So if they've been denied permission to demolish, but don't get a chance to make a case for it again until after the deadline, what happens?  Do they get some sort of fine for not starting renovations?

My guess is the court could issue any number of sanctions against L&R if has not acted per the order by 3/15... then again, it's the City (through the Planning Comm.) that told L&R to "... give us a plan or an analysis stating why Herold can't feasibly be repaired."  And since the court order is the result of litigation between the City and L&R about the building, it would be contradictory (and unfair) to punish L&R for not demolishing the building by the 3/15 deadline since it is the City that's restraining L&M from demolition in the first place.

"Commission members and the city's planning staff said they want one of two things: Specific plans showing what the property owner hopes to do with the site or a feasibility analysis illustrating that the historic building simply can't be saved."

 

So next up is a study to show that is has to come down, which it will

 

"Based in California, L&R is a major parking owner with a sister business focused on retail. The company has no interest in exploring other uses or constructing a taller building on the Prospect site."

 

"The city prohibits downtown property owners from razing buildings for parking lots, though temporary lots have lingered for years on some potential development sites."

 

Sounds like a future "temporary" parking lot is the end game here. :-(  I give the city alot of credit for holding firm and making L&R give an honest effort but even with these mechanisms for forcing action, they can lead L&R to the water but they can't make them drink.  If L&R doesn't want to unleash the potential of this corner then I guess they don't have to and get to contribute to Cleveland being the world leader in downtown surface lots. :drunk:

^I am pretty sure that even if the building comes down it will never be a temporary surface lot (if that is what L and R is hoping for).  I would imagine the instances where those unfortunate "temporary lots" have lingered the city had a good relationship with the owner and were working with the developer or at least hoping that the development would take place and turn a blind eye to the length of time.  I doubt this will ever be the case in this instance given how hard the city is fighting the owner.

Let's hope.  It is a great location, the whole area is just tragically underdeveloped/misused.  I can understand the hesitancy of developers because the area is a mess, a condo would offer tenants magical views of . . .  the huge a$$ surface lot across the street...  We could call it Park(ing lot)side Estates.  Anyways there is alot of really good attention in UC, FEB, and the westside in general but this area and the super block (apologies if the mere mention is too far off topic) are places where development would really change the feel of the actual downtown of the city.  Making the right decision on this corner could be the catalyst for a larger plan, I hope the city stays firm.

i hope this happens. The two renderings of the 6 floor mix-use building both look good.

This is barely any better than their last proposal. They "may" sell air rights? A few of you speculated the first proposal was purposely horrendous so their next, slightly-less horrible, proposal had a better chance of passing. I don't see how this project would get approved without a real plan in place. Anybody could put together a pretty rendering in 15 minutes.

 

 

Agreed.  That was my point from my renderings on the previous page.  Anyone can paint a pretty picture.

Cleveland Council's hearing on early repayment of Colonial and Euclid arcades: What you should know

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2014/03/cleveland_councils_hearing_on.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

Request to demolish historic Herold Building is denied by Cleveland Planning Commission; debate over land continues

By: Teresa Dixon Murray, The Plain Dealer

 

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Cleveland City Planning Commission today denied a request to demolish the Herold Building, a historic four-story structure on Prospect Avenue in downtown Cleveland.

The denial came after a representative for building owner L&R Group of Companies wasn't able to provide the commission with enough answers about whether the building could be restored or what they would do with the property at Prospect and Fourth if the building was torn down.

 

Built in 1906, the Herold Building has been empty for more than a decade and has been condemned for years. An L&R affiliate bought the glass-fronted building, at 310 Prospect Ave., in 2008 and since then has been battling the city about restoring it or redeveloping the 0.19-acre site.

 

The vote to deny the demolition request occurred primarily because the commission was concerned about a technical misstep if the board tabled the request again. Tabling the issue was the original motion. But commission members feared that tabling it for more than 30 or 45 days could be interrupted as passive approval.

 

 

Story at: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/03/request_to_demolish_historic_h.html

L&R has owned the Herold Building for six years.  The refuting point to their claim that damages are too dire to repair is that the company was a major contributing factor to the building's worsening condition.

L&R has owned the Herold Building for six years.  The refuting point to their claim that damages are too dire to repair is that the company was a major contributing factor to the building's worsening condition.

^ctownballr2  :wink:

I cant decide if the plagiarism is insulting or flattering

Downtown Cleveland property owner claims damage from Horseshoe Casino street closures

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2014/03/downtown_cleveland_property_ow_2.html#incart_m-rpt-2

 

Michelle Jarboe McFee, The Plain Dealer

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Another legal fight is brewing in downtown Cleveland's Gateway District, where the 2012 opening of the Horseshoe Casino Cleveland set off jostling over real estate that hadn't received much attention in decades.

 

Now George Troicky, who owns a short stretch of buildings along High Avenue, is alleging that permanent street closures for the casino's Ontario Street welcome center and a prominent digital sign mounted on a casino parking garage have dinged the value of his property and hurt his prospects of attracting tenants. In January, Troicky and High Street Properties LLC, a company tied to his family, filed a lawsuit against the city of Cleveland and an affiliate of gaming group Rock Ohio Caesars LLC.

I will echo my comment on cleveland.com. Anybody can tell that the casino garage hurts the businesses down East 2nd and High. The question is whether they have recourse against either the city or Rock.

 

It's what we always say on this forum. There is such a thing as bad development.

A couple weeks ago I walked past the Clevelander and noticed a bunch of scaffolding in front of the building. Has anyone walked past the building lately? Have they finally cleaned up the facade?

 

A couple weeks ago I walked past the Clevelander and noticed a bunch of scaffolding in front of the building. Has anyone walked past the building lately? Have they finally cleaned up the facade?

 

Walked by today, remembered your post, and grabbed a quick shot with my phone. 

 

When is Red the Steakhouse opening their roof deck?

Thank you! Doesn't look like they've done anything to clean up the facade. Call me crazy but I liked the old Clevelander look.

That Clevelander building is an eyesore.  Too bad the property owners don't seem to have a clue.  Geez, please renovate the exterior and upper floors already!

 

^I dont think that bldg is done, thats just my guess tho.

I see tonight that the second floor of the Point Bldg is all interior-demoed (i.e. above winking lizard). Looks like a lot of walls were taken down

dont recall reading anything about that

^I believe an architecture firm will be taking the second floor of that building.

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2014/06122014/index.php

 

Cleveland Landmarks Commission

June 12, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's more at:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2014/06122014/index.php

I love the addition of vibrant colors.  Aesthetically I think Cleveland needs more color and more trees (what happened to Forest city?).

All they did was put 20 people in the rendering with a small mural and some sort of vegetation filled dumpster.

The one thing that would do wonders for pedestrians and non-pedestrians alike would be a road resurfacing for that street that lasts longer than a few years. What ever happened to the brick crosswalks that were in place the last time the street had a major repaving anyway?

All they did was put 20 people in the rendering with a small mural and some sort of vegetation filled dumpster.

 

What about the other renderings that followed it?

All they did was put 20 people in the rendering with a small mural and some sort of vegetation filled dumpster.

 

What about the other renderings that followed it?

 

The rest of the renderings aren't that impressive either. Prospect needs to be repaved, the intersection at east 4th should be brick, better pedestrian lighting, and trees that are taller than my shin.

 

It would be great if they turned that parking lot by east 4th (between prospect and huron) into green space too.

It would be great if they turned that parking lot by east 4th (between prospect and huron) into green space too.

 

Or at least what Cincinnati did with Washington Park -- put a parking garage below a redesigned park.

Prospect has an incomplete feeling to it. I don't think any amount of aesthetic improvements will actually cure this.

This project certainly has a Potemkin feel about it.  It almost advertises abandoned buildings.  I agree that what that street needs more is repaving and a real tree scape.  I am continually baffled by Cleveland's urban tree plantings.  The City seems to have a curious fondness for small, ornamental trees that are planted in very confined spaces, causing a failure to thrive.  Why, oh why, can't they simply fill spaces like this with trees that will mature into arboreal arch?

This project certainly has a Potemkin feel about it.  It almost advertises abandoned buildings. 

 

Agree. There's a fine line between giving some life and color to storefront windows vs. a glaring bandaid that screams out "this isn't blight!"

I don't believe these ideas are long range in scope. As described on the LandStudio website:

LAND Studio plans to continue its work with Positively Cleveland by testing small-scale, low cost design projects before scaling up to larger and more permanent changes to the city's streets and public places.

LAND was hired by PositivelyCle to develop long and short term ideas to identify 'eyesores' areas.

All they did was put 20 people in the rendering with a small mural and some sort of vegetation filled dumpster.

 

What about the other renderings that followed it?

 

The planters look nice, but will be collectors of garbage and cigarette butts.

I like the idea of the Parkmobiles, but the locations on E. 5th of the Parkmobiles seem odd. Why would people want to sit there? Wouldn't these be better for Public Square being only temporary?

The storefront improvements don't do anything for me. They are bright, but they look like MS clip art.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

 

That is a bad example as those "pools" were temporary for a City Sponsored summer event on Park Ave. 4 years ago.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

 

That is a bad example as those "pools" were temporary for a City Sponsored summer event on Park Ave. 4 years ago.

 

Are these too not temporary like the CPLibrary reading garden and bookmobiles? I would hate to think the storefront signage is permanent and they have abandoned all hope of leasing the spaces.

The point was the OP stated they didn't want to sit on dumpsters, I was stating that people swim in them.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

 

That is a bad example as those "pools" were temporary for a City Sponsored summer event on Park Ave. 4 years ago.

 

Are these too not temporary like the CPLibrary reading garden and bookmobiles? I would hate to think the storefront signage is permanent and they have abandoned all hope of leasing the spaces.

The point was the OP stated they didn't want to sit on dumpsters, I was stating that people swim in them.

They were constructed then dismantled.  In addition, these "pools" were only open for 4 hours, in mornings, on certain days.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

 

That is a bad example as those "pools" were temporary for a City Sponsored summer event on Park Ave. 4 years ago.

 

Are these too not temporary like the CPLibrary reading garden and bookmobiles? I would hate to think the storefront signage is permanent and they have abandoned all hope of leasing the spaces.

The point was the OP stated they didn't want to sit on dumpsters, I was stating that people swim in them.

They were constructed then dismantled.  In addition, these "pools" were only open for 4 hours, in mornings, on certain days.

 

Please feel free to read my post that you responded to. That's why I put it there.

Land Studio works with an aesthetic that i just cant warm up to.  Everything ends up looking hackneyed in their attempt to be unique. Why would I want to sit in something that looks like a converted dumpster?

 

I would guess it's too "urban" for you? In New York City they have swimming pools in converted dumpsters.

 

That is a bad example as those "pools" were temporary for a City Sponsored summer event on Park Ave. 4 years ago.

 

Are these too not temporary like the CPLibrary reading garden and bookmobiles? I would hate to think the storefront signage is permanent and they have abandoned all hope of leasing the spaces.

The point was the OP stated they didn't want to sit on dumpsters, I was stating that people swim in them.

They were constructed then dismantled.  In addition, these "pools" were only open for 4 hours, in mornings, on certain days.

 

Please feel free to read my post that you responded to. That's why I put it there.

and my point was that choosing them as a comparison made no sense.  ;)

and my point was that choosing them as a comparison made no sense.  ;)

 

The point was the OP stated they didn't want to sit on dumpsters, I was stating that people swim in them.

 

If it's a comparison then the comparison was that they at one point existed.

 

 

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140713/RENEWSLETTER/140719926/1276/newsletter07

 

 

 

NY Spaghetti House in downtown Cleveland changes hands

" ...but they will try to get a city OK to demolish the restaurant." 

Lou Frangos "He insisted his brother paid him real money for the quaint but dilapidated building."

 

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140713/RENEWSLETTER/140719926/1276/newsletter07

 

 

 

NY Spaghetti House in downtown Cleveland changes hands

" ...but they will try to get a city OK to demolish the restaurant." 

Lou Frangos "He insisted his brother paid him real money for the quaint but dilapidated building."

 

 

And meanwhile, one block north of here, E9th and Euclid is seeing a transformation like no other.  I really wish parking did not generate such great revenues!

Hopefully the City won't let him demolish the historic building.

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140713/RENEWSLETTER/140719926/1276/newsletter07

 

 

 

NY Spaghetti House in downtown Cleveland changes hands

" ...but they will try to get a city OK to demolish the restaurant." 

Lou Frangos "He insisted his brother paid him real money for the quaint but dilapidated building."

 

 

 

Disgusting.

 

Not too surprising, I guess, given the expected parking demand generated by the new stuff at 9th and Euclid. But still awful.

 

I loved this tidbit at the end of the article:

 

He said the transaction also provides a means for the Rascal House owner to shelter from federal taxes some of the proceeds from the sale of his original location to CSU. That building was demolished by CSU to help produce the site of its new Center for Health Professions. 

 

As if I didn't hate that horrendous CSU project enough already.

Hi all -

 

Three things to consider re: New York Spaghetti House.

 

1. Building demolitions for parking are prohibited in the central business district without special permission. Even if they take down the building, they won't necessarily be able to use the land for parking.

 

2. Members of the Frangos family have sought permission before to demolish the New York Spaghetti House. They haven't been successful. That said, I hear the building is in worse shape now than it was a few years ago.

 

3. The building, constructed in the late 1800s, is a Cleveland city landmark. The Landmarks Commission will have to review a demolition request. I haven't seen anything show up yet on a public agenda.

 

Michelle

The thing that is ridiculous to me, is these property owners just hold the properties until they fall so far into disrepair that they "have to be torn down". Is there nothing in place where the city can fine these building owners?

The thing that is ridiculous to me, is these property owners just hold the properties until they fall so far into disrepair that they "have to be torn down". Is there nothing in place where the city can fine these building owners?

 

Change the statutory definition of "demolition" to include demolition by neglect.  By letting your building fall into such disrepair that it must be demolished (likely by building and housing), you will have been deemed to have demolished your building pursuant to the statutory definition.  This of course, would put you on the wrong side of the law in a historic district where you need permission to demolish structures or face penalties.

 

This is a similar issue to the Herold Building fiasco on Prospect.  It would be best to write a letter to Cimperman or whoever to change the statutory definition to give the City more leverage over saving historic structures.  It seems like it would be an easy fix too.  Detroit's City code defines demolition to include demolition by neglect.  There is nothing that Detroit can do that we can't.  :mrgreen:

If a building falls into neglect, then it almost certainly is violating one or more building codes. If those violations aren't rectified, the city can fine the owner or otherwise force the owner to take action. The problem is that the city's Board of Building Standards is overwhelmed with so many cases of neglect.