Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

I must say, the renderring is very "Un-Cleveland" as far as what we have seen built in the city center over the past 30 years.  But I do welcome the design as it is very different to our current stock of highrise structures.  It may be boxy, but at least is has some decent accents to it. 

 

I think besides the few accents, it is rather similar to the federal building and some of the other boring building on E. 9th

 

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

I agree, theres other parts of downtown that I wouldnt necessarily mind it, but to me it seems out of place in this spot. 

The red brick used for the hotel will blend in with the surrounding area well.  With the choice of brick color used for the office tower, I think the office tower is designed purposely to stand out in regards to its surroundings.  Since this is phase 1 of the project, things might seem to come together better when the residential phase is built.  Until then...

I must say, the renderring is very "Un-Cleveland" as far as what we have seen built in the city center over the past 30 years. But I do welcome the design as it is very different to our current stock of highrise structures. It may be boxy, but at least is has some decent accents to it.

 

I think besides the few accents, it is rather similar to the federal building and some of the other boring building on E. 9th

 

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either. The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

I agree, theres other parts of downtown that I wouldnt necessarily mind it, but to me it seems out of place in this spot.

 

I was going to say the boxy architecture that helps contribute to the canyon look on 9th is very similar.  However, the accents on this building take away from the boxy look.  If this was simply a box building in the flats, it would look very strange being that it is kind of disjoined from the rest of the buildings downtown. 

I'm a pretty harsh judge and I don't think this design is that bad.  The criticisms are valid, it's a bit sterile and it makes no attempt to invoke the history of its surroundings, but at least this is a step up from those giant ice cubes we've had proposed recently.  As noted, it might look better once surrounded by brick structures.  I like that it's more than just vast sheer surfaces of uniform nothingness, like so many of those E9th jobbies.  It gives your eyes different things to do as you scan over it.

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

they said the same thing about stonebridge!  I think having it rise slightly above the shoreway is cool!  Office workers looking out onto the shoreway and drivers, ships, leisure boats going past and looking in.

 

Think outside the box

I don't know...it doesn't look all that bad (there are worse in Cleveland now) and based on the level of activity I've seen going on in the flats the past 2 years, I think we're a long way from the final product.

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

they said the same thing about stonebridge!  I think having it rise slightly above the shoreway is cool!  Office workers looking out onto the shoreway and drivers, ships, leisure boats going past and looking in.

 

Think outside the box

 

I do like the height and the way it rises over the Shoreway, and I don't mind the overall design.  I just don't like the design combined with the location.

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

they said the same thing about stonebridge!  I think having it rise slightly above the shoreway is cool!  Office workers looking out onto the shoreway and drivers, ships, leisure boats going past and looking in.

 

Think outside the box

 

I do like the height and the way it rises over the Shoreway, and I don't mind the overall design.  I just don't like the design combined with the location.

 

It's the first phase of a rendering.  Come on folks, sheesh!

At what phase are comments/critiques on design acceptable?

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

they said the same thing about stonebridge!  I think having it rise slightly above the shoreway is cool!  Office workers looking out onto the shoreway and drivers, ships, leisure boats going past and looking in.

 

Think outside the box

 

I do like the height and the way it rises over the Shoreway, and I don't mind the overall design.  I just don't like the design combined with the location.

 

It's the first phase of a rendering.  Come on folks, sheesh!

 

Actually its not the first phase of a rendering (and if you were going to press for changes you wouldnt wait any later). 

I can assure you the design isnt going to change much or get any better than that. 

Wow, really exudes the muscle and braun of the Flats huh?..

 

I don't like this design for the Flats either.  The Shoreway bridge visible next to the building in the rendering seems to really show how the design does not seem to fit into the area.

 

they said the same thing about stonebridge!  I think having it rise slightly above the shoreway is cool!  Office workers looking out onto the shoreway and drivers, ships, leisure boats going past and looking in.

 

Think outside the box

 

I do like the height and the way it rises over the Shoreway, and I don't mind the overall design.  I just don't like the design combined with the location.

 

It's the first phase of a rendering.  Come on folks, sheesh!

 

Actually its not the first phase of a rendering (and if you were going to press for changes you wouldnt wait any later). 

I can assure you the design isnt going to change much or get any better than that. 

 

Sorry typo.  First phase of the project! Of course it wont change much but seeing something on paper/computer is vastly different than seeing it in real life.

 

As The Mayor says...

Did you hear that w28th, it might turn out to be something great and unique after all. :lol:

Thus my earlier comment.  Like it or not, this is what its going to look like.

It does look like they are going with the "white thingy" on the roof, which I think is better than what they showed on Ch. 5 last week. 

 

Designs for Flats office building and hotel get approval from Cleveland review board

By Michelle Jarboe, The Plain Dealer January 14, 2010, 1:30PM

 

CLEVELAND -- A city review board approved designs today for the office building and hotel planned for the Flats East Bank, making way for the developers to obtain building permits for the first phase of the project.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2010/01/designs_for_flats_office_build.html

I'm glad this project is going forward, but still have a lot of reservations.  Phase I just doesn't seem big enough to support any businesses that may open as part of the project.  Moreover, Ernst & Young and Tucker's move is going to leave quite a void in the Central Business District, particularly coming on top of all the NatCity layoffs.  (I work in the NatCity Tower at 9th and Euclid, and trust me, there isn't much of a wait for an elevator in the morning anymore).  Here's hoping Phase II happens sooner rather than later.  :-)

There's 3 surface parking lots in the site plan in the cleveland.com article  :x

I really dont see the need for these 3 lots to go along with the 3 floors of parking attached to the building.

There's 3 surface parking lots in the site plan in the cleveland.com article  :x

I really dont see the need for these 3 lots to go along with the 3 floors of parking attached to the building.

 

Someone have an outside interest in a near-by parking lot?  ;)

Welcome, Trav.  Know something we don't know?

Hopefully those surface lots will be built on ASAP.

 

And, in regards to people complaining about this design for the flats, the same could definitely be said about Pinnacle Condominiums. That building definitely sticks out like a sore thumb, but I still think it's a beautiful building that strangely fits the location well.

 

By the way, I know the Cuyahoga is a lot cleaner than in the past but is there really much interest to have a beach on the river?

the beach seems a little silly to me.  It's not as if there is any access to the water there.  They could build a beach on Public Square and it would make no more or less sense.

I'm glad this project is going forward, but still have a lot of reservations. Phase I just doesn't seem big enough to support any businesses that may open as part of the project. Moreover, Ernst & Young and Tucker's move is going to leave quite a void in the Central Business District, particularly coming on top of all the NatCity layoffs. (I work in the NatCity Tower at 9th and Euclid, and trust me, there isn't much of a wait for an elevator in the morning anymore). Here's hoping Phase II happens sooner rather than later.   :-)

 

Much my concern as well as I posted above some posts back...... I hope there are those who will want to occupy the vacancies this will leave behind, otherwise we are simply playing musical chairs with downtown businesses here, and the other areas will look ghostly.

 

Someone above asked: "By the way, I know the Cuyahoga is a lot cleaner than in the past but is there really much interest to have a beach on the river?"   

 

Having a beach on the river bank can actually project a lot of positives. It will demonstrate the attempt to turn around the health of the river...and will also demonstrate a total turn around in the mentalities that used to think the best use for the river was to channel away industrial waste. The advantage of such is image polishing--and that will go a long way. We know how far the negative image has taken us and how long it has lasted.

 

Finally, although the river has cleaned up from a lot of the industrial contaminants of the past, much are still having their effects----and its ongoing health is just that, an ongoing job---and we cannot afford to sit on our laurels---as it has many new threats that have taken the place of the old ones. Much less visably dramatic to the untrained eye, but they are there and can be equally problematic. Like good health/diet and exercise are a lifestyle change, and not a fad that we do once and then quit and pat ourselves on the back.......so is stewardship for this river and shoreline.

 

Someone above asked: "By the way, I know the Cuyahoga is a lot cleaner than in the past but is there really much interest to have a beach on the river?"   

 

Having a beach on the river bank can actually project a lot of positives. It will demonstrate the attempt to turn around the health of the river...and will also demonstrate a total turn around in the mentalities that used to think the best use for the river was to channel away industrial waste. The advantage of such is image polishing--and that will go a long way. We know how far the negative image has taken us and how long it has lasted.

 

Finally, although the river has cleaned up from a lot of the industrial contaminants of the past, much are still having their effects----and its ongoing health is just that, an ongoing job---and we cannot afford to sit on our laurels---as it has many new threats that have taken the place of the old ones. Much less visably dramatic to the untrained eye, but they are there and can be equally problematic. Like good health/diet and exercise are a lifestyle change, and not a fad that we do once and then quit and pat ourselves on the back.......so is stewardship for this river and shoreline.

 

I agree and although the "beach" is temporary, this could be a selling plus/point for future home owners and a way to show that the city is becoming more progressive.

 

Lets hope there is some programing for the flats.

Am I the only one that thinks that the hotel portion looks like an Aloft? I'd take it  ;D

 

 

Wow, those are similar.  I like the way that that Aloft looks better than the rendering we're being shown for the FEB, though.  What city is that in?

That image is from the National Harbor development (DC area).

the beach seems a little silly to me. It's not as if there is any access to the water there. They could build a beach on Public Square and it would make no more or less sense.

 

Yup.  But it's just a placeholder, no?

Wow, just doing a google image search on "aloft" shows just how iconic that little roof canopy thing is!  If the FEB hotel isn't one, it sure is inspired by them.

 

http://images.google.com/images?q=aloft&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi

 

That image is from the National Harbor development (DC area).

 

Thanks.

 

the beach seems a little silly to me. It's not as if there is any access to the water there. They could build a beach on Public Square and it would make no more or less sense.

 

Yup. But it's just a placeholder, no?

 

I think that's the plan.  It's just an odd one, imo.

This sentence from the PD article posted yesterday leads me to believe this may be the brand they've designed the hotel around...

 

"Developers have not announced the hotel brand, but they said today that the building is being designed for a specific occupant."

 

They're nice hotels...I've stayed at the Uptown Charlotte location a few times. They're trendy but still reasonably priced. Like the baby brother of the W.

Am I the only one that thinks that the hotel portion looks like an Aloft? I'd take it  ;D

 

 

 

Lets hope not.  I'm a huge starwood fan, but the aloft brand is lacking.

I think the beach is a great idea, and it should NOT be temporary.  If this area is to be child/family friendly at all (perhaps for young couples with first child or empty-nesters/grandparents having grandchildren visit), add a splash park to the beach area.

 

On the flip side, I think a beach will draw some bikini-clad 20 somethings (sorry if insensitive, but is the truth).

Any other examples of beaches being built up against bulkheads?  Seems like it would be more of a sandbox than a beach.

Anyone ever been to Bayfront Park in Miami? They have an 'urban beach'...obviously the palm trees and Biscayne Bay are a little different than the Flats  ;D , but I think it works there and don't see why it can't in Cleveland

 

(this photo isn't mine...it's from this url: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=477774&page=138)

^  I get it, you're kidding... right?

Anyone ever been to Bayfront Park in Miami? They have an 'urban beach'...obviously the palm trees and Biscayne Bay are a little different than the Flats  ;D , but I think it works there and don't see why it can't in Cleveland

 

(this photo isn't mine...it's from this url: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=477774&page=138)

 

Yes....and God knows I wouldn't want the homeless camps or gun fights!

No one is going to swim in the River...so sand is really pointless.  You're better off just making it grass or putting in dock slips.  People already lay out on that grassy area by Settler's Landing. 

 

But let's be 100% clear...NO ONE is going to go to a "beach" on the Industrial Cuyahoga River...certainly not any woman, which means no guys will be ther either.

 

Sit out by the water in a park/bar/restaurant?  Absolutely.  Beach?  No.

I think folks are being too harsh about the beach.  Provided its sand is replenished very year (or month or whatever), sand can be a pleasant open space surface for lounging, playing, volleyball, whatever.  Certainly more comfortable to lie down on than pavers.  If it flops, so what?  We already have more unused riverfront than we know what to do with.

No one is going to swim in the River...so sand is really pointless.

 

speak for yourself.

No one is going to swim in the River...so sand is really pointless.  You're better off just making it grass or putting in dock slips.  People already lay out on that grassy area by Settler's Landing. 

 

But let's be 100% clear...NO ONE is going to go to a "beach" on the Industrial Cuyahoga River...certainly not any woman, which means no guys will be ther either.

 

Sit out by the water in a park/bar/restaurant?  Absolutely.  Beach?  No.

 

A "beach" doesn't mean that there has to be swimming.  It's all about the programming. There were several "beaches" in NYC (among other cities) this past summer that had "beach" activities/programming sans water sports.

 

So to say that this is pointless, shows why young people are considered non progressive in Cleveland.

 

Having this beach and settlers landing, and adding programming to both will be an added benefit to current resident and retail and be huge selling point for potential residents, hotel guest and the "hip, young" and "progressive and upwardly mobile" targetted market, which is what this development is aimed!

 

I swear if I had the money I would start my own branding firm and give Cleveland a good make over.  starting with its supposed "young, hip and urban"!  ::) ::)

 

Why can't you all look at the positives of any project instead of always finding the negatives?? 

 

You have to wonder why advertisors/sponsors don't use Cleveland as a "focus" city.  Everything is always a fuckin complaint!

If you're suggesting re-creating Whiskey Island in the Flats (which has sand volleyball courts) and are calling that a "beach" then OK.  But that's not what I think of when I think "beach"...that's a park with sand volleyball courts - which is what I mentioned above that would be good thing...so stop getting your panties in a wad about me "complaining".

No one is going to swim in the River...so sand is really pointless.

 

speak for yourself.

 

I had to talk some people out of seeing if they could swim across the river from Settler's Landing to Nautica after the opening Browns game this year...so I guess if that was you, then OK.

 

If you're suggesting re-creating Whiskey Island in the Flats (which has sand volleyball courts) and are calling that a "beach" then OK.  But that's not what I think of when I think "beach"...that's a park with sand volleyball courts - which is what I mentioned above that would be good thing...so stop getting your panties in a wad about me "complaining".

 

Key words, "But that's not what I think of when I think "beach".  First of all who says it has to be a traditional beach??    Can you for once think outside the box?

 

The "beaches" in NYC were packed with people who just wanted to go to a "beach" but not travel to one.  The "beach" in Queens was packed.  The floating beach 145 was a huge success.  The "beach" on Gov. Island was a massive hit.

 

There was all sorts of programming for people of all ages.  DJ's, specific parties, etc.

 

For someone who lives on the Eastbank, it would be nice just to sit out and watch boats go buy. 

 

Right now, south of the Shoreway there is still a retail infrastructure.  Now that this a go, you can best believe that those place have a bullet on for development or investment.

 

Those business and residents gain a tangleable unique item in their neighborhood, making the beach itself a destination within a destination!

Again, this isn't a natural riverfront nor can it be.  It's walled off with steel.  There's no need to replace sand because the water doesn't touch the land here.  The end of the Cuyahoga is primarily a shipping channel.  We can't have it all, and there's no sense in having a halfass version of something more appropriate for Miami when we can focus on what's apporpriate for our own climate.  Think about the #1 gripe about the stadium location-- prime land rendered usable 8 times a year.  You put a beach here and you just threw out nine months of usefulness.

Again, this isn't a natural riverfront nor can it be.  It's walled off with steel.  There's no need to replace sand because the water doesn't touch the land here.  The end of the Cuyahoga is primarily a shipping channel.  We can't have it all, and there's no sense in having a halfass version of something more appropriate for Miami when we can focus on what's apporpriate for our own climate.  Think about the #1 gripe about the stadium location-- prime land rendered usable 8 times a year.  You put a beach here and you just threw out nine months of usefulness.

It's temporary and a great use of the space in the interim.

 

And if they can do it in Chicago, Toronto, NYC, and Phily why cant this be done in Cleveland?

 

AND...since you and other will most likely have a list of "why nots" I'm sure people can list "why it can be succesfully" implemented.

If you're suggesting re-creating Whiskey Island in the Flats (which has sand volleyball courts) and are calling that a "beach" then OK. But that's not what I think of when I think "beach"...that's a park with sand volleyball courts - which is what I mentioned above that would be good thing...so stop getting your panties in a wad about me "complaining".

 

Key words, "But that's not what I think of when I think "beach". First of all who says it has to be a traditional beach?? Can you for once think outside the box?

 

The "beaches" in NYC were packed with people who just wanted to go to a "beach" but not travel to one. The "beach" in Queens was packed. The floating beach 145 was a huge success. The "beach" on Gov. Island was a massive hit.

 

There was all sorts of programming for people of all ages. DJ's, specific parties, etc.

 

For someone who lives on the Eastbank, it would be nice just to sit out and watch boats go buy.

 

Right now, south of the Shoreway there is still a retail infrastructure. Now that this a go, you can best believe that those place have a bullet on for development or investment.

 

Those business and residents gain a tangleable unique item in their neighborhood, making the beach itself a destination within a destination!

 

Umm, it's not about thinking outside the box there jerky.  I'm not going to say "let's build some parking spaces on the river for our vehicles" if I am referring to somewhere that you can tie up your boat.  I'm going to call it something using jargon that is common in the English language so that people know what I am talking about.  Building a "Park with Beach activities" is different than building a "Beach".

Again, this isn't a natural riverfront nor can it be.  It's walled off with steel.  There's no need to replace sand because the water doesn't touch the land here.  The end of the Cuyahoga is primarily a shipping channel.  We can't have it all, and there's no sense in having a halfass version of something more appropriate for Miami when we can focus on what's apporpriate for our own climate.  Think about the #1 gripe about the stadium location-- prime land rendered usable 8 times a year.  You put a beach here and you just threw out nine months of usefulness.

It's temporary and a great use of the space in the interim.

 

And if they can do it in Chicago, Toronto, NYC, and Phily why cant this be done in Cleveland?

 

AND...since you and other will most likely have a list of "why nots" I'm sure people can list "why it can be succesfully" implemented.

 

They do do it in Cleveland and the surrounding area.  Edgewater, Euclid Beach, Huntington, Mentor Headlands.  I am not saying I am not for this, but DJ's and parties and festivals never seem to be flocking to our local beaches.

If you're suggesting re-creating Whiskey Island in the Flats (which has sand volleyball courts) and are calling that a "beach" then OK.  But that's not what I think of when I think "beach"...that's a park with sand volleyball courts - which is what I mentioned above that would be good thing...so stop getting your panties in a wad about me "complaining".

 

Key words, "But that's not what I think of when I think "beach".  First of all who says it has to be a traditional beach??    Can you for once think outside the box?

 

The "beaches" in NYC were packed with people who just wanted to go to a "beach" but not travel to one.  The "beach" in Queens was packed.  The floating beach 145 was a huge success.  The "beach" on Gov. Island was a massive hit.

 

There was all sorts of programming for people of all ages.  DJ's, specific parties, etc.

 

For someone who lives on the Eastbank, it would be nice just to sit out and watch boats go buy. 

 

Right now, south of the Shoreway there is still a retail infrastructure.  Now that this a go, you can best believe that those place have a bullet on for development or investment.

 

Those business and residents gain a tangleable unique item in their neighborhood, making the beach itself a destination within a destination!

 

Umm, it's not about thinking outside the box there jerky.  I'm not going to say "let's build some parking spaces on the river for our vehicles" if I am referring to somewhere that you can tie up your boat.  I'm going to call it something using jargon that is common in the English language so that people know what I am talking about.  Building a "Park with Beach activities" is different than building a "Beach".

 

First, slow you're roll with the name calling. Don't disrespect me!

 

Secondly, the "beach" moniker is now a common name for attractions like this.  Since the bulkhead is there, who says you cannot tie up a boat or that the developers haven't already thought of that???

Again, this isn't a natural riverfront nor can it be. It's walled off with steel. There's no need to replace sand because the water doesn't touch the land here. The end of the Cuyahoga is primarily a shipping channel. We can't have it all, and there's no sense in having a halfass version of something more appropriate for Miami when we can focus on what's apporpriate for our own climate. Think about the #1 gripe about the stadium location-- prime land rendered usable 8 times a year. You put a beach here and you just threw out nine months of usefulness.

It's temporary and a great use of the space in the interim.

 

And if they can do it in Chicago, Toronto, NYC, and Phily why cant this be done in Cleveland?

 

If it's temporary it's as good as any other use for empty land.  But I do hope we eventually move forward with re-urbanizing the flats.  And I could be wrong, but I doubt these other cities have beaches right up on their shipping channels.  I mean, you're specifically not supposed to be in the water here.  Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a beach?  Cleveland has well-located beaches that tons of people enjoy.  But this is a... counterintuitive... location for one.

I actually agree with MTS here. 

A small (and fake) beach amongst the grass, whats the problem?  Is it not temporary?

  If its succesful hopefully it would become permanant somewhere. 

A beach can just be about the sand.  Look at the picture upthread with the wooden lounge chairs... (or why the childrens museum has ##tons of sand in it right now, and has had the highest attendance ever.

People like to be able to take their shoes off and feel sand, and this is an awesome vantage point for the bridges/ships etc. 

 

327, why are you comparing it to the stadium?  Its either going to be sand or grass....  Youll still have the option of being on grass.