15 minutes ago, BJBaes said:

Maybe unrelated but there are around 15 porta potties on the Bridgeworks site as of this week. Could these be for the Irishtown Bend cleanup? Seems like an excessive amount for non-construction…

 

There are also large pieces of plywood covering parts of the county building. Could some sort of interior work already be taking place? 

Saint Patries Day parade is in less than a week. Probably staging for that... ironically. Lol.

I am so hyped this is still going through albeit a slightly smaller scale. Not the biggest fan of standalone parking garages; I would like parking to be hidden but this is leagues better than what is at that corner now. I'm glad Ohio City/Hingetown is getting a hotel. I think it's a great place to show off Cleveland to some tourists!

I'm glad overall to see it moving forward, but man, do they keep coming up with the ugliest designs for this project.  The new one is at least slightly less ungainly, but still my least favorite high rise proposal in Cleveland in recent memory.

2 hours ago, jeremyck01 said:

I am a-ok with this, and, in fact, prefer this new design and sight plan to the previous one. 

Agree… this design actually is really cool.

8 hours ago, BJBaes said:

Maybe unrelated but there are around 15 porta potties on the Bridgeworks site as of this week. Could these be for the Irishtown Bend cleanup? Seems like an excessive amount for non-construction…

 

There are also large pieces of plywood covering parts of the county building. Could some sort of interior work already be taking place? 

I believe there was a running race of some sorts downtown yesterday.

I absolutely love the “greenish hue”! And right adjacent to Irishtown Bend as well. Let’s go! ☘️😆

I believe there was a running race of some sorts downtown yesterday.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Super glad it’s moving forward, interested to see the planning commissions reaction. One thing though it looks like they plan on doing a wrap again for the parking garage like they did for church and state… those wraps have struggled to stay up while there’s any type of weather event and have been taken down for months on 2 full sides of the parking garage exposing it completely with no real siding. I like the idea of showcasing art to cover the garage but seemingly doesn’t seem to be a realistic solution


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

41 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said:

Super glad it’s moving forward, interested to see the planning commissions reaction. One thing though it looks like they plan on doing a wrap again for the parking garage like they did for church and state… those wraps have struggled to stay up while there’s any type of weather event and have been taken down for months on 2 full sides of the parking garage exposing it completely with no real siding. I like the idea of showcasing art to cover the garage but seemingly doesn’t seem to be a realistic solution


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. They need a more permanent solution, a la the Lumen for wrapping the garage. It probably costs more on the front end but based on how often the Church and State wrap needs replacing it probably would be cheaper to go the Lumen route in the long run. 

I'm concerned about this getting through Landmarks again, but fingers crossed.  More generally, I think it is crazy that Landmarks can block a building for being too tall even though it is within the zoning for that area.  Through legislation and with awareness of the historical context of the area, the city has already decided that buildings up to that heights are appropriate for that location.  That shouldn't be something an administrative body can just override.

I think a greater concern is that it requires additional demolitions. And these new demolitions are of slightly older, but more architecturally significant structures. If the additional demolitions are approved, I would expect that the commission will require Bridgeworks to save and store some of these stone, art deco facades for possible reuse in this development. 

Geez, l ignore this site for a few hours and look what l missed. 

 

My first thought in reading Ken's article is surprise that this project is happening and happening fast. After losing out on the TMUD credit l figured this project was now a long shot. So this is welcome news. I think it's really going to be a capstone for that important corner and only enhance the coming park. I can see Hingetown construction really taking off now. The future is very bright in that neighborhood. 

 

Now the bad news. IMO l'm less than impressed with the redesign. The original was cleaner, crisper. And yes more prominent. This version looks cheaper, more generic although l do like the color around the garage. I doubt we'll see much improvement when it moves through the planning commission. 

 

So on the whole it's great that something that is still quite large is actually being built in a fantastic location. And compared to the likelihood that nothing would get built if this wasn't happening l am truly pleased. It's just that l think we get a triple instead of a home run.

11 minutes ago, KJP said:

I think a greater concern is that it requires additional demolitions. And these new demolitions are of slightly older, but more architecturally significant structures. If the additional demolitions are approved, I would expect that the commission will require Bridgeworks to save and store some of these stone, art deco facades for possible reuse in this development. 

I agree.  The additional demos are what prompted my post up thread about granting Landmarks a second bite at the apple.  I can guarantee you the sessions will be a long one as they can spend a half hour arguing mindlessly about a window sash.

Not gonna accuse KJP of burying the lede, because the persistence and survival of this mega-project even without the TMUD credit IS the big story here, but that tidbit in the second to last paragraph about Church & State's 90 percent occupancy just a year into leasing is...awesome.  That should be more than enough momentum to make this project a success, even with Intro soon to open its doors down 25th Street.  Also, great to see the mixed use piece of the project survive.  As others have said upthread, a hotel will be a great addition to Ohio City and only add to the neighborhood's around the clock vitality.

16 minutes ago, Down_with_Ctown said:

Not gonna accuse KJP of burying the lede, because the persistence and survival of this mega-project even without the TMUD credit IS the big story here, but that tidbit in the second to last paragraph about Church & State's 90 percent occupancy just a year into leasing is...awesome.  That should be more than enough momentum to make this project a success, even with Intro soon to open its doors down 25th Street.  Also, great to see the mixed use piece of the project survive.  As others have said upthread, a hotel will be a great addition to Ohio City and only add to the neighborhood's around the clock vitality.

I know alot of us speak of the importance of success in building high rises downtown, but these low/mid rises in the inner neighborhoods and in UC seem to be far more important in the continued growth of making this city dense and populated again. I will take one hundred 5 story residential apartment and condo buildings on the east and west side over five super talls downtown any day. 

This is going to be awesome for the area. Very exciting news 

Now Cleveland will have two green glass buildings!
—with love, The Cuyahoga County Job & Family Services Building 

5 hours ago, Down_with_Ctown said:

Not gonna accuse KJP of burying the lede, because the persistence and survival of this mega-project even without the TMUD credit IS the big story here, but that tidbit in the second to last paragraph about Church & State's 90 percent occupancy just a year into leasing is...awesome.  That should be more than enough momentum to make this project a success, even with Intro soon to open its doors down 25th Street.  Also, great to see the mixed use piece of the project survive.  As others have said upthread, a hotel will be a great addition to Ohio City and only add to the neighborhood's around the clock vitality.

 

I had previously reported Church+State's leasing success in a past Bridgeworks article. But I think it was at "only" 86 percent at the time. 

Site Plan and Massing yes. Whatevers going on with the Pea Soup cladding HARD NO

4 hours ago, ogibbigo said:

Site Plan and Massing yes. Whatevers going on with the Pea Soup cladding HARD NO

My thoughts exactly.

14 hours ago, ogibbigo said:

Site Plan and Massing yes. Whatevers going on with the Pea Soup cladding HARD NO

Changing just one of the colors (yellow) would instantly fix this.

12 minutes ago, Dougal said:

Changing just one of the colors (yellow) would instantly fix this.

Maybe add a little brickwork?

 

Edited March 14, 20223 yr by LibertyBlvd

I kinda like the quirkiness of the architecture.  Considering this is part of the team behind Church and State I'm not surprised. I think we need more quirky buildings in Cleveland. 

I'll say again, I think this is just one of those renders where you can't tell what the final product will look like. I like the color scheme, but so much depends on exactly how the light hits the panels.

 

Bottom line:

 

1. It will not be the most attractive building in the area. It will not be the least attractive building in the area.

2. 🎊🥳🎉 Hopefully it gets built.

^I agree with the above.  I think the renderings are just specific enough to get through the reviews process, while being just vague enough that they have a variety of options on final materials.  Basically we know it will probably be all curtain wall, but the amount of clear and colored glass or opaque metal panels are probably all up in the air.  The renderings aren't a great representation of what the building will look like when it's done.

 

That said, I think it will be cool and I'm glad it's getting built.

On 3/12/2022 at 9:44 PM, KJP said:

 

Bridgeworks revised, spring start sought

By Ken Prendergast / March 12, 2022

 

Developers hope to start construction in spring of a high-rise in Cleveland’s Ohio City neighborhood despite missing out on a so-called megaprojects tax credit from the state earlier this month. The optimism is the result of a redesign of plans for Bridgeworks that would reduce the cost of the project by reducing the height of the building by 24 feet, virtually eliminating renovation costs while reshaping a proposed parking garage.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/03/12/bridgeworks-revised-seeks-spring-start/

 

I believe this was the original version of the rendering before they cleaned it up a little bit.

 

 

This isn't the building that was very miami-esque with renderings that showed an abundance of plants/greenery, is it?

 

I have great faith in the developers based on Church & State... that building is a standout in terms of design and aesthetic. I trust that the final product will look much better than the renderings which look rushed in order to get things approved quickly.

Wow. Those are ugly and outdated colors and the panel layouts are not attractive. I'd rather it NOT be built if it's going to look like that. 

If they're going to go green then why not an Emerald green considering the Irish heritage of this area? Maybe add a splash of orange as well to be representative?

Personally, I welcome the addition of a bit of color. We have had a lot of great builds with high end finishes recently. Few, if any, have added much color to a skyline that really needs it. I understand that this is certainly not the greatest looking building in the current renderings, but bit of color that can brighten our neighborhoods is a plus in my mind! Here's to hoping the end result is higher quality than the renderings portray.

The color is not an issue in my eyes that green hue is all over the neighborhood including the quarter 2 building on the same street and the church behind it (probably the unofficial color of OHC) it’s just the distinct green lines breaking up the massing that seem unnatural

57 minutes ago, dastler said:

This isn't the building that was very miami-esque with renderings that showed an abundance of plants/greenery, is it?

 

I have great faith in the developers based on Church & State... that building is a standout in terms of design and aesthetic. I trust that the final product will look much better than the renderings which look rushed in order to get things approved quickly.

 

Pretty sure you're looking for "The Viaduct"

 

When will the planning commission vote on this new proposal? 

1 hour ago, osu4brutus03 said:

When will the planning commission vote on this new proposal? 

 

The developers want to get on the March 24 Landmarks Commission docket.

26 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

The developers want to get on the March 24 Landmarks Commission docket.

Thank you 

On 3/14/2022 at 4:39 PM, KJP said:

 

The developers want to get on the March 24 Landmarks Commission docket.

Bridgeworks not on the March 24 LC agenda.  It is a pretty crowded docket so maybe it does not appear for that reason.  Let's see if it appears on the 1st April agenda.

Edited March 21, 20223 yr by Htsguy

Just walked by the site tonight and they already have the whole property lined with those concrete traffic barriers. Maybe signs demolition is soon to start? They must have just put them up in the past day or two as they weren't there before. Would have grabbed a pic but it's too dark out.

9 hours ago, dwolfi01 said:

Just walked by the site tonight and they already have the whole property lined with those concrete traffic barriers. Maybe signs demolition is soon to start? They must have just put them up in the past day or two as they weren't there before. Would have grabbed a pic but it's too dark out.

I wonder if they can obtain demolition permits based on past approvals even though they are going back to Landmarks with the new design?  I would imagine if they can it will only be for those buildings on the property that were to be demoed per the last design approval and not the additional demolitions that are planned with the new proposal.

Is Bridgeworks on the April 1 LC agenda? 

8 minutes ago, CleveFan said:

Is Bridgeworks on the April 1 LC agenda? 

Planning Commission meets on April 1.  The next Landmarks Commission meeting is April 14

Edited March 30, 20223 yr by Htsguy

Pic of the fencing around the site that appeared recently

Yes the whole site is fenced off. Will construction start soon on this development?

35 minutes ago, osu4brutus03 said:

Yes the whole site is fenced off. Will construction start soon on this development?

Well it cannot start that soon since it won't be able to pull permits until it passes the city approval process.  The new design has to still go in front of Landmarks.  We have theorized on the forum that they might be able to demo those portions of the project that Landmarks approve with the previous design-but not the new proposed demolitions-but I don't believe there was any consensus as to whether that is actually the case.

7 hours ago, osu4brutus03 said:

Yes the whole site is fenced off. Will construction start soon on this development?

 

No. Construction material costs are too volatile to proceed. They apparently feel like they saved enough costs while keeping the same programming. But absent new revenue or materials inflation reversing, it will be difficult to move forward. 

22 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

No. Construction material costs are too volatile to proceed. They apparently feel like they saved enough costs while keeping the same programming. But absent new revenue or materials inflation reversing, it will be difficult to move forward. 

@KJP  I am confused by your post.  Are you saying they are now going to keep the original design or that "keeping the same programming" means they are going with the new design but it will be the same mixed use as before (apartments and a hotel).  And if they are going with the new design are you saying they are still not moving forward at this time (even given all the new fencing) because the numbers are still not working even with the new design and cost savings?  Your March 12 blog article was much more positive than this post.  Has something recently changed?

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by Htsguy

They are keeping the same programming but with the new design, as noted in my last article. And that article was based on input from Mike Panzica who is an optimistic guy. But I think he was hoping to get more favorable construction costs estimates. He probably could get them if the market wasn't so volatile. Normally, contractors will guarantee prices for a year. But not now. Now, six months seem to be the max unless you can secure enough money for a decent contingency reserve, like what Midwest Development Partners was able to get from the Cleveland Public Library for Library Lofts. 

8 hours ago, KJP said:

They are keeping the same programming but with the new design, as noted in my last article. And that article was based on input from Mike Panzica who is an optimistic guy. But I think he was hoping to get more favorable construction costs estimates. He probably could get them if the market wasn't so volatile. Normally, contractors will guarantee prices for a year. But not now. Now, six months seem to be the max unless you can secure enough money for a decent contingency reserve, like what Midwest Development Partners was able to get from the Cleveland Public Library for Library Lofts. 

 

Maybe a dumb question: but why even close off there area then?

Bummer -- so is this basically dead until the next round of TMUD or a stabilization or prices?

What? I'm confused. Seems like with the new and cheaper version this building was being sorta fast tracked. But now it may have to wait for another round of TMUD credits because of the rising cost of construction materials? 

 

In re-reading the previous comments l don't really see how that happened. Went from trying to get on the next Planning Commission agenda to being postponed due to the high cost of construction. That's alota conflicting info squeezed into a short timeframe. And yes, why bother fencing off the site if nothing is going to happen for awhile?

 

Whole thing seems odd to me.

2 hours ago, YABO713 said:

 

Maybe a dumb question: but why even close off there area then?

 

No, it's a good question. They have the authority to demolish everything except the 1941 garage and they're not going to demolish the subway entrance. I'm told the developer wants to get done as much as they can so they can be ready to go as soon as they are able.

 

1 hour ago, gg707 said:

Bummer -- so is this basically dead until the next round of TMUD or a stabilization or prices?

 

If a project is dead, then it's not coming back. And I don't think it's even fair or accurate to say that this project is on hold if they are still building their capital stack or trying to control costs to be able to break ground in a matter of a couple of months. And yes, the development team still has "Spring 2022" as their groundbreaking goal as a result of their revised plan.

 

An additional source of funding could resolve the cost-capital disconnect. For example, the developer did not include the possibility of parking revenue from a neighboring business. Terry Coyne, owner of the BoxCast building, said months ago that he would be willing to pay Bridgeworks LLC a half-million dollars so BoxCast employees could park in their garage.

 

When the revised Bridgeworks plan came out some weeks ago, I asked Terry what he thought about them building the parking garage right up next to the BoxCast building. He said he hadn't seen the plans. So I sent them to him and he contacted the developer and asked again about a possible parking partnership. I don't know if anything came from it but I do know that they have since talked. Hopefully they can work something out and, if so, help push this project across the finish line.