Probably should've started a new thread about this project a long time ago. Here's my last article on it, from two months ago.......

 

On 9/10/2020 at 8:44 PM, KJP said:

 

 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2020

Bridgeworks project likely to retain historic Engineers buildings

 

Developers of a proposed mixed-use real estate project at West 25th Street and Detroit Avenue are taking actions that show they are increasingly likely to preserve the three existing historic buildings on the site. But it isn't yet certain how the buildings will be repurposed.

 

The buildings are the former Cuyahoga County Engineers' laboratory-office building, a maintenance garage, plus an entrance to a station on the long-closed streetcar subway in the lower level of the 1917-built Detroit-Superior Veterans Memorial Bridge.

 

MORE:

http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/09/bridgeworks-project-likely-to-retain.html

 

 

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by KJP

Oh, and by the way, incoming!

 

Thanks to @tykaps for his help with this!!

 

 

 

 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020

Bridgeworks plans revealed, will add to Hingetown's height

 

Conceptual plans were submitted to the city this week for a mixed-use development in the Hingetown section of Cleveland's Ohio City neighborhood. According to those plans, the tallest building would rise to 11 stories or about 127 feet high.

 

The project is Bridgeworks, a partnership of Grammar Properties LLC and M. Panzica Development, on the northeast corner of West 25th Street and the Detroit-Superior Bridge. The project's address is 2429 Superior Viaduct.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/11/bridgeworks-plans-revealed-will-add-to.html

Wow, I'm surprised by the scale of this. Just imagine if this comes to pass, along with the Viaduct (feeling like that name may be too generic now, lol) plus Nautica getting developed, along with Church & State & Quarter...The density is staggering.

This would definitely add to the density of the neighborhood- glad to see they’ll be utilizing the subway entrance! 

Wow, very surprised about the height and the hotel component. If the pandemic is under control by the time this opens, I could see a hotel being popular here. The amount of density in this area has grown at an incredible rate, and access to the Lakefront Bike Trail has increased pedestrian/bike activity exponentially. This corner of the intersection has become such a key spot... and now all eyes turn to Bobby George. 

 

Love this quote too: "I'm sure there are some people who will worry about traffic congestion. But the people in Northeast Ohio who worry about traffic congestion probably haven't spent much time outside Northeast Ohio." 🙃😁

Exciting little Easter egg in there regarding retail momentum for Church + State:

 

Retail leasing at Church+State lagged due to the pandemic. But the sources said that one unidentified retail tenant has recently signed on and lease drafts are being worked on for at least more potential restaurant-retail tenants.

As someone with a property interest in Stonebridge, I'm happy to see this moving forward. I'll be honest though, I don't love that initial rendering.

 

Otherwise, thrilled that there will be commercial in the space as well. 

37 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

As someone with a property interest in Stonebridge, I'm happy to see this moving forward. I'll be honest though, I don't love that initial rendering.

 

Otherwise, thrilled that there will be commercial in the space as well. 

 

I believe these are just preliminary site plans, and not reflective of any final architecture and design.

7 minutes ago, mrclifton88 said:

 

I believe these are just preliminary site plans, and not reflective of any final architecture and design.

Look forward to hearing what the "experts" at design review think of this conceptual siting.  If they are keen for a plaza I think I would like to see it on the church side so that the building does not overwhelm  the church and more height and presence at the intersection of Detroit and West 25th where they currently have a plaza.  However, I see where this might be problematic since they want to keep the current buildings and incorporate them into the design.  Seems like the plaza at the corner is at out growth of wanting to keep the old buildings.

1 hour ago, mrclifton88 said:

 

I believe these are just preliminary site plans, and not reflective of any final architecture and design.

 

Correct. What was shown is just a massing. There were some internal programming/designs included in the application, which is available here:

 

https://ca.permitcleveland.org/public/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=BuildingHousing&TabName=BuildingHousing&capID1=20BHO&capID2=00000&capID3=14437&agencyCode=COC&IsToShowInspection

 

EDIT: I updated the article with a quote from the block club president at the end.

 

Edited November 10, 20204 yr by KJP

The combination of this, Stoneleigh, Church & State, the Viaduct, and Market Square will make for much more impressive crossings of the Lorain and Detroit bridges from downtown. 

^And Main Ave., which of the three would have the best view in both directions, IMO.  

Very nice surprise with the additional height than what they originally planned. I also like the setback from Detroit. At first I was confused by it, thinking like stated above that it would be better to have the plaza towards the church. Having it set back on that side though should help preserve the views of the bridge and downtown when looking down Detroit though. That view is one of my favorites, especially now that we have a nice canyon going on.

Also from Cleveland.com:

 

Developers behind Church + State unveil plans for hotel, new apartments in Cleveland’s Ohio City neighborhood

By Eric Heisig, cleveland.com

 

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2020/11/developers-behind-church-state-unveil-plans-for-hotel-new-apartments-in-clevelands-ohio-city-neighborhood.html

The Stoneleigh development (Waterford Bluffs) is in Duck Island, and the post about that has been moved there.

12 minutes ago, X said:

The Stoneleigh development (Waterford Bluffs) is in Duck Island, and the post about that has been moved there.

My bad, wrong thread. Thanks.

On 11/10/2020 at 11:54 AM, KJP said:

Thanks to @tykaps for his help with this!!

 

 

 

 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020

Bridgeworks plans revealed, will add to Hingetown's height

 

Conceptual plans were submitted to the city this week for a mixed-use development in the Hingetown section of Cleveland's Ohio City neighborhood. According to those plans, the tallest building would rise to 11 stories or about 127 feet high.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/11/bridgeworks-plans-revealed-will-add-to.html

Yea, just a thank you to @KJP (and @tykaps) for yet another well detailed story.  Particularly for those of us living in other cities, this forum has been a fantastic source of information on Cleveland development time and again.  I’ve been a forum regular for about 4 years - much of which has been a pretty dynamic time for the city. And in recent months, there have been any number of times when I’ve been surprised and delighted to see new topic threads popping up. The Viaduct Tower, the midtown Dream Hotel  Circle Square, Intro, Magellan  - and now Bridgeworks. It’s very impressive (I saw the amazing energy in Ohio City for myself on my last trip into town).  And there’s real synergy - as one project emerges and becomes reality - it seems to encourage the next. The SW HQ will certainly  be the biggest linchpin  but projects such as Church & State and Bridgeworks are also incredibly important. Great to see this latest project being planned on the large scale it is - I’m certain it will be a great location for both residents and hotel visitors. Now, with an end game at least in sight with the pandemic, I’m looking forward to the next few years - and beyond for this great comeback city.  

Edited November 12, 20204 yr by CleveFan
Spelling

ALERT!! ALERT!! Lots of pictures in this article!! Thanks again to @tykaps for his indispensible assistance!

 

 

SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2020

More Bridgeworks planning details released

 

At the end of last week, more planning materials for the new Bridgeworks development in Ohio City's Hingetown section were submitted to Cleveland's Building Department and City Planning Commission. The submitted plans, albeit still preliminary, show further refinements to massings, floor plans, ground-floor elevations, materials usage and more.

 

Those details were added to the initial submission to the city, provided two weeks ago. Among all Northeast Ohio media, NEOtrans provided the first glimpses into those plans, along with information provided by sources close to the project. 

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/11/more-bridgeworks-planning-details.html

I really would like to see a little less "cost containment" on such a prominent corner.

I like the "Ohio City" sign, but like the "Playhouse Square" sign, it would be cooler if it went on top of a taller building so that it will be visible around the neighborhood.

5 minutes ago, X said:

I like the "Ohio City" sign, but like the "Playhouse Square" sign, it would be cooler if it went on top of a taller building so that it will be visible around the neighborhood.

 

And it should face the other direction so that cars coming into not leaving Ohio City will see it.

 

 

Edited December 16, 20204 yr by MrR

Good point. How about a rotating sign?

On 11/23/2020 at 10:43 AM, KJP said:

Good point. How about a rotating sign?

Lol would be cool too...

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 20204 yr by MrR

18 hours ago, KJP said:

 

And it should face the other direction so that cars coming into not leaving Ohio City will see it.

That would definitely be cool, just like the Flats East Bank sign that you see when facing the East. 
 

Edit: I would love if it were bigger along with being on top of the taller building in the development as X stated. There has to be money for that from somewhere if the developer doesn’t have it.

Edited November 23, 20204 yr by Oldmanladyluck

2 hours ago, MrR said:

Lol would be cool too...

 

imagine trying to rotate this much steel...

 

 

All it takes is a little....  🧐

 

33 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

All it takes is a little....  🧐

 

Personally I would rather have a Martin Creed sign on top the taller building, rather than another sign presenting a neighborhood. Bringing in an international artist for a permanent piece feels like a good marketing strategy for the city, something for people to visit when they come here.

Great to see more details to it. I know they are early designs, but I really like the arches they have on the first floor along the Superior Viaduct side. That's a great nod to the church and really helps tie the new structure into the historic fabric of the neighborhood. 

 

Also, such a great point by the neighborhood group about the one way traffic on Washington. I don't know why they did it - its literally only for about ten feet - but I'm guessing they just didn't want people turning left onto 25th. That shouldn't be that big of an issue though considering there's a light though, right? Drove me crazy when I lived down there. So many close calls with people driving the wrong way... Glad someone is pushing back against it.

Some newer renderings:

Very nice design. Will be a good transition between the older brick stuff to the east and the shiny new stuff to the west. Fingers crossed they use real brick.

1 hour ago, LlamaLawyer said:

Very nice design. Will be a good transition between the older brick stuff to the east and the shiny new stuff to the west. Fingers crossed they use real brick.

 

My thoughts too. I think the arches, and now this color scheme, shows good respect to the church and will really tie things together there.

I would like to see less of a disconnect between the "open glass boxes" that appear to be the main design statement on the Western elevation by incorporating some subtle arch'ful element to match the brick arches - below are just some concept images.  I couldn't find an arch composed of inset glass in a commercial application by doing a quick search. 

 

There are window systems out there that would help achieve at least a cheap version of this effect (center).  Of course I'd truly prefer some sculpted glass arches as window surrounds on the 25th Street Side of the building, but who am I kidding? 

I'll take what we get, I guess.

 

 

 

 

Fantastic design. This is top notch.

@KJP...do you think it might be possible that the developers may add a few floors to this project now that the THUM tax credit has passed (even though there is no guarantee they would win an award given the competition for the tax credit)?

24 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

@KJP...do you think it might be possible that the developers may add a few floors to this project now that the THUM tax credit has passed (even though there is no guarantee they would win an award given the competition for the tax credit)?

 

Don't know, but Panzica sounded cagey when I asked him if he was involved with a project that could benefit from the TMUD credit. The zoning allows for buildings up to 250 feet there. Panizica is involved in other projects that haven't been publicly announced yet, so it could be something else.

CLEVELAND LANDMARKS COMMISSION
WEBEX VIRTUAL MEETING – 9:00 AM
DECEMBER 10, 2020
AGENDA

 

CONCEPT PLAN
1. Case 20-069: Ohio City Historic District
2429 West Superior Viaduct
New Mixed-Use Construction for Bridgeworks
Ward 3: McCormack
Project Representatives: Dominick Durante, Steve Jennings, LDA Architects; Michael Panzica, Graham Vesey; 
Jonathan Evans, John Maher, Ian Kenney, Mass Group

 

 

Wow, this is a lot. They liked the overall design of the building but had objections on size and of course parking.

 

Trott suggested 'flipping' the layout so St. Malachi's isn't blocked and yes, complained about how there wasn't parking for every tenant to have a space. The parking comment is what irked me- it's literally across the way from downtown and is within walking distance of anything you need (and a bus ride if you really need to get anywhere). Parking minimums really need to die a quick death imo, y'all might have other feelings but I really can't get over how that could (being dramatic here) cut into a really awesome project. Maybe Ms. Trott will come to, but again, being NEO I have my doubts. We'll lose some cool element because they had to devote money to a garage or something....bah humbug lol

 

 

Quote

Cleveland Landmarks Commission expresses concerns about Bridgeworks apartment, hotel project in Ohio City

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2020/12/cleveland-landmarks-commission-expresses-concerns-about-bridgeworks-apartment-hotel-project-in-ohio-city.html

....Rather, Chair Julie Trott said she felt that the size of one of the proposed buildings felt too large compared to what is already there.

“It feels very cramped to both the street and St. Malachi,” Trott said, referring to the historic Catholic church next door to the proposed project.

 

The quote from that article that especially got me: “People felt the buildings should be farther back from the street as to not block a view of the church, and also to not further separate Ohio City from the nearby Lakeview Terrace public housing complex.”

 

Alright. Time for my own hot takes / rant on this, some of them totally paralleling what GISguy said.

A) Setbacks are BAD in dense, urban neighborhoods like Ohio City. If the goal is to create a more lively, walkable & comfortable streetscape experience, the smaller the setback here, the better. Especially w/ the proposed retail/café, this building needs a strong street presence.

 

B) This development, and its strong street presence, will actually BETTER connect Lakeview Terrace with the neighborhood. Active ground floor retail, enhanced sidewalks and streetscapes, and infill on a current sea of asphalt will make Lakeview feel MORE integrated, not less IMO.
 

C) The pushback on building height is interesting. This is one of the most prominent corners in the city, with some of the most expansive views of downtown, on some of the most frequent / highest ridership bus lines. I feel like a tall, dense building just makes so much sense.
 

D) Lastly, how did I know parking was going to come up. Yes, parking is important to work out with any project. But every project does not need to be inundated with parking, especially when, to my previous point, transit access here is great. It’s time to be bullish on this.

^ Regarding the parking, one of the commission members did mention the transit access at this corner being a justification for the lack of parking.

 

As for the rest of your points, couldn't agree more.  New buildings should stand on their own, not defer to their neighbors, and more importantly look like it belongs in a city. That usually means being built up to the sidewalk with a strong street presence.

This is a commission for an urban city, right?  Maybe they need to take a field trip to New York City for some perspective. Just sayin 

I would think zoning might be a way to help with this fairly arbitrary number.  If one were building an apartment complex in Brooklyn I can see having a certain amount of parking.  Zoning in a high transit zone should be allowed to drop parking space requirements to one half or 3/4 depending on location. 

3 minutes ago, audidave said:

I would think zoning might be a way to help with this fairly arbitrary number.  If one were building an apartment complex in Brooklyn I can see having a certain amount of parking.  Zoning in a high transit zone should be allowed to drop parking space requirements to one half or 3/4 depending on location. 

 

The project sits in an urban form overlay district, so the parking requirements are lower than normally required. As designed they won't need a parking variance. The landmark commission still questioned if they had enough for the hotel component. Not sure their concern really matters if the developer meets the zoning minimums.

Why is Landmarks Commision even ruling on this?  

 

the Landmarks Commission is responsible for determining whether buildings, sites or historic districts are eligible for designation as landmarks. The Commission follows established criteria listed in the Landmarks Ordinance and uses the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation to review proposed changes. Through the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness the Commission reviews building and demolition permits for Designated Cleveland Landmarks and Districts. Local Design Review Committees act as advisory committees to the Landmarks Commission within designated historic districts.

After perusing twitter and seeing most folks up in arms about this talk what's the best way to get through to the commission? Also would it be worth a FOIA request to see just how many of the public are concerned with the setbacks? Stuff like this is so frustrating, I'm really concerned we'll lose a cool concept/scene over one person's (two if you're generous) objections.

 

I was mentioning to @urbanetics_on twitter how biking from hingetown to the bridge feels awesome and like being in a city with the corridor of buildings and storefronts. My friends always dig at Cleveland's hulking streets and how they're about 4 lanes too wide everywhere, since the city isn't keen on removing lanes (or even narrowing them) the only way to make things feel closer is to bring the buildings closer....

 

Also @mack34has a great point. Landmarks needs to stay in their lane.

Edited December 11, 20204 yr by GISguy

15 minutes ago, GISguy said:

After perusing twitter and seeing most folks up in arms about this talk what's the best way to get through to the commission? Also would it be worth a FOIA request to see just how many of the public are concerned with the setbacks? Stuff like this is so frustrating, I'm really concerned we'll lose a cool concept/scene over one person's (two if you're generous) objections.

 

I was mentioning to @urbanetics_on twitter how biking from hingetown to the bridge feels awesome and like being in a city with the corridor of buildings and storefronts. My friends always dig at Cleveland's hulking streets and how they're about 4 lanes too wide everywhere, since the city isn't keen on removing lanes (or even narrowing them) the only way to make things feel closer is to bring the buildings closer....

 

Also @mack34has a great point. Landmarks needs to stay in their lane.

We’re all about to go full Karen. How do we reach the manager???
 

In all seriousness, I want to know where OCI solicited their comments from; they didn’t use the new platform they set up, and I don’t remember hearing anything from them about it either.

14 hours ago, urbanetics_ said:

The quote from that article that especially got me: “People felt the buildings should be farther back from the street as to not block a view of the church, and also to not further separate Ohio City from the nearby Lakeview Terrace public housing complex.”

 

Alright. Time for my own hot takes / rant on this, some of them totally paralleling what GISguy said.

A) Setbacks are BAD in dense, urban neighborhoods like Ohio City. If the goal is to create a more lively, walkable & comfortable streetscape experience, the smaller the setback here, the better. Especially w/ the proposed retail/café, this building needs a strong street presence.

 

B) This development, and its strong street presence, will actually BETTER connect Lakeview Terrace with the neighborhood. Active ground floor retail, enhanced sidewalks and streetscapes, and infill on a current sea of asphalt will make Lakeview feel MORE integrated, not less IMO.
 

C) The pushback on building height is interesting. This is one of the most prominent corners in the city, with some of the most expansive views of downtown, on some of the most frequent / highest ridership bus lines. I feel like a tall, dense building just makes so much sense.
 

D) Lastly, how did I know parking was going to come up. Yes, parking is important to work out with any project. But every project does not need to be inundated with parking, especially when, to my previous point, transit access here is great. It’s time to be bullish on this.

Parking NIMBYs always drive me nuts, especially since most of them are not experts but have no problems spouting out nonsense without anything to back up their opinions (sort of like members of the Freedom Caucus).  

 

Also, I agree that density at this corner is desirable.  In fact, I am of the opinion that the building should be taller.  However, I do agree with the concerns about the building overwhelming the church and would like them to explore a siting where the building is up to the sidewalk but does not loom over the church as it currently does.  Probably would require a significant design revision so I don't know if that is possible.

 

By the way, I don't know what Landmarks formal mission is but I have streamed a number of their meetings and they always get into issue of design, aesthetics, parking and density when they review projects....they seem very similar to Design Review in that regard.  So what they appear to be doing on this project is not novel as far as I can tell.

 

Since the developers when to Landmark at this stage just to get their feed back rather than approval, it will be interesting to see what changes, if any, are made to the design next go around.

Man, for a second I thought I was going to be the only person irate  about that article... then i came here. 

 

Thanks everyone :) 

On 12/11/2020 at 8:17 AM, mack34 said:

Why is Landmarks Commision even ruling on this?  

 

the Landmarks Commission is responsible for determining whether buildings, sites or historic districts are eligible for designation as landmarks. The Commission follows established criteria listed in the Landmarks Ordinance and uses the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation to review proposed changes. Through the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness the Commission reviews building and demolition permits for Designated Cleveland Landmarks and Districts. Local Design Review Committees act as advisory committees to the Landmarks Commission within designated historic districts.

I think there's definitely importance to a Landmarks Commission ruling on buildings in significant, historical areas. They would encourage historic touches to the design to complement it's surroundings like the incorporation of arches and bricks in Bridgeworks.

 

But they're missing something extremely important. Historic building design doesn't have setbacks. Commercial buildings are pushed right up to the sidewalk and contribute to the historic charm. They should be forcing developers to NOT have setbacks, not the other way around.