Critique:  I don't like the design because (insert anything other than the height)

 

Response:  Why do you hate tall buildings so much?!?! 

Interesting to compare KJP and Gotribe posts.  One is overly optimistic and the other is overly pestimistic.

I'm not overly anything.  It's just not love or hate at first sight for me. 

City review panels unanimously approve Stark and J-Dek nuCLEus development concept

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio – Amid warm praise and a few caveats and suggestions for improvement, the city's Downtown/Flats Design Review Committee and Planning Commission unanimously approved plans for the massive nuCLEus development for downtown in meetings Thursday and Friday.

 

"This kind of density is really important to our city," Anthony Coyne, chairman of the Planning Commission, said just before Friday's vote, which the development team of Stark Enterprises and J-Dek Investments Ltd. of Solon needed for a building permit.

 

"Great start, guys," said David Bowen, another member of the commission.

 

The development, for which the developers have not yet said they've completed financing, would include the city's fourth-tallest skyscraper and could have a transformative effect on downtown.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/01/city_review_panels_unanimously.html#incart_river

^ i have to admit i was a little worried they would want to butt in on this project too much, but that outcome was the absolute best case scenario and obviously the most sensible and supportive. it will definately encourage other developers to consider creative projects!

After alot of thinking over this, I certainly love the height, I love the impact it will have on the skyline, I love the street interaction and retail, and I love the uniqueness. What I dont love is just how the residential tower abruptly ends. Id like to see some setbacks that slim it down at the top some. Not as bulky or as abrupt as the BP building, but something that helps draw the eye in and towards the top. I was thinking somewhere along the lines of the Aura in Toronto.

^I felt that way at first. Like if the "jenga-esque" nature of the balconies continued into a fragmented crown that felt as if the building was pixelating away at the top. But then I really thought about it and decided that would go against the "stacked-boxes" concept since the tower portion would lose its shape a bit and feel too much like an independent tower rather than another abstract box turned up vertically. I think I'm fine with the flat top even though I'm usually a fan of SOMETHING happening at the top of skyscrapers.

^I very much agree.  With all that is going on with the lower levels I believe some sort of "statement" at the top might be too much.  I would like to see some ideas, but I am liking the box.

^ flat top = roof access, for the residents if not the public. that could be another possible selling point.

The roof doesnt need to taper to a fine point or spire, and indeed I personally wouldnt like having another large tower in the skyline like that. I just feel like there could be a happy medium with a few setbacks closer to the top, instead of just an abrupt termination

Does anyone know if the hotel will have views of the lake?

Yes it will, it looks over the relatively low-rise Gateway and Mall areas.

The plan does not necessitate setbacks, a spire or pointed top.  So why should they be there?  Just to cater to people who think that's the only way to terminate or sculpt a building?  Actually, keeping it a flat roof defers to the Terminal Tower and Key, allowing them to maintain their unique forms in the skyline profile.  What, should we slope the roof so it looks like the Hilton?  No.  The more diversity in our buildings the better.  Other than getting something besides parking to flank the lane way above ground level, I say move forward as is Stark.

^ @ W28th

I'm all for skyline diversity, but a flat top tower hardly adds that to Cleveland.  I'd suggest most of the towers downtown are flat topped.  Only those with more interesting treatments are able to stand out in a meaningful way.  Even with a flat top though, the height of this tower & the unique surface treatments will make it distinctive anyway.

 

I think this project is great.  I'm curious what they come up with for the final version.  I'm still holding out hope for something more distinctive for the upper part of the tower. As it is, there's nothing particularly memorable or unique about it.  The tower portion is just ordinary and OK, but if it goes on to gets built as is, it'll hardly be an embarrassment to the city.

Does anyone know if the hotel will have views of the lake?

Pages 17 and 18 of the presentation indicate views of the lake from as low as 200 feet.  http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1502590-20150113-city-stark-comments.html#document/p18

Not sure if this one from Litt was posted yet. Nothing really new except this image of a massing study, kind of cool.

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/01/nbbjs_design_for_robert_starks.html

^The developer and the designer talked about that in the presentation to the CPC. It was interesting to hear about their process, most of which was a combination of space and natural light needs.

^ @ W28th

I'm all for skyline diversity, but a flat top tower hardly adds that to Cleveland.  I'd suggest most of the towers downtown are flat topped.  Only those with more interesting treatments are able to stand out in a meaningful way.  Even with a flat top though, the height of this tower & the unique surface treatments will make it distinctive anyway.

 

I think this project is great.  I'm curious what they come up with for the final version.  I'm still holding out hope for something more distinctive for the upper part of the tower. As it is, there's nothing particularly memorable or unique about it.  The tower portion is just ordinary and OK, but if it goes on to gets built as is, it'll hardly be an embarrassment to the city.

 

The building facade itself is more interesting than pretty much any mid to high rise in Cleveland, let alone Ohio.

How often would you see the top of the builidng? You're using a 5,000 ft. approach to design which should be the last consideration. Even the rendering they have proposed for the skyline is an airplane view.

Does anyone know if the hotel will have views of the lake?

 

The hotel is about 200 feet up, right?

From Google Earth, this might be the northern view out of the hotel-

Just trying to give a little more perspective here.  I think the only place it will really stick out is from Progressive field.  It is really going to block views of 200 PS and Key.

 

^ I feel like i'm having 60's era heavy drug flashbacks looking at those.

Really like the view from east ninth and prospect.

sizzlinbeef[/member] - Where did you get that nuCLEus model for Google Earth. I've been hoping one would be available to download

Really like the view from east ninth and prospect.

 

I agree. I was at this intersection yesterday and thought to myself how it would be nice to have another tower in view from that perspective. Now you can only see the Terminal Tower as the other buildings on Public Square are not in sight.

Throw a Ferrari Tower-scale building on that grassy strip in front of the Gateway garage, and a big building where the LeBron banner hangs and that area will be a new skyscraper district.

sizzlinbeef[/member] - Where did you get that nuCLEus model for Google Earth. I've been hoping one would be available to download

 

I threw it together in Sketchup and previewed it in Google Earth.  I could send you the kmz if you PM me.

Time for another one of those models I used to stare at endlessly at Tower City when the mall first opened.

Time for another one of those models I used to stare at endlessly at Tower City when the mall first opened.

 

MayDay posted this a while back at SSP......

 

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4173086&postcount=34

I had almost forgot about the building which appeared to mimic the Guardians

I had almost forgot about the building which appeared to mimic the Guardians

 

Oh! I kept thinking "looks like the Comerica Building" in Dallas. But Guardians makes more sense! I think it would be great if we had the Ferrari Building and then have Gilbert add a mixed-used tower on the Phase II land reminiscent of the "2000" plan. Let's hope nuCLEus works and sets the stage for more! Here's to making Cleveland not the "unhappiest place to work!"

The thing is, that model you all are using has clean edges, and the renderings do not.

slizzlin good work - let the massing wars begin! love it

The thing is, that model you all are using has clean edges, and the renderings do not.

 

It does.  It is just the randomness of the balconies which distorts the edges

The thing is, that model you all are using has clean edges, and the renderings do not.

Fair enough.

Hmmm...so which is better, the city view with the lake in the background or the side where you can sit on your balcony and watch the game, fireworks and everything.  Either way should be pretty sweet!

Making choices is silly. Head down to the Stark offices and hand over your deposit for a full floor penthouse. I'm sure they'd appreciate it.

The thing is, that model you all are using has clean edges, and the renderings do not.

Fair enough.

 

But it's not the same color as the renderings!

 

 

I kid, I kid.  Thank you for your work giving us some different views on what we can expect from the project!

There's now a thread to discuss architectural lighting in Project & Construction. Back to nuCLEus :-)

I love the design. Only thing I worry about is the bridge and interfering with the height. IS this going to happen?

I was reminded at renderings for the proposed Courthouse Plaza of 2008 and striking similarities of design aspects to NuCLEus.  Wish this project was to have been built and I look forward to NuCLEus.

I love the design. Only thing I worry about is the bridge and interfering with the height. IS this going to happen?

 

I just got back from the future in my 1981 DeLorean with the flux capacitor upgrade package and I can tell you without a doubt that this in fact is going to happen.

 

Seriously though, I forgot all about that Courthouse Plaza proposal. I remember the earlier one, which I think is posted in abandoned projects.

A couple of pictures of the site shot from Vincenza's Pizza prior to last night's Cavs blowout of the Clippers...

 

 

I played around with the renderings and added a condo lobby to the tall tower.  I felt breaking up the detail gives another opportunity for programming. I would love to see a restaurant  such as Top of The Town which would interact nicely with Progressive Field.

I like it. In a way it tones down the "Jenga" look of the tower.

I really like the aggressiveness of this design, especially the bridge section... I must say that even though I know it's psychedelic effect, the uneven stacked design makes it seem like the tower could easily topple, ... even though I know it won't.

I really like the aggressiveness of this design, especially the bridge section... I must say that even though I know it's psychedelic effect, the uneven stacked design makes it seem like the tower could easily topple, ... even though I know it won't.

 

It looks like a mutant breed of glass and steel eating termites attacked.

I like it. In a way it tones down the "Jenga" look of the tower.

 

The version done by the professionals is better.

^ Ouch! 

 

Short, but with just enough information given so as to be both impolite and disrespectful.

^ Ouch! 

 

Short, but with just enough information given so as to be both impolite and disrespectful.

 

Architects. Put 10 of them in a room together for three hours and none will walk out alive.

We're not all that bad...maybe some just come out a little beaten up?

 

Though I do agree that the actual proposal is a better proposal, I see the merit in the study of adding another layer to the tower portion to further extend the idea of visual separation of uses. I'm glad someone took the time to create those mock-ups for discussion as it offers an interesting idea that does work well with the techniques used to create the overall massing of the building(s).