I do not expect the latest design to improve much from Geis. Their track record of design is mediocre. I wish we could just go back to the original design that LDA had proposed back in 2020. 

dang I've never seen that design before. I think that would have been my favorite of them all. Even more than that pretty glass tower they had at one point

1 hour ago, dwolfi01 said:

dang I've never seen that design before. I think that would have been my favorite of them all. Even more than that pretty glass tower they had at one point

Well remember we can’t have it because it blocks the view of the church 

For me, this project has gone from a spectacular game-changer for that site that I couldn't wait for, to a monolithic and bland prison that I would rather have nothing.

13 hours ago, dave2017 said:

I do not expect the latest design to improve much from Geis. Their track record of design is mediocre. I wish we could just go back to the original design that LDA had proposed back in 2020. 

I wish you didn't post this, god this hurts. The new Bridgeworks is literally the definition of building something just to say you did it. I don't think I've seen a project fall from grace like this one has. 

Honestly…which board should I write to, to berate them for this? 
 

I have some energy I need to get out.

Without apology to those on this forum who are saying “wouldn’t you rather have this current iteration of Bridgeworks  rather than nothing  at all?” …

If this Geis design doesn’t get pushback from the commission and an aesthetic upgrade  - I would answer  “In this case waiting might actually  be better than building”.  It’s out of step with the recent exciting designs in Ohio City (like Intro and Church And State)

 

That specific location deserves something noteworthy. This design - to quote Huey Lewis, “sometimes bad is bad”.   
 

Edited March 14, 20241 yr by CleveFan

I think that if this version had been presented first and didn't have Geis' name as the architect, people would be excited for it.  

 

The development environment is tough getting tougher and my guess is that if they hadn't started on this project years ago, it wouldn't be happening at all.

 

An 132-key hotel and 146 units of workforce housing will be a great addition to the neighborhood.  We need more people living and visiting today to keep the momentum, that will create the future environment for more expensive buildings.  

 

We don't exactly have a shortage of large, undeveloped, prominent sites around that we can all spend years thinking about.  

 

54 minutes ago, Enginerd said:

Honestly…which board should I write to, to berate them for this? 
 

I have some energy I need to get out.

 

First up is Design Review --  probably Ohio City Design Review one week from today although I haven't seen their agenda yet. Then Landmarks.

We haven't seen the changes they made since the last time they presented the design so maybe we get some small updates to make it look better? But also I think this is comparable to the development across the street, the Quarter. I think it would mesh well with that similar scale design. Plenty of empty lots and abandoned buildings in the West Bank Flats to build some big towers if we want! 

11 minutes ago, dwolfi01 said:

We haven't seen the changes they made since the last time they presented the design so maybe we get some small updates to make it look better? But also I think this is comparable to the development across the street, the Quarter. I think it would mesh well with that similar scale design. Plenty of empty lots and abandoned buildings in the West Bank Flats to build some big towers if we want! 

I believe Ken's article stated that the design to be presented to design review and Landmarks has remained unchanged from the awful conceptual presentation or just a few small refinements.  It still looks like a prison.  I would hate to live in an apartment building which is clearly going to have long dark hallways that will probably be valued engineered to death.

3 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I believe Ken's article stated that the design to be presented to design review and Landmarks has remained unchanged from the awful conceptual presentation or just a few small refinements.  It still looks like a prison.  I would hate to live in an apartment building which is clearly going to have long dark hallways that will probably be valued engineered to death.

Ah thank you for pointing that out. I must have missed it when I read the article because I was curious how much they would have changed it. Should be interesting to see.

13 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I believe Ken's article stated that the design to be presented to design review and Landmarks has remained unchanged from the awful conceptual presentation or just a few small refinements.  It still looks like a prison.  I would hate to live in an apartment building which is clearly going to have long dark hallways that will probably be valued engineered to death.

 

I totally get the negative feedback people have about this design. It's not beautiful, certainly. But I lived in an apartment building with a similar design in D.C. It also had long, windowless hallways and the exterior was basically a giant, unadorned brick wall with windows. But it was one of the best buildings I ever lived in because it was well-maintained inside and out and walkable to desirable amenities. The other designs were definitely more exciting but I think bringing more people into the neighborhood is worth it. As long as they really focus on keeping the building up. If they don't maintain it, it'll age terribly. 

It’s really ugly, but we’ll have opportunity for some great ones on the west rim on 25th street. Geis does not care about aesthetics. 

On 3/14/2024 at 9:46 AM, Enginerd said:

Honestly…which board should I write to, to berate them for this? 
 

I have some energy I need to get out.

 

Here's the LinkedIn for Geis's VP of Design: Brandon L. Kline, Architect | LinkedIn

I wrote my letter. 

Has anyone heard any news on this project?  Did the city approve demolition permits for the garage?

37 minutes ago, dave2017 said:

Has anyone heard any news on this project?  Did the city approve demolition permits for the garage?

 

No demo permit issued yet. 

KJP (or someone knowledgable on the subject) - Please refresh my memory - am I correct that Bridgeworks never won a TMUD award?   Had it won, would that've probably been the tipping point to result in the building of the striking original 16 story (or so) version?  Or the second, slightly less vertical, but still impressive glassy version?  Or were they far away from completing financing?

I'm sure I'm not the only one on the forum that has been hoping for some miraculous

return to one of these versions....

This is total hearsay and probably very inaccurate but at my condo's HOA meeting someone mentioned an August targeted start date. When asked how he knew he said he "worked in the industry" 

 

Again I'll believe it when I see it but thought it was funny it's not just us speculating on local projects

8 hours ago, CleveFan said:

KJP (or someone knowledgable on the subject) - Please refresh my memory - am I correct that Bridgeworks never won a TMUD award?   Had it won, would that've probably been the tipping point to result in the building of the striking original 16 story (or so) version?  Or the second, slightly less vertical, but still impressive glassy version?  Or were they far away from completing financing?

I'm sure I'm not the only one on the forum that has been hoping for some miraculous

return to one of these versions....

 

 

 

It applied at least twice and didn't get it. Yet it was still able to get its project financing, albeit too late for the high-rise. It was unable to keep its construction financing, however, as lenders nationwide were pulling their financing for projects. Only small and mid-side lenders were providing construction financing which meant anything costing above $50 million to perhaps $75 million wasn't going to get built. I don't know if getting a TMUD would have helped but maybe the first one would have since it would've come before the lending market stopped lending. 

Not qualifying for TMUD (and the mid-rise iteration not getting built) will go down as a huge missed opportunity IF the current nondescript version is built.

 

Terrible waste of a prime location.

Got this letter in the mail regarding Bridgeworks zoning appeal for the May 6th Board of Zoning Appeals meeting:

 

 

Then here is the request also included in the letter:

 

Edited April 19, 20241 yr by dwolfi01

1 hour ago, dwolfi01 said:

Got this letter in the mail regarding Bridgeworks zoning appeal for the May 6th Board of Zoning Appeals meeting:

 

Then here is the request also included in the letter:

 

That's progress at least. It would have to go before Landmarks next week to be on the May 6th BZA agenda.

18 hours ago, Mendo said:

 

That's progress at least. It would have to go before Landmarks next week to be on the May 6th BZA agenda.

It is not on the April 25th Landmarks agenda.  I believe a project can be first granted zoning variances with the condition that they have to at some point receive the necessary thumbs up from Landmarks or PC.

https://www.clevescene.com/news/ohio-city-bridgeworks-project-eyes-fall-groundbreaking-after-last-years-redesign-44213531

 

sigh.....

I'm thrilled to see this is getting built in this lending environment. The design is fine. I'd even go so far as to say it's pretty good. Far above average five-over-one. If it weren't for the previous designs, I suspect we'd all be pretty happy with it.

 

The more momentum the developer community can build up, the more really nice designs we can get.

^The design is very far from being fine.  Currently it is one of the worse five by ones in town and that is saying something.  This is a very prominent corner and deserves a fine design.  If we have to wait for nicer design as a result of some sort of city wise build up then let that build up happen elsewhere so that a good design can go here.

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by Htsguy

from the article: 

 

 

Damn I didn't realize people didn't like Waterford Bluffs either?? I thought that one turned out nicely. Not as big a fan on the Bridgeworks but still I am hopeful the real like look does look better than the renderings which has happened numerous times lately.

Geis and Panzica haven't made any adjustments to their plans after The Landmark's Commission and Ohio City Planning unanimously disapproved of the design!  I hope the city rejects their permits to tear down any historic property to build this crap.  Value engineered design doesn't mean build ugly.

22 minutes ago, dwolfi01 said:

from the article: 

 

 

Damn I didn't realize people didn't like Waterford Bluffs either?? I thought that one turned out nicely. Not as big a fan on the Bridgeworks but still I am hopeful the real like look does look better than the renderings which has happened numerous times lately.

While I hate the current Bridgework design I would have no problem with it if it mimicked Waterford Bluffs.

1 minute ago, dave2017 said:

Geis and Panzica haven't made any adjustments to their plans after The Landmark's Commission and Ohio City Planning unanimously disapproved of the design!  I hope the city rejects their permits to tear down any historic property to build this crap.  Value engineered design doesn't mean build ugly.

You are right.  I absolutely cannot believe this given all the negative feedback when it was first proposed.  I guess it takes balls.

 

This is the second major development in the city where Geis has stepped in and "rescued" the original developer with their value engineered, off the shelf design work.  Lets face it...they are good at keeping costs down because their work is so generic.  Maybe we need this given the lack of affordability in Cleveland and nationwide...I just don't like it happening at such a prominent corner.

 

By the way, I follow Geis on Instagram.  If you find their Northeast Ohio work objectionable you should see some of the hot mess they are building down south.

I don't really have a problem with the generic design. It would be fine in most city locations as it would add much needed density. The problem l have is one others have as well. This is a PROMINENT location. A gateway to downtown, adjacent to our giant new urban park and if things turn out an entrance to another very cool urban space, that being the lower level of the Detroit-Superior bridge. A location like that requires a building of equal importance. 

 

If current interest rates prohibit building anything of prominence then do the right thing and wait a few years. Don't waste this important site on a very mediocre design. Wait a little and be rewarded with a greater return on equity. Wait and the city gets a beautiful addition and you fatten your bottom line. Just wait because if you build this version everyone is a loser.

It looks like a Holiday Inn Express off the freeway.

I get the dislike, but I don't see how you can deny this is at least an okay if not an above average design.

 

This will be across the street from the Quarter. It's a significantly better and more interesting design than the Quarter, in my opinion. It's a significantly better design than what NRP is planning on the Scranton Peninsula. It's a significantly better design than Aura at Innovation Square. It's perhaps a better design than Medley. It's a better design than anything I can think of recently or currently being built anywhere in Hough or Glenville. It's a much better design than Via Sana at Metrohealth. Better than Innova by the Cleveland Clinic.

 

I can think of *several* buildings from the last few years that are clearly superior to this design. But there are many more that are, in my opinion, much worse looking.

Just now, LlamaLawyer said:

I get the dislike, but I don't see how you can deny this is at least an okay if not an above average design.

 

This will be across the street from the Quarter. It's a significantly better and more interesting design than the Quarter, in my opinion. It's a significantly better design than what NRP is planning on the Scranton Peninsula. It's a significantly better design than Aura at Innovation Square. It's perhaps a better design than Medley. It's a better design than anything I can think of recently or currently being built anywhere in Hough or Glenville. It's a much better design than Via Sana at Metrohealth. Better than Innova by the Cleveland Clinic.

 

I can think of *several* buildings from the last few years that are clearly superior to this design. But there are many more that are, in my opinion, much worse looking.

 

I think the dislikes come due to them teasing us with that nice sleek glass tower then turned it into this. If those renderings were never shown I think there would be a lot less discourse here regarding the design because i agree this is a fine design, nothing amazing nothing awful just fine.

Blame the state who awarded two projects downtown the tax credits instead of bridgeworks. If they would have gotten it, more than likely this thing would have been built with the better design.

^ especially since those two projects downtown may never happen 

@LlamaLawyer  l agree it's an ok design. Agree to disagree that it's above average but it's not the design that's the issue. It's the location/design that's the issue and you haven't addressed that although maybe that's not a problem for you like it is me.

My question for anyone unsatisfied with the design is how long are you willing to wait for a better design? The land is currently fallow. There's a good chance that if this isn't built nothing will be built for several years. Is it worth passing on a "mediocre" design if it means the land will stay a parking lot for the next five, ten, fifteen, twenty, forty years? What is the exchange rate? Is any length of time worth it, or is there a length of time for which waiting for a more optimal design ceases to be worth it? 

1 hour ago, Ethan said:

Is it worth passing on a "mediocre" design if it means the land will stay a parking lot for the next five, ten, fifteen, twenty, forty years?

 

Respectfully, I think it's pretty rich to think this corner sits vacant for that long if Geis walked away. This is a gateway to one of the hottest housing markets/areas in Cleveland, and add in the new park (and potential lowline greenway)? Going to be one of the best spots to live and if it takes that long, I'm okay waiting five years for a better design.

 

As others have stated there's definitely the issue of funding but a developer of a high quality project would make their money back and some to pay the banks. It's too bad our developer pool is limited to a few names. 

 

Aside from funding, Frank Jackson's Landmark Commission really screwed the project over trying to pull the project back from the street, they really were the catalyst for this change.

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by GISguy

It's horrible and the people who approve this desgn should be fired if this is actually built. A disgraceful design for Cleveland. Truly unexceptable. 

The project still hasn't gone through Landmarks. We'll see if this the final revision or there are more tweaks to be made.

Tough watching Harbor Bay working on a 13-15 story timber building in Columbus, this would be a perfect place for an intro level project 

2 hours ago, Mendo said:

The project still hasn't gone through Landmarks. We'll see if this the final revision or there are more tweaks to be made.

Tweaks??? No. It needs to be scrapped, burned the sent into a black hole in deep space. The designers need to take this more seriously because that plot of land is not meant for substandard design. 

I believe the look they have faked-out here is supposed give the (failing) illusion of a canted French mansard roof line (in a faux historic verdigris color to boot). It simply comes off like a cheap billboard advertising a building quality that is totally missing on this structure.

There is zero shape or texture, and I've seen better roof-line treatments at strip malls (image below).

 

I don't think I'm the only one who seeks more of the "the real thing" for Cleveland.  The top floor of this building is an insult to people who know better. The proposed look of this top floor fails at every turn of the eye.

 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by ExPatClevGuy

My biggest annoyance and miss is the lack of rooftop access. Rooftop access for a restaurant and the residents would make a killing with the views.

I got downvotes last time I said it but I think switching that Parisian Patina teal color with something else would make a big difference.
 

I don’t get a vote on it but the building doesn’t bother me and as was already said, there are many other comparable buildings going up around the city. I don’t think anyone is arguing this is a revolutionary or gorgeous building but deciding what is “adequate” is clearly subjective.

Isn’t the group that brought us Church + State behind this?  I thought they had a pretty strong design ethos, and the earlier designs were much more aspirational.   Surprised they’re settling for this instead of insisting on something better.

@Ethan You and l are usually in synch with our opinions but not this time. You do make a valid point in saying if not this development then when, but my point is not only is the location worth the wait for a design befitting the site but l don't think it will be all that long of a wait either. Interest rates don't have to come down all that much and by the time they do the park will become a magnet, the lower level of the bridge could be open and then we may get a developer with deeper pockets. 

 

And if we don't, well we can always build another knock-off. I say it's worth the wait and worth the gamble.