it’s not an exhilarating design, but I’m in the camp of let’s just get 5 of these built and then we can be more picky about design for the next 15. 

2 hours ago, MyTwoSense said:

I hate parking, but not having parking does not make the design - on the surface - less "suburban".  Especially when I compared it to other developments in other cities which are suburbanized from the inside out.

 

You've said nothing here.

21 minutes ago, LlamaLawyer said:

I hear the criticism in that it’s not an exhilarating design, but I’m in the camp of let’s just get 5 of these built and then we can be more picky about design for the next 15. 

 

How many times have we "settled" in the past on a development, to end up with something unsatisfactory or under performing years later.  I'm looking at First Energy Stadium.  I'm looking at the Convention Center.  I'm looking at developments in the Flats.  Several in which many people in this forum complained about.  RIGHT??

 

If we don't raise the bar now....we'll be starting at a deficit and trying to play catchup (once again).  Not just to other regions, but to define and differentiate urban cluster housing in Cleveland from what is offered in the 'burbs.  In the past we've discussed how two generations have no idea on what it was like to "get dressed and go downtown to shop".  Those same kids have grown up living in - IMO - tacky tract homes, so to appeal to them we go along with building something, similar to what they can find in the suburbs, in the HEART of downtown.

 

This isn't my style of housing, but I want to advocate, discuss and push decision makers to require the best the long haul, not a quick fix.  I want/would love to see apartments, condo's, brownstones, townhomes and SFH built in the city, that appeal to all, but are a uniquely different housing stock from the 'burbs.   

 

There is a reason why neighborhoods like Coventry, Hough, (greater) Shaker Square and Edgewater appeal to people.  Great housing along with unique retail and great transportation options and are walkabie.  Gateway has great transportation, restaurants and unique and ever expanding retail.  The housing should match.  The district, downtown and the City deserve that.

17 minutes ago, X said:

 

You've said nothing here.

 

11 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

How many times have we "settled" in the past on a development, to end up with something unsatisfactory or under performing years later.  I'm looking at First Energy Stadium.  I'm looking at the Convention Center.  I'm looking at developments in the Flats.  Several in which many people in this forum complained about.  RIGHT??

 

If we don't raise the bar now....we'll be starting at a deficit and trying to play catchup (once again).  Not just to other regions, but to define and differentiate urban cluster housing in Cleveland from what is offered in the 'burbs.  In the past we've discussed how two generations have no idea on what it was like to "get dressed and go downtown to shop".  Those same kids have grown up living in - IMO - tacky tract homes, so to appeal to them we go along with building something, similar to what they can find in the suburbs, in the HEART of downtown.

 

This isn't my style of housing, but I want to advocate, discuss and push decision makers to require the best the long haul, not a quick fix.  I want/would love to see apartments, condo's, brownstones, townhomes and SFH built in the city, that appeal to all, but are a uniquely different housing stock from the 'burbs.   

 

There is a reason why neighborhoods like Coventry, Hough, (greater) Shaker Square and Edgewater appeal to people.  Great housing along with unique retail and great transportation options and are walkabie.  Gateway has great transportation, restaurants and unique and ever expanding retail.  The housing should match.  The district, downtown and the City deserve that.

I don’t really think you can compare settling on a major project like a stadium to settling on a low-rise infill apartment building. It sounds like your concern is the aesthetics, and a building like this can easily be reclad in 25 years. Basically every major city in the U.S. has buildings that look like this. In healthy cities, you get a mix of boring and exciting developments. We do here too. Across the way, they’re starting construction on City Club, which will be a very unique looking development. This is a hugely exciting project because of the density and activity it will add to the area even if it won’t land in architect magazine.

The stadium, convention center and other projects that require a significant amount of public funding tends to limit the "bells and whistles" on those facilities.

After traveling to NYC a couple weeks ago and walking around Brooklyn, I tried to take notice of bland designs. I know we nitpick a lot of buildings on here, but after walking around and seeing a lot of "eh" buildings, I'm less concerned with designs in Cleveland. At this point I just want to see people moving into the city and surface lots disappearing. Could you imagine if we saw this building proposed in Cleveland what we would say? 😂 I'd say this proposed design is leaps and bounds compared  to this one in Brooklyn...

1 hour ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

How many times have we "settled" in the past on a development, to end up with something unsatisfactory or under performing years later.  I'm looking at First Energy Stadium.  I'm looking at the Convention Center.  I'm looking at developments in the Flats.  Several in which many people in this forum complained about.  RIGHT??

 

If we don't raise the bar now....we'll be starting at a deficit and trying to play catchup (once again).  Not just to other regions, but to define and differentiate urban cluster housing in Cleveland from what is offered in the 'burbs.  In the past we've discussed how two generations have no idea on what it was like to "get dressed and go downtown to shop".  Those same kids have grown up living in - IMO - tacky tract homes, so to appeal to them we go along with building something, similar to what they can find in the suburbs, in the HEART of downtown.

 

This isn't my style of housing, but I want to advocate, discuss and push decision makers to require the best the long haul, not a quick fix.  I want/would love to see apartments, condo's, brownstones, townhomes and SFH built in the city, that appeal to all, but are a uniquely different housing stock from the 'burbs.   

 

There is a reason why neighborhoods like Coventry, Hough, (greater) Shaker Square and Edgewater appeal to people.  Great housing along with unique retail and great transportation options and are walkabie.  Gateway has great transportation, restaurants and unique and ever expanding retail.  The housing should match.  The district, downtown and the City deserve that.

 

And when it all comes down to it, what is it you want to be different?  Any specifics beyond that you think it is "tacky"?

8 hours ago, LlamaLawyer said:

I don’t really think you can compare settling on a major project like a stadium to settling on a low-rise infill apartment building. It sounds like your concern is the aesthetics, and a building like this can easily be reclad in 25 years. Basically every major city in the U.S. has buildings that look like this. In healthy cities, you get a mix of boring and exciting developments. We do here too. Across the way, they’re starting construction on City Club, which will be a very unique looking development. This is a hugely exciting project because of the density and activity it will add to the area even if it won’t land in architect magazine.

You've partially proved my point. My building is almost 100 years old. It was stunning when built and is still stunning today. However, I love prewar buildings.  I don't like the design/aesthetic and that is personal.  I totally believe we don't have to agree, because style/design are all person choices.  Beyond that, I don't think these types of buildings are built for the long haul.

 

Again, this is a uber creative, unique city, the housing should match.  

 

Why are we afraid to push back and think outside the box?  I find it all very defeatist.  Just because other cities have these "mass produced cluster apartments" why should we?  That isn't snark, that is a real world question.   Even before seeing floor plans I can predict, the unit's will be short on storage, no linen or broom closets.  

 

Again, I want the best and realize there must be compromise.  I'm just glad we can have robust discussion to understand others view points as it relates to various developments.

37 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

You've partially proved my point. My building is almost 100 years old. It was stunning when built and is still stunning today. However, I love prewar buildings.  I don't like the design/aesthetic and that is personal.  I totally believe we don't have to agree, because style/design are all person choices.  Beyond that, I don't think these types of buildings are built for the long haul.

 

Again, this is a uber creative, unique city, the housing should match.  

 

Why are we afraid to push back and think outside the box?  I find it all very defeatist.  Just because other cities have these "mass produced cluster apartments" why should we?  That isn't snark, that is a real world question.   Even before seeing floor plans I can predict, the unit's will be short on storage, no linen or broom closets.  

 

Again, I want the best and realize there must be compromise.  I'm just glad we can have robust discussion to understand others view points as it relates to various developments.

I agree with the sentiment, I just don’t think that we’re in a position as a city to be making demands of developers who want to come in and do B+ design work. We do routinely demand more from poorly conceived projects, but I think you would agree this project is not poorly conceived, it’s pretty good, B+, just not at the level you want for the city we love. If 10 years from now we’ve reversed the population loss, grown the metro by 5%, gotten downtown’s population to 35,000, gotten more than one real grocery store downtown, etc. then yeah why settle for less than A- work, but I just don’t think we’re there yet.

As Cleveland climbs back, we’ll get a variety of types of development, some great, some just ok. Great cities are a patch work.

I get your point LiamaLawyer but l agree with MyTwoSense. Sure we'll often be settling for B+ designs because the development community is relatively diverse and there are many factors that determine a finished product. Still, if the city pushes back with knowledgeable arguments l'm positive we can get better results rather than just rolling over for every submission. It starts with raising the bar across the field from the planning commission to local architecture firms to any developer with a proposal. 

 

It's not impossible it just takes a better effort and yes a more knowledgeable professional class than what we're used to. If we have to import that by being less insular so be it. Other cities demand better results, we can too.

Guys, I hate the be the bearer of bad news, but Cleveland is nowhere near as expensive of a market to rent in to justify the costs of more "creative" buildings. Construction costs are insanely high and this is the reality of the weighing of construction costs and what the market deems an acceptable rent per square foot.

We can all talk ad nauseum about pre-war buildings, but remember, they were cheap because human labor was a tiny expense of construction back then. You could pay someone the equivalent of a handful of dollars a day and they'd do the work. 

 

Then add in the fact that back then you didn't have complicated modern HVAC systems, rarely had any amenity spaces, had only minor electrical service to units, and kitchens and bathrooms were utilitarian and the comparison stops being one that matters at all. You can't build like that today and make money in really any market other than a small handful in specific cities.

 

The big thing people should focus their energy on is how it interacts with the street. How people enter and exit. How retail space activate the sidewalk. How it fills in the gaps. We're not going to see extremely unique architecture for run of the mill rental apartments in Cleveland. You might get the handful of nicer, more "luxury" (I hate that term) buildings, but for the average building, which this is, this is what you get at a price point that makes it a viable investment.

1 hour ago, jmicha said:

Guys, I hate the be the bearer of bad news, but Cleveland is nowhere near as expensive of a market to rent in to justify the costs of more "creative" buildings.

 

 

Unfortunately, I agree.  I also wonder how the developer's return-on-investment requirements have changed from the 1920s to the 1950s to today.  Are they demanding faster and higher returns?

^^To an extent this is true, however, a skilled designer can often turn lemons to lemonade if the developer has any ambition at all.

25 minutes ago, w28th said:

^^To an extent this is true, however, a skilled designer can often turn lemons to lemonade if the developer has any ambition at all.

That's part of the issue, but that's also a symptom of the cost issue. I guarantee these are designed on a shoestring budget and there just isn't the fee available to work through iterations and improvement. It's all a result of the same issue of cost verse benefit analysis of where to spend money.

 

The reality is that these are "good enough" and as a result, there's no cost benefit of doing additional iteration to improve them because that won't get you any additional rent.

 

I'm an architect, so I get it. I want better buildings in general. But unfortunately for a place like Cleveland, it's at a point where it's essentially this or nothing at all. And people can call that settling, but it's a reality of the market right now.

 

I'm hopeful that construction costs come down in the near future which might open up more opportunities for additional well-designed buildings in secondary markets. But that's still to be seen.

^ Thanks for the input. I am not an architect but I have read enough to understand that returns (rent/sale) play a significant role in determining the final look of anything built in our market ie. low rent/low design or high rent/high design. Couldn't there also be a middle ground? We tend to think low cost always means poor quality fixtures and knock-off designs. That is mostly true but...

 

In another thread I satirically wrote about looking through architectural magazines for ideas. I think a design firm could incorporate more interesting renderings without adding exponentially to the cost. It doesn't have to be cutting edge. Just make it a little more appealing. 

 

What are our peer cities doing with design? I think Cincinnati is doing a great job with infill especially in Over the Rhine. How do they pull it off? I've seen some pretty nice results in other cities around the country none of which were New York, Chicago etc. Yes, we do have economic constraints but I think there is a middle ground to pursue here. 

 

A final point before I walk the dog...sometimes better design doesn't even have to cost more. Case in point; those ridiculous white strips on two sides of the Luman. It stands to reason that it costs more to add them than not. Right?

 

When we first got a look at the Luman I was ecstatic because we were getting another all glass facade which IMO is a massive break from Cleveland beige. Unfortunately one of our experts overselling their brilliance with a flourish came up with "TaDa! Stripes!" But only on two sides not four. Masterful! I only wish they had stayed in bed that day with a cold. 

4 hours ago, jmicha said:

 

The big thing people should focus their energy on is how it interacts with the street. How people enter and exit. How retail space activate the sidewalk. How it fills in the gaps. 

This all of this.

 

How buildings interact with the street is much more important than architectural style. IMHO

Of course. Relating to the street or its context is just as important as what the building looks like, maybe moreso. I'm not espousing either/or but both. 

 

A 30 story high rise fits better in the 9/12 district while 4 to 6 story infill that mirrors the existing buildings on West 6th is ideal. Flip them and it doesn't work. 

On 12/5/2021 at 6:20 PM, cadmen said:

I get your point LiamaLawyer but l agree with MyTwoSense. Sure we'll often be settling for B+ designs because the development community is relatively diverse and there are many factors that determine a finished product. Still, if the city pushes back with knowledgeable arguments l'm positive we can get better results rather than just rolling over for every submission. It starts with raising the bar across the field from the planning commission to local architecture firms to any developer with a proposal. 

 

It's not impossible it just takes a better effort and yes a more knowledgeable professional class than what we're used to. If we have to import that by being less insular so be it. Other cities demand better results, we can too.

City pushback got us the current “meh” squat, Harbor 44 building, from something that initially looked awesome. But I get what you’re saying.

 

Developer proposal:

City pushback:

Edited December 7, 20213 yr by marty15

It has been so long I cannot recall the process for Harbor 44, but I think you might be confusing city push back (that being staff in Planning and the Planning Commission) with NIMBYS, neighborhood block clubs which seem to wield a lot of power and often weak knee ward councilperson who don't want to rock the boat even thought they know better.  For example, city push killed that awful project on Scranton Peninsula by NRP.  I do which there was more "city push back" on the SHW project but we all know why that did not happen.
 

On 12/6/2021 at 1:38 PM, cadmen said:

I think Cincinnati is doing a great job with infill especially in Over the Rhine.

Most of the redevelopment in Over the Rhine was done by 3CDC, which is a non-profit created by a partnership between the City and corporate partners.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_Center_City_Development_Corporation

 

I lived there when the redevelopment was first beginning.  I don't know the whole story, but the general perception was that the neighborhood was so bad that the major corporations put up the money and the City cleared all the red tape and they just got it done.  The City went so far as to eliminate its Planning Department all together in 2003.

 

You can't deny the transformation of the neighborhood, but people will be debating the merits of this approach for a long time.

 

On 12/3/2021 at 3:55 PM, GISguy said:

I noticed that AJ Rocco's in the old Huron Point Tavern space is adding signage today. Hopefully that corner will be alive again by the NBA ASG. 

 

Really worried about the impression of the empty spaces of Panini's and Winking Lizard though.

Permit was uploaded this week for a "Final Score Bar & Grill" at the old Panini's location, so it won't be empty for long.

Stretch of Bolivar Road to see new apartments.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2021/12/stretch-of-bolivar-road-between-progressive-field-playhouse-square-to-see-184-new-apartments.html

Rally House, a sports themed clothing store, will be opening a location at 812 Huron Rd, the Caxton Building. I thought it might just be temporary for the game, but I just saw a new permit for an estimated $125,000 in renovations for the space. It's always nice to have a new clothing shop downtown.

45 minutes ago, tykaps said:

Rally House, a sports themed clothing store, will be opening a location at 812 Huron Rd, the Caxton Building. I thought it might just be temporary for the game, but I just saw a new permit for an estimated $125,000 in renovations for the space. It's always nice to have a new clothing shop downtown.

Do you happen to know which retail space? I was a regular at the former Camera City space (first unit immediately west of the entry stairs) from about 1997 until they closed. 

20 minutes ago, MayDay said:

Do you happen to know which retail space? I was a regular at the former Camera City space (first unit immediately west of the entry stairs) from about 1997 until they closed. 

It's the space that says GV ART + DESIGN. So ya just west of the entry stairs.

13 hours ago, tykaps said:

Rally House, a sports themed clothing store, will be opening a location at 812 Huron Rd, the Caxton Building. I thought it might just be temporary for the game, but I just saw a new permit for an estimated $125,000 in renovations for the space. It's always nice to have a new clothing shop downtown.

Great! Although everyone would love to see a store on Euclid etc. this location makes sense due to its location right by the arena's.

On 12/6/2021 at 9:56 AM, jmicha said:

Guys, I hate the be the bearer of bad news, but Cleveland is nowhere near as expensive of a market to rent in to justify the costs of more "creative" buildings. Construction costs are insanely high and this is the reality of the weighing of construction costs and what the market deems an acceptable rent per square foot.

We can all talk ad nauseum about pre-war buildings, but remember, they were cheap because human labor was a tiny expense of construction back then. You could pay someone the equivalent of a handful of dollars a day and they'd do the work. 

 

Then add in the fact that back then you didn't have complicated modern HVAC systems, rarely had any amenity spaces, had only minor electrical service to units, and kitchens and bathrooms were utilitarian and the comparison stops being one that matters at all. You can't build like that today and make money in really any market other than a small handful in specific cities.

 

The big thing people should focus their energy on is how it interacts with the street. How people enter and exit. How retail space activate the sidewalk. How it fills in the gaps. We're not going to see extremely unique architecture for run of the mill rental apartments in Cleveland. You might get the handful of nicer, more "luxury" (I hate that term) buildings, but for the average building, which this is, this is what you get at a price point that makes it a viable investment.

 

There are plenty of new projects in Cleveland that show the opposite of this statement. Some projects have taken chances and been built.

This is developer driven. See previous project: https://desmone.com/work/bridge-on-forbes/

Nice to see this new addition to the 5th Street Arcades! 

 

Some exciting news for this building! And more downtown residents!!

 

2 hours ago, urbanetics_ said:

Some exciting news for this building! And more downtown residents!!

 

This excites me very much! Been waiting for this beautiful building to be converted into something more impactful! 

^ where is the church hq moving to? or has it already? 

 

speaking of ucc every time i look at something about salt lake city i wonder what cleveland and ne ohio would have been like if they didn’t run john smith and the mormon church out of kirtland back in the day. although the history would have been very different, can you imagine?

 

i guess you could say the same for running big business guys out of town too like peter lewis and rockefeller, but an alternate history where ne ohio is the mormon capital would be the most interesting, if strangest one.

It moved to the AECOM Building 1300 East 9th St.

1) Indie rooftop now open

 

 

2) Blue Agave is also now open

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, MuRrAy HiLL said:

1) Indie rooftop now open

 

 

2) Blue Agave is also now open

 

 

 

This was my favorite pre Tribe game stop. Glad it’s back!

Love me some rooftop decks. More please.

5 hours ago, cadmen said:

Love me some rooftop decks. More please.

Agreed.  There’s really no where else in the world I’d rather be than Cleveland from May - September ☀️