You're mixing up your game show hosts - Alex hosted Jeapordy, Chuck hosted Wheel of Fortune and Love Connection (back in two and two).

You're mixing up your game show hosts - Alex hosted Jeapordy, Chuck hosted Wheel of Fortune and Love Connection (back in two and two).

 

I'm old, OK?  Cut me some slack, Pat!  But then again, you're pretty so you could very well be Vanna!  :-D  Can I buy a vowel?

Hmm... it would be nice if the county walked away from this and built on a surface lot somewhere.  And since they're abating 1010 Euclid, maybe it would be attractive to a developer.  Unless, of course, they've seriously messed it up in the abatement phase, which is possible because they were anticipating demo.

 

Then again, the county may just do something even stupider.

^Like locate in Independence?

^Like locate in Independence?

 

Or Brunswick!

How about we move Cuyahoga County somewhere else and start over.

I could see the County Commissioners saying f it and moving to the suburbs, just to give Cleveland a tap to the you know what's.

Could they actually do that, despite the fact that Cleveland's the county seat?

I could see the County Commissioners saying f it and moving to the suburbs, just to give Cleveland a tap to the you know what's.

 

Don't give those other two idiots any ideas!  We need to show PLJ some support!

My source on the Port Authority board has said that if the commissioners can't get everyone on board for the Breuer site, they will look to give Cleveland the bird and build in the burbs somewhere. They (the commissioners) were quoted as saying that the new admin bldg "doesn't have to be in Cleveland".

Speaking for myself, I believe the Breuer Tower is ugly as all hell, and the opportunity to refurbish and bring back to life the former Ameritrust Rotunda alone makes this project worth it. That being said, I am still taken aback at how much this is going to cost us; but saving the Breuer Tower at the expense of pushing the county's admin building to the burbs is not worth it to me.

which commisioners?  Certainly not Jones?  If they were to move elsewhere, that would be an even bigger waste!

My source on the Port Authority board has said that if the commissioners can't get everyone on board for the Breuer site, they will look to give Cleveland the bird and build in the burbs somewhere. They (the commissioners) were quoted as saying that the new admin bldg "doesn't have to be in Cleveland".

Speaking for myself, I believe the Breuer Tower is ugly as all hell, and the opportunity to refurbish and bring back to life the former Ameritrust Rotunda alone makes this project worth it. That being said, I am still taken aback at how much this is going to cost us; but saving the Breuer Tower at the expense of pushing the county's admin building to the burbs is not worth it to me.

 

Talk about sour grapes! It's not Cleveland's fault you (apparently) didn't perform even a cursory risk mitigation study at the start of the project that would've identified potential roadblocks like this before blowing out millions of dollars, Jimmy. Of course it's always easier to blame others for your own incompetence.

 

Besides, didn't the latest plans ditch the original centralization plan? So we're only talking like 1500 people or so, right? pfft.

My source on the Port Authority board has said that if the commissioners can't get everyone on board for the Breuer site, they will look to give Cleveland the bird and build in the burbs somewhere. They (the commissioners) were quoted as saying that the new admin bldg "doesn't have to be in Cleveland".

Speaking for myself, I believe the Breuer Tower is ugly as all hell, and the opportunity to refurbish and bring back to life the former Ameritrust Rotunda alone makes this project worth it. That being said, I am still taken aback at how much this is going to cost us; but saving the Breuer Tower at the expense of pushing the county's admin building to the burbs is not worth it to me.

 

Talk about sour grapes! It's not Cleveland's fault you (apparently) didn't perform even a cursory risk mitigation study at the start of the project that would've identified potential roadblocks like this before blowing out millions of dollars, Jimmy. Of course it's always easier to blame others for your own incompetence.

 

Besides, didn't the latest plans ditch the original centralization plan? So we're only talking like 1500 people or so, right? pfft.

 

I thought all workers would be downtown.

This sort of attitude reveals yet another layer of incompitence with these two jackasses.  I'll trade saving a landmark structure and it's surrounding context for a thousand and a half cig sucking county workers.  Let them drive to the nearest Steak and Shake or whatever out in Strongsville.

Having it in Cleveland makes sense because it is the center of the county population, moving it out of that to simply tap Cleveland in the nuts a bit is ridiculous.  There is no way these two idiots will make it through the next election.  God can only hope.

Damn empty lots all over the city and these morons had to muck up the process with tearing down an interesting building.  So much for the idea of Cleveland's design community not being mobilized to stop such an attrocity huh Steven Litt?

Has anyone sent a note to PLJ, Litt, Ciperman or the mayor about this?

Having it in Cleveland makes sense because it is the center of the county population, moving it out of that to simply tap Cleveland in the nuts a bit is ridiculous.

 

Not only that, but like I said before, Cleveland is the county seat!  Look at what Chardon's doing to keep Geauga county there.  I honestly can't see this happening without a major fight.

Has anyone sent a note to PLJ, Litt, Ciperman or the mayor about this?

 

Who hasn't contacted these people on this topic?  They aren't reconsidering their desicion because they've had a change of consceince. 

Or do you mean about moving the county out of Cleveland?  If that's what you meant, let's win the first fight, then move onto the next bout.

Has anyone sent a note to PLJ, Litt, Ciperman or the mayor about this?

 

Who hasn't contacted these people on this topic?  They aren't reconsidering their desicion because they've had a change of consceince. 

Or do you mean about moving the county out of Cleveland?  If that's what you meant, let's win the first fight, then move onto the next bout.

 

W 28 what I mean is do they know this "rumor" is out and what are they doing to force the two "evil" commissioners to re examine the facts.

 

Even if suburbanites don't want to come downtown, letting 33 million go to waste to tear it down as per PLJs letter is ridiculous

Regarding my intial post, the commissioner's quote should've been attributed to "rhymes with shimora". I'm sure no one's surprised. Like I said, while I'm not a fan of the Breuer Tower architecturally and support the project there; the process surrounding this from the get-go has been incredibly shady. This has not been handled well at all.

M2S, the city planning commission is split in 2 on how this thing should turn out.  The county commissioners are pissed that it is that close, and are considering other options if it doesn't pan out for them.  Other than that, I don't know how else to respond to your "question."

M2S, the city planning commission is split in 2 on how this thing should turn out.  The county commissioners are pissed that it is that close, and are considering other options if it doesn't pan out for them.  Other than that, I don't know how else to respond to your "question."

 

too lazy to look, who exactly is on the planning commission?

AP story picked up by MSN:  http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?Feed=AP&Date=20070515&ID=6906773

 

May 15, 2007 6:55 PM ET

Ohio Office Tower Facing Demolition

 

CLEVELAND (AP) - An architecturally acclaimed but mostly unloved office tower that sits empty has become a battleground between county commissioners determined to demolish it and preservationists and architects who want the Marcel Breuer building renovated.

 

"Hagan has said the government for Ohio's most populous county deserves a signature building."

 

And the POS designed by KPF/Madison is a signature building? Then again, Hagan has a history of being off the mark (aka Gateway's job creation potential; Gateway's ROI for the city...).

"Hagan has said the government for Ohio's most populous county deserves a signature building."

 

And the POS designed by KPF/Madison is a signature building? Then again, Hagan has a history of being off the mark (aka Gateway's job creation).

 

HELLO!

Since when does vacany = uninteresting building?  I hate Hagan with a passion.

There has not been one sane decision in this entire process:

*Site Selection

*Deciding on demolition

*Architect Selection

 

It seems that the two commissioners are seeing their political life flash before their eyes, but are so deep into their illadvised decision that they will not back out at the expense of the county population.

I also think the two of them are seeing the future of local politics in Peter Lawson Jones, and aren't happy with him going against the company line.  Jones deserves a lot of respect for his stand on this issue.  Though it's really a no brainer, he is getting his name out there for a just cause and really can't lose either way, at least politically.

"Hagan has said the government for Ohio's most populous county deserves a signature building."

:? :? :? :bang:

I'll never suggest that the Breuer Tower is gorgeous, but it's certainly better than that boring piece of garbage!

i think the personal attacks on Hagan,etc. because they want to demolish this tower are a little uncalled for.  I am not architecture buff - but i work arcross the street from this building and would much rather have a new, cleaner looking, glass building to clean up that corner - then the existing dark stone building currently there.  That stretch of euclid and 9th is old and dingy - no matter what you do the old masonry buildings will remain looking old. 

 

I'd prefer to knock it down and put in its place a nice glass building-i think it would do wonders for that corner and to freshen up that part of the city. 

 

And i agree with the article - if it is such a "special buidling" then why has it sat vacant for so long.

Well you aren't going to get a significant piece of architecture that offsets the loss of the Breuer tower whether you want to live in that dream or not.

I too work across the street from the Breuer tower and find it to be the most interesting building in site.

Also, there was no personal attack in the response, I simply announced my hatred for people that are trying to destroy part of my city.

"sight"

lewarctj, my biggest concern is the waste of money because of Hagan's bullheadedness - and pointing out his less-than-stellar track record is hardly a personal attack.

i think the personal attacks on Hagan,etc. because they want to demolish this tower are a little uncalled for.

 

Your entitled to your opinion and I respect that. However, when someone makes such a statement to the media and they have nothing to back it up, they leave themselves open for personal attacks. I'm no buff either but it doesn't take one to know architecture 101.

 

Examples of Signature Buildings:

 

Terminal Tower

Key Tower

200 Public Sq

Court House Tower

 

Something that looks like it belongs on Rock Side Road, not so much.

Examples of Signature Buildings:

 

Terminal Tower

Key Tower

200 Public Sq

Court House Tower

 

Something that looks like it belongs on Rock Side Road, not so much.

 

you mean you don't want Crown Centre V 3.0 downtown?

Let's face it, the Breuer tower is a second rate design at best. In the best of times (The inspiring 70’s) it has loomed like a foreboding monument to the Stalinist school of architecture. This is not a signature building of any sorts.

 

Don't you think it would be more productive to spend the time and energy focusing on a putting up a structure of the highest design on a key intersection in the city of Cleveland, rather than trying to salvage something that is inefficient, and unworkable in the minds of the county?

 

I would not take lightly the county's threat to dump the building and possibly build in the suburbs. Another twenty years of a vacant building on a key intersection is not progress in my mind.

 

^still a lot of my bottom line is 20 millions dollar difference in renovation versus building new.

Zippo - Thank You.  I totally agree with  your comments.  The county has said the building is not suitable for their needs.  In fact, If it was suitable for modern day office needs, it would not be sitting vacant.  I understand that the minority views this building as significant, but the vast majority of the day-to-day pedestrians view this building as ugly on a prime downtown intersection and are actually looking forward to it coming down and somethign new going up.  I can't tell you how often people look out our windows here at work and ask  "when are they tearing that thing down".  Granted they say this about the atrium building too...

 

Having a significant new building built downtown will do wonders to the negative attitude Clevelanders have towards almost everything. 

Zippo - Thank You.  I totally agree with  your comments.  The county has said the building is not suitable for their needs.  In fact, If it was suitable for modern day office needs, it would not be sitting vacant.  

 

My question to you is, Do you think it was smart of the county to waste money buying the building only to find out they'd have to spend more money to knock it down and rebuild becasue the current structure doesn't meet their needs?

Again, my argument isn't that the Breuer Tower is aesthetically pleasing - my concern is that taxpayers' money is being wasted, and that sustainable principles are being given lip service by two public servants, and please tell me you're joking that you think the KPF/Madison proposal resembles anything approaching "highest design". 

 

I'm sorry - the minds of the county? The commissioners have said that they want a "green" building but anyone with a cursory understanding of sustainable design knows that demolition of a 383-foot tower is contrary to the tenets of sustainable design. Anyone with a basic knowledge of sustainable design is aware that utilizing existing materials is preferable to using new. Anyone with the most simple grasp of sustainable design and green principles knows that the fuel used and effort exerted to import foreign steel and materials to the site would contradict and invalidate any notions of green design. Finally, anyone who has a little bit of knowledge of sustainable design knows that demolition would result in tons of granite, steel, concrete and god knows what else needing to be disposed of. Tell me again how the minds of the county commissioners are beyond reproach? The one thing that hasn't been done enough with Cleveland's built environment is questioning the powers that be. So they say the building is inefficient - how so? Beyond small floorplates (which could be remedied by constructing on the site of 1010 Euclid to expand the existing footprint), how is the building "inefficient"? Why is it that the county commissioners don't have to be creative and work with what they have? It doesn't help that one of the commissioners spearheaded one of Cleveland's largest public projects and it was plagued by cost overruns.

 

So two of the commissioners are threatening to dump the building because they're acting like selfish schoolchildren - if the Breuer Tower is demolished and the new construction follows suit of previous projects (cost overruns, etc.), I can assure you the commissioners will be dumped at the ballot box.

I don't like either option, but that's all we have it seems.  If the county would be willing to renovate and move right into the existing building, I would say great.  Unfortunately they likely won't do that, so that leaves the option of demolition and rebuild.  This option would involve more money spent than should be and likely cost overuns, but it would also guarantee a fully occupied new building in downtown replacing a completely vacant one.  If people would stop voting these guys in, maybe we wouldn't have to be in this situation.  We need some new leaders with fresh ideas and flexibility.

I try not to post pure opinion pieces but to add on to lewarctj's comments, I worked across the street at medical mutual last summer and even with life that building would serve as a poor conduit to relay those signs of life to east 9th.  The entrance is set back behind monolithic black pillars and the building is being saved because this architect is famous for OTHER projects.  If this tower had been erected by a no name of the same time period this building would be dust by now, architecture needs to be able to stand alone and this building does not merit its own continued existence.

"Don't you think it would be more productive to spend the time and energy focusing on a putting up a structure of the highest design on a key intersection in the city of Cleveland, rather than trying to salvage something that is inefficient, and unworkable in the minds of the county?"

 

I would have initially thought this and been open to this idea as well, as well as looking at concepts of recreating the existing building (like enclosing it glass etc..)  But these options were never given a chance, and its obvious from the above renderings that it will not end up being anything signature whatsoever taking its place (your happy with a suburbanish office building taking its place?). 

 

Its mostly the idea of how stupidly the commissioners have gone about this project from the very beginning that has people upset.  They havent exactly been sensible.  Read some of the previous 22 pages of posts before jumping to conclusions about "uncalled for attacks".     

 

Having a significant new building built downtown will do wonders to the negative attitude Clevelanders have towards almost everything. 

 

Ohhhh yeah, the federal courthouse building built a few years really got people running through the streets. 

What is the $20 million question?  Should the existing infrastructure in the city- be it roads, public space, or buildings, be reused or torn down as if we are still living in the era of urban renewal?  This is a horrible waste of money, and for a county that is losing population is an unacceptable "decision" by our elected officials, who work for the taxpayers of Cuyahoga County, not a developer who they acquired the building from in a back-room deal.  The building might not be aesthetically pleasing, but should our county officials have the right to tear it down just because of aesthetics, or office sizes, or whatever other bull$ht they can come up with? 

 

 

I don't like either option, but that's all we have it seems.  If the county would be willing to renovate and move right into the existing building, I would say great.  Unfortunately they likely won't do that, so that leaves the option of demolition and rebuild.  This option would involve more money spent than should be and likely cost overuns, but it would also guarantee a fully occupied new building in downtown replacing a completely vacant one.  If people would stop voting these guys in, maybe we wouldn't have to be in this situation.  We need some new leaders with fresh ideas and flexibility.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like the 1500 workers are appearing out of thin air.  Most of them already work downtown.  This is just a shell game -- moving them from once place another.  So I disagree with the statement that this "guarantees a fully occupied new building in downtown replacing a completely vacant one."  Instead it creates a vacant building in order to fill up another one. 

 

 

I don't like either option, but that's all we have it seems.  If the county would be willing to renovate and move right into the existing building, I would say great.  Unfortunately they likely won't do that, so that leaves the option of demolition and rebuild.  This option would involve more money spent than should be and likely cost overuns, but it would also guarantee a fully occupied new building in downtown replacing a completely vacant one.  If people would stop voting these guys in, maybe we wouldn't have to be in this situation.  We need some new leaders with fresh ideas and flexibility.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like the 1500 workers are appearing out of thin air.  Most of them already work downtown.  This is just a shell game -- moving them from once place another.  So I disagree with the statement that this "guarantees a fully occupied new building in downtown replacing a completely vacant one."  Instead it creates a vacant building in order to fill up another one. 

 

 

 

NO.  the county employees are in a number of office.  Again the cost of building/renovating one central location was cheaper then continuing to rent space.  The current county building is outdated and too small.

Having a significant new building built downtown will do wonders to the negative attitude Clevelanders have towards almost everything. 

 

Ohhhh yeah, the federal courthouse building built a few years really got people running through the streets. 

 

giggles!

^^Point taken MTS, but I'm not talking about cost here.  I'm disagreeing with the argument that putting 1500 people in one important intersection is going to magically transform the office market downtown.  Instead, it's taking 200 from one building, 500 from another,  250 from another, 150 from (suburb), and so on..... 

 

What happens to the newly vacant office buildings?  And the businesses (restaurants, coffee shops, etc.) that count on the tenants?  Sure, new businesses will start up around the new location, but the old ones may die out as well.

 

I'm just trying to make the point that it's not like these are new employees coming from the suburbs or outside the region.  They mostly come from other parts of downtown.  If you move them from one place to another, the net benefit is probably not going to be as large as is being touted.  It's a shell game.

"Point taken MTS, but I'm not talking about cost here.  I'm disagreeing with the argument that putting 1500 people in one important intersection is going to magically transform the office market downtown.  Instead, it's taking 200 from one building, 500 from another,  250 from another, 150 from (suburb), and so on.....  "

 

 

Magic?  Who's talking magic?  Look I think you are exaggerating.  No one is saying either option is a cure all.  But the current tower is a freaking large skyscraper and it is COMPLETELY empty and has been for quite some time.  If the county doesn't do anything with it, it would likely stay COMPLETELY empty for a quite a while longer.  If the county wants to consolidate a bunch of smaller offices thats wonderful.  Its a lot easier to fill a few smaller vacant spaces than one much larger space.  That would require a large company to move downtown to do that and this is not happening as frequently as we would all like.