Where can I find a picture of the new building they want to build?

 

How can you be for demolishion when you don't even know what the replacement will be???

An email I received from Commissioner Jones:

 

 

Dear Concerned Citizen:

 

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the prospective demolition

of the Ameritrust Tower, located at the corner of Euclid Avenue and East

Ninth Street and designed by the renowned modernist architect, Marcel

Breuer.

 

As you are probably aware, on Thursday, March 29, 2007, the Cuyahoga

County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) voted 2-1 to raze the tower, with

me casting the dissenting vote to preserve the building. In determining

as I did, I employed a *decision matrix* that considered the

following factors: (1) architectural significance; (2) aesthetics;  (3)

preservation/sustainability; (4) functionality/work flow; and (5) cost.

 

 

The Breuer Tower*s architectural significance is well documented and

cannot be dismissed. By retaining the *brutalist* structure as part

of a new complex that includes the neoclassical rotunda and a new 21st

century contemporary building, an opportunity is presented for a rare

*dialogue* amongst three different architectural expressions. The

resulting campus will provide not only a living laboratory for students

of architecture but also an attraction for our citizens and visitors

alike. The architectural significance of the tower clearly favors its

preservation.

 

As regards aesthetics, some critics of the tower find it physically

unattractive. At the risk of sounding cliché, however, beauty is in the

eye of the beholder. Furthermore, tastes have a tendency to change over

time.  Because some do not find the building visually pleasing, however,

is not reason enough to justify its demolition.  Moreover, the highly

regarded firm of Davis, Brody and Bond demonstrated in a presentation to

the BOCC that the tower can be externally treated and the new structure

designed in a way that creates a physically compelling final product.

 

Our relatively recent embrace of preservation and sustainability as a

society and a community also militates for the preservation of the

tower.  With the new administrative complex, we aspire at a minimum to

achieve silver LEEDS certification. The demolition of the tower will

jeopardize this goal, particularly as it has been designated a historic

structure by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. Furthermore,

demolition will be tricky, given the proximity of other structures to

the site. Finally, the waste of the thousands of tons of materials that

went into the construction - less than forty years ago - of this

building as well as the adverse environmental impact resulting from the

dumping of the debris in local landfills hardly constitutes a positive

ecological outcome. 

 

A fourth consideration is functionality and work flow. Although the

tower*s floor plates are too small to accommodate County departments

on a single and, in most cases, on even two floors, this concern is

exaggerated.  Most office communication today is conducted via e-mail

and telephone. Moreover, through creative intra-departmental

organization and grouping, the desired face-to-face interaction can be

achieved. A competent interior workplace architect and designer need

only, as Tim exhorts the contestants in Project Runway, *Make it

work!*  Floor plate sizes and ceiling heights should not be viewed as

insurmountable obstacles in our efforts to provide a physical

environment conducive to the delivery of world-class service to our

citizenry.

 

Finally, impossible to ignore is the matter of cost. A minimum of $20

million can be saved by choosing adaptive reuse over new construction.

An additional $15 million in federal historic tax credits will accompany

the preservation of the tower. As stewards of public funds, we must ask

if there is a better use of the $35 million that could be saved in the

short run by retaining the structure. Considering the burgeoning

economic development, workforce training and health and human service

needs of our community, the answer is self-evident. An investment that

addresses our critical social challenges will yield a far greater

return, a more consequential community benefit than will the expenditure

of valuable dollars on a pubic edifice.

 

The Marcel Breuer Tower debate now proceeds to the City of Cleveland

Planning Commission, which, by charter, must approve the demolition and

construction of all public buildings within the municipality*s

boundaries.  On Friday, March 30, 2007, the Planning Commission voted to

approve the demolition of three smaller structures on the site and

passed a motion that no action is to be taken regarding the Breuer

building until the panel has the opportunity to:

1)      review a master plan for the entire site;

2)      review plans to ensure the safe removal of art work currently in

the    building;

3)      tour both the Breuer Tower and the remainder of the site; and

4)      hear a comprehensive presentation on the merits of  preserving

the Breuer Tower.

The Planning Commission also required that no asbestos abatement take

place in the Breuer Tower without prior Commission approval.

 

Now that the fate of the building resides with the Planning Commission,

I urge you to share your views to that body as well. The names, phone

numbers, and e-mail addresses of the panel members are provided below. I

also urge you to communicate with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, which, in

an editorial dated Tuesday, April 3, 2007, declared that the Marcel

Breuer Tower is not a *serious candidate for renovation.* You can

read the editorial at: 

http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1175589150262091.xml&coll=2

 

 

You may also wish to express your opinion on this important issue with

other news publications.  In addition to that for the Plain Dealer, I

have included the contact information for the editorial departments of

the Call & Post, News-Herald and Sun Newspapers.

 

Again, I thank you for taking the time to share your views and concerns

regarding the Breuer Tower with me.  As always, please do not hesitate

to contact my office if we can ever be of any assistance whatsoever.

 

Sincerely,

 

Peter Lawson Jones

Cuyahoga County Commissioner

 

 

 

 

ADDITIONAL CONTACTS

 

CITY OF CLEVELAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS

 

Anthony Coyne, Chair:  216-523-1500 (o)

[email protected]

                             

David Bowen: 216-491-9300, ext. 808

[email protected]

 

Joe Cimpermann:216-664-2691

[email protected]

 

Norman Krumholz:216-687-6946

[email protected]

 

Lillian Kuri:216-659-4926

[email protected]

 

Larwrence Lumpkin: 216-299-1550

[email protected]

 

Gloria Pinkney:            216-751-5131

[email protected]

 

CLEVELAND CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF

Robert N. Brown, Director

601 Lakeside Ave.

City Hall Room 501

Cleveland, Ohio 44114

Phone: 216-664-2210 ~ Fax: 216-664-3281

 

Meetings are held the first and third Friday*s of everything month @

9:00 am Please call for the schedule and the agenda.

Robert N. Brown, Director

[email protected]

 

Gary Newbacher, Chief City Planner

[email protected]

 

Jean Crawford, Private Secretary

[email protected]

 

Letters to the Editor

 

The Cleveland Plain Dealer

Letters to the Editor

1801 Superior Avenue

Cleveland, Ohio 44114

 

e-mail letters to: [email protected]

fax: 216-999-6209

 

Include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for

verification purposes. Submissions should not exceed 200 words.

 

 

Call & Post

Attn. Constance Harper

11800 Shaker Boulevard

Cleveland, Ohio 44120

 

e-mail letters to [email protected]

fax 216-451-0404

 

The New-Herald

Letters to the Editor

7085 Mentor Avenue

Willoughby, Ohio 44094

 

e-mail: [email protected]

fax: 440-975-2293

 

The Sun News

The Sun News welcomes letters to the editor which are brief and to the

point, typewritten and double-spaced. We reserve the right to edit

letters. Deadline is 9 a.m. Monday, though we urge readers to submit

letters as early as possible. Letters are printed as space permits and

may not appear in the next edition, even when deadlines are met.

Sign your letter and include a telephone number at which you may be

called during business hours for verification purposes. Only names and

cities will be printed, not street addresses. We never print unsigned

letters.

Send "Letters to the Editor" to your local office or e-mail if you wish

with your address to: [email protected]

 

Wow, I might have to contribute to PLJ's next campaign- that was a pretty fantastic response.

^^I really don't think you can write it better than that.  Kudos to Commissioner Jones.

now thats a response. :clap:

 

I'll be rewriting my initially email to the names below adding all of Peter's points.  I urge you all to do the same.

 

Wow, I might have to contribute to PLJ's next campaign- that was a pretty fantastic response.

 

I think he's one of the most progressive commissioners we've had in a LONG time.

Wow. This finally got me to get off my butt and fire off some letters. I wrote the county commissioners, the City planning commission members and the PD. By the way, the e-mails for Cimperman and Kuri are bad.

Try these:

Joe Cimperman - [email protected]

Lillian Kuri - [email protected]

 

Here's what I wrote. Nothing fancy, but serviceable. I encourage all forumers to write some letters now, before it's too late. To lose this building would be such a waste.

 

Planning Commission Members:

 

I am writing to express my outrage at the recent vote of the County Commissioners to demolish the Breuer Tower for the new County Headquarters project. The building is Marcel Breuer's only skyscraper -- a unique building by one of the last century's most important architects. It is also in pristine condition, having been continuously guarded and climate-controlled even during its vacancy. Many people may consider it ugly now, but tastes change. The Hippodrome on Euclid Avenue, the old Hollenden Hotel, many buildings in the Warehouse District -- all were considered "ugly" and disposable at one time, and we now mourn their loss.

 

Much has been made of the fact that a new building to replace the Breuer tower would follow sustainable, "green" building principles.

Yet to demolish a building in perfect working condition is the antithesis of everything the sustainability movement aims to accomplish. Renovating the building would also save at least $20 million over the cost of building a new one. To tear down the Breuer tower would waste taxpayers' money and do a disservice to the architectural heritage not only of this city, but of the world. Please do everything in your power to save it.

I feel all goose-bumpy from Commissioner Jones response.

I said it before and I'll say it again. Hagan, and especially Dimora, are going to have a hard time getting re-elected.

No they wont, they're "democrats".  Thats the whole problem, they wont be held accountable due to the stupid notion that people here tend to just vote for a democrat for the sake of it. 

Your forgetting the Scene article on Dimora. That is going to majorly bite him in the ass when it comes time for his re-election

 

 

This is a great to read!! Without knowing anything else about the guy, he's instantly turned me into a huge fan. Plus I love the Project Runway reference, that show rocks..

 

BTW, several camera shots during snow delays at the Indian's home opener framed the tower quite nicely. It looked like a beaut IMO with the cascading snow and all. Just yet another reminder of how the landscape will be changed for the worse if it is demolished.

 

Fight to Save Downtown Building

Isn't Over Yet, Says Lawson Jones

 

I ran into Cuyahoga County commissioner Peter Lawson Jones this morning at breakfast, and took a moment to congratulate him for his principled stand on the preservation of the Breuer Building, which some see as an architectural landmark but which his commission counterparts are itching to demolish. The Plain Dealer this week did what it always does, editorializing against preservation and thus throwing its weight toward what establishment players want rather than average citizens. In doing so, it thus ignored the ongoing and impassioned calls of its architecture critic, Steve Litt, who's been campaigning to save the building. Last week, he had this to say. In February, he wrote this column.

 

Last September, in a column no longer online (but the energetic Norm Roulet mentions it here), Litt got the whole debate started by writing that "the three Cuyahoga County Commissioners soon could decide to pull down a 29-story downtown office tower by Marcel Breuer to make way for a new county administrative center. That would be tragic and wasteful for a city with a limited supply of historic buildings worth saving from any period. In this case, apathy over mid-20th-century Modernist architecture is playing a huge role. Debate over the Breuer tower has been absolutely anemic." Imagine that, a PD writer trying to spark more rather than less community debate! It helps explain why Litt isn't merely popular in many quarters, but increasingly becoming at least a minor folk hero to some.

 

Anyway, Lawson Jones said this morning that all does not look so gloomy as some would assume. "It's now before the City Planning Commission, and I'm hopeful, knock on wood, that they'll do the right thing." He added that it wouldn't hurt if people were to call the commission and make their voices heard. Okay, folks, you have your marching orders (okay, more like a suggestion). That number is 216-664-2210.

 

http://workingwithwords.blogspot.com/2007/04/fight-to-save-downtown-building-isnt.html

I wouldn't say that the "average citizen" is crying out to save the Breuer building.  The best bet is to emphasize the cost savings of not demolishing the building.  It's going to be a hard sell to get people passionate about the building's architecture.

I agree. The problem with the Litt argument is that this issue is painted as an architectural issue (of course, that's his job so I'm not faulting him). While the architectural aspect is very important, I feel that the economic issue is more so. We have a much much better chance of swaying both public and commissioner opinion if we emphasize the economic idiocy of this project rather than the very subjective architectural side. The architectural side almost comes off as snobbish.

^X and 3231, have you both made your opinions known to the planning commission and/or county commissioners? It doesn't take much longer than typing out a response on Urban Ohio. ;)

Here's the message I sent to the Planning group and, previously, to the commissioners themselves.

 

"Esteemed Planning Committee Member,

 

"I am grateful for the continued dedication and commitment that the Board of Cuyahoga County Commissioners shows for the urban fabric of Cleveland.  I know, as I'm sure you  realize, that any movement the County makes can affect great change.  I was (and continue to be) enthusiastic that the County chose the corner of East 9th and Euclid for their new offices given the positive impact it will have on the neighborhood and the now-empty storefronts.

 

"Despite my appreciation for this move, I truly feel that the demolition of the Breuer Tower will be a major loss for Cleveland that won't be fully felt for years to come.  While I have heard that it would cost more to demolish and rebuild the Breuer Tower, my principle concern is about the building itself, the hole in the skyline that would be created, and the abandonment of an architecturally significant structure because of current tastes and trends.

 

"When I was growing up in Shaker Heights I resented the brutalist style of the Breuer Tower as well as other austere structures of the era that are currently slated to be torn down.  At the time, I vastly preferred the newer, more classically inspired buildings that were going up.  Now, while I greatly admire new trends in architecture, my opinion has changed.  I find the Breuer Tower both subtle and elegant, and it is increasingly significant as modernism is making an strong comeback in every field of design.  I feel it is a unique trophy from an important era in architecture in a district of period skyscrapers.

 

"However, this style of architecture is in a twilight phase between stodgy and classic, as all styles invariably find themselves at one point.  It is for this reason that I hope that you will reconsider the demolition of the Breuer Tower.  I have no doubt that the current needs of the County can be met through updating the interiors or through building new on the Euclid Avenue land that was also acquired in the purchase.  But I am even more certain that tearing down Marcel Breuer's only tower is a mistake that will come back to haunt Cleveland in the very near future.

 

"Thank you for your consideration."

 

 

I also submitted Jones's letter as well as my own plea for help on the Society for Architectural Historians' listserv and to the University of Cincinnati's architecture department.  both groups were "shocked", and are currently passing it around to build support.

Christorra, excellent letter. Diplomatic and well-written. You should send it to the letters department of the Plain Dealer too: [email protected]. I think they may be planning a section of letters about the tower soon, as they called me about possibly publishing my letter.

Let the tower fall

Commissioners' vote for new county center on Ameritrust site makes sense economically, practically and aesthetically

(Cleveland) Plain Dealer Editorial

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

 

The Cuyahoga County commissioners made the right choice in voting, 2-1, to demolish the former Ameritrust headquarters at Euclid Avenue and East Ninth Street to make way for a new county administrative center.

 

The existing 29-floor tower, designed by modernist architect Marcel Breuer, simply has too many drawbacks to make it a serious candidate for renovation.

plan is so limited that fewer than half of the county's agencies would fit on the same level ...

 

... More at http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1175589150262091.xml&coll=2

I wonder where they got the figure that "99 percent of those who look at the building find it extremely unattractive".  Was that a Pew Research Center poll, or did they get a show of hands at Slyman's?

Blink, I have no love for the Breuer tower, I was making a comment on strategy for those of you are are trying to save it to think about.  I'm disappointed by the loss of 1010 Euclid, however.  But I seem to be the only one concerned about losing this beautiful historic office structure that is representative of the height of our once great main street.  Perhaps if the county has to rethink their architectural plans, 1010 will have a better chance of being saved.  But I doubt it.

Has that been considered, X?  I'd certainly be interested to know more.

Has what been considered?  Saving 1010 Euclid?  As far as I know, it was a forgone conclusion that this building was going to be demolished, even before the fate of the Breuer Tower was decided.

I'm not sure if it ever had a decorative cornice, but imho the 1010 building isn't terribly remarkable:

I really like the cluster it forms with the tower and rotunda. In and of itself.. eh.

 

It's not about remarkable architecture.  It's about the way the 1010 Euclid Building is a part of the Euclid Ave ensemble of early 20th century architecture.  It's about the way the building has the kind of street level presence, with human scaled storefronts and nice transparency, that makes for a great street.  It's about the way that the building has a solid, sedate, and unpretentious presence that works well with the buildings around helps to create the overall feel of Euclid Ave. as a special place.  It think a lot of the charm of that section of street will be lost with this building.  Moreso than with the Breuer tower, which stands aloof from its surroundings.

^Good points.  I tend to agree with them.

 

While not a fan of the Breuer tower and with no deep passion regarding its demolition (especially in comparison to others on the Board), I am  concerned about what is going in its place.  So far, the original concept did not excite me and recently we have seen little in the way of what may actually be built.  I would hope that the new building can incorporate the elements discussed by "X", especially on Euclid.

It's not about remarkable architecture.  It's about the way the 1010 Euclid Building is a part of the Euclid Ave ensemble of early 20th century architecture.  It's about the way the building has the kind of street level presence, with human scaled storefronts and nice transparency, that makes for a great street.  It's about the way that the building has a solid, sedate, and unpretentious presence that works well with the buildings around helps to create the overall feel of Euclid Ave. as a special place.  It think a lot of the charm of that section of street will be lost with this building.  Moreso than with the Breuer tower, which stands aloof from its surroundings.

 

It's this very street level presence that you are talking about that will be lost when the Breuer Tower comes down.  Its lobby facade with a wash would become a great lantern of the city again.  And the Breuer Tower does not stand aloof from the surrounding cityscape X, it is connected on all sides to it, rising above it, ina way bringing the cityscape with it.  You just wait and see how odd a 10 story building will look next to the rotunda.

 

Apparently the County Commisioners and City Planning Commission are being inundated with emails and phone calls.  Our presence is being felt. 

 

FYI, there is talk of a demolision protest in front of the Breuer Tower for this friday and sunday.  I'll have more info as it comes along.

If it were anymore integrated into the surroundings X and Htsguy, it would be hovering above the neighboring structures.

It's not about remarkable architecture.  It's about the way the 1010 Euclid Building is a part of the Euclid Ave ensemble of early 20th century architecture.  It's about the way the building has the kind of street level presence, with human scaled storefronts and nice transparency, that makes for a great street.  It's about the way that the building has a solid, sedate, and unpretentious presence that works well with the buildings around helps to create the overall feel of Euclid Ave. as a special place.  It think a lot of the charm of that section of street will be lost with this building.  Moreso than with the Breuer tower, which stands aloof from its surroundings.

 

X, I too am very ticked off by the loss of 1010 Euclid and think you sum up its value nicely.

 

Between the 1010 Euclid loss and the Beuer tower loss (which upsets me at least as much), I think this was an absolutely awful site choice from the beginning.

 

I really wish the county would have selected a site along Euclid in Midtown to help spur a little activity there-perhaps in conjunction with a new public outdoor space, something I would really like to see on Midtown Euclid to create an identifiable new focal point for the vast netherregion between our two big hubs.

^Good point, but that still leaves a building that is in desperate need for expensive renovation sitting vacant on Euclid.  Other developers were really not eying this corner for renovation.  It was kind of a road block for futiure development until the county stepped in.  I thinked they picked the absolute best location being that it is a chance to start using that corner again, but the plans are questionable and debatable.

I thought all the buildings on the other (north) side of Euclid between Huntington Bank and the Statler Arms were purchased with an eye towards mixed use renovation? Of course I assume nothing will happen at a minimum until ECP is done.

It would also depend on how the buildings were packaged for sale.  The Rotunda and AT tower would be a lot of extra baggage to purchase for a developer who was only interested in 1010 Euclid, if the owner was unwilling to sell seperately.

This just in: I was just told by a reliable (though not foolproof) source the 1020 Euclid building is on the demolition block as well. This is the building that housed the old Loretta's Restaurant and Greek Express. A true outrage, as it is in many ways an even better example of early 20th century commercial architecture than 1010... featuring a beautiful terra cotta facade. WTF??

The county's really gone bulldozer happy, here.

Any photos of 1020?

I'll snap some pics of 1020 Euclid tomorrow.

THANKS!

Here are a few shots from the spiderman filiming on 1020.  building has been for sale for a while...

 

middle building (1010, also to be demolished to the right):

 

street level (all currently vacant):

Are there any renderings of the new county building or possibilities for it.  I's liek to see how it interacts at street level. 

I don't think they'll be happy until they've demolished all of Cleveland and all that's standing is their craptacular turd of a building.

I guess we'll always have Second Life!

this is really turning into a disaster

A nice summary of the Breuer Controversy http://www.recentpast.org/types/skyscraper/cleveland.html

 

Also, it sounds as if a there is going to be protest/demonstration in front of the Breuer sometime next week. 

do not worry, it appears that spiderman is on the case.  though he looks a little heavier than he used to be.  no wonder he is walking across the street and not swinging from a web. 

do not worry, it appears that spiderman is on the case.  though he looks a little heavier than he used to be.  no wonder he is walking across the street and not swinging from a web. 

 

???

Methinks that math is referring to the less-than-svelte Spiderman in the second photo, heading for Greek Express.

 

Just for sh!ts and giggles, here is a brochure that was posted on the Design Rag blog. Some of the sentiment is a little inflammatory (though I agree certain groups are playing too "nice"), and the font choice couldn't be worse, but they bring up some good points:

 

 

 

^Wow, something for everyone in that brochure- even trade protectionists.

 

Ugh, this topic is such a downer.

 

^yeah, how about the reference to the "narcissistic and self-referential" Peter B. Lewis building?

 

 

When people refer to Cleveland having a sour grapes "anti-wealthy" mentality, that's a perfect example.

^ You can say that again. Someone's always got something smart or demeaning to say about people who've made money. Around here, it's assumed you're either lazy, lucky or crooked if you've been successful. As Traficant used to say, "When was the last time a poor man gave you a job?"

 

After looking at Euclid Avenue pictures on The Cleveland Memory Project, and I don't know what I think about this tower project anymore. The whole damn streets been obliterated anyway.

^hey, we've still got 8 1/2 (or 9 1/2) of the mansions lying around!

 

 

 

 

(out of how many?)