Here are some new ones from this site (which was eerily quiet today at 1:30pm)...

 

...if you ask me, I think that ANYTHING would beat how cruddy this looked...so, should the "bunker" be ugly, I still don't think it could be as nasty as this (but then again, I am not living here)

Well, it looked nicer before they took a demo rig to it!  I actually think that building had a lot of potential, and am sad to see it go.  I wish they would have demo'ed the eastern portion, if anything.

it almost looks like work has completey stopped since the day they almost destroyed the townhomes... hmmmmm....

They're still saving some of it, right?

The building they are currently demoing gets completely demolished.  If you look at that top picture where ever you see the crappy 5th floor add on gets demolished.  The other 2 buildings are actually occupied.  They will just get refaced to match whatever it is they do where this building stood.  And I guess according to CBRE we have no idea what that will look like yet because the rendering has been updated and no one has seen it.

When I was talking to the site manager on the phone, he said the outside of the new rendering was completely glass as opposed to the old brick sketch.  He did mumble something about that rendering still getting approved or something of that sort, so I guess maybe that's why CBRE hasn't posted a new drawing yet.

Pics from today ... last ones from the top of the Firestone garage, next to the Avenue's main building.

 

 

Oh, and some video of it, too, on my blog ...

 

http://fluidpowertalk.blogspot.com/2008/04/talk-about-power-of-hydraulics.html

Nice work.  By the way, I noticed a Parker video on your blog - My boyfriend (with whom I am buying the townhome) is a design engineer at the Parker Gas Turbine Fuel Systems Division up in Mentor.  You guys should chat about MechE stuff (I am a Chemist, so I just nod and smile when it comes to such things, lol).

Soooo, they posted a new picture of the complex on the CBRE page http://www.cbre.com/USA/US/OH/Cleveland/property/clevelandtechcenter.htm?pageid=0

 

It looks kinda short, though (in terms of how many blocks it takes up)...  Maybe that's just the new facade for the existing buildings, with the design for the new one later to come?

Regardless of the aesthetic deficiencies of the existing structure (which I could argue is better than what is proposed on that link), I don't see why tearing down a 5-story warehouse with 15' ceilings for a "temporary" surface lot, is seen as positive news.

Jeebus that is ugly!

Re the design: eh, whatever.

UGH. They've almost made ZERO aesthetic improvement to that structure by way of that image...I mean, except for the fact that it'll be newer.  :|  ...it literally, though, looks like they could've renovated the existing structure.

 

*shaking head*

 

...whatever, "progress is progress" huh?

Well, if it is occupied, it will be a vast improvement.  Let's not lose site of that.

I think if it's at all possible, the new design of this building quite possibly looks worse than the old version.  And I agree with west 28th that I'm not quite sure that turning this into a parking lot, however temporary, is any sort of improvement over leaving the existing structure up. My only guess is that they feel by "moving forward" and showing some activity it may be easier to attract tennants.  That being said... I'm a little shocked at everyone's affection of this building.  You will find few people more in favor of historic preservation than me, this city still bears the scars of decades of needless demolition.  But this building? Really?  It's an old warehouse.  It has little historical value.  Other than some nice cement pediments over the doorway it had little that was asthetically pleasing about it.  It had that awful cinder block 5th floor addition.  And most importantly it looks from the demolition pictures to be completely functionally obsolete.  There are giant columns about every 15-20 feet!  How is one supposed to make decent contiguous office space out of that.  Not to mention it appears the HVAC is running all over the place and straight out where the original windows were.  It would cost a fortune to rehab this building and make it ready for the type of users they are trying to attract.  Sometimes I think people go a tad over the top on "saving" buildings, that there really aren't many good arguments for saving.  I mean sometimes you have to realize you just can't polish a turd. (And remember I am ACTIVELY against demolition of HISTORIC properties).

I couldn't care less about the historic aesthetics of the building, I just don't want to see yet another surface lot.

I couldn't care less about the historic aesthetics of the building, I just don't want to see yet another surface lot.

 

I agree, however, with Mayor McCleveland's assessment it might be necessary in the interim

Just some thoughts from a townhome purchaser....  When someone goes to the townhome site, the first thing they notice is the huge ugly brick monstrosity behind the townhomes, not the townhomes themselves.  I know I did just that, and it's a HUGE turn-off for prospective buyers.  When I sent my mom the first batch of pictures, the first thing she asked was what was back there.  The part of the building currently being torn down was obviously vacant to anyone who went by (by the way, does anyone know when that part of the building was last occupied?  Just curious).  For us, it ultimately came down to "Well, our unit doesn't look at it, so I guess we'll deal".  A lot of people in this city can't look past things like that, and I think that has probably hurt townhome sales.

 

Now, with respect to demolition vs. preservation - I am also all for historic preservation when appropriate, but McCleveland is right - that building is a mess, and renovation would take years, probably with a couple of years of no visible improvement.  We all know that Tower City's pretty much looked the same from afar since they started the work 3 years ago, and if people don't know how much work is being done, they wonder why it's taking soooooo long.  So think of the Cleveland Technology Center project from the view of the Avenue District and from prospective Telecom tenants - Would you rather have an obviously vacant building sitting there while its appearance slowly improves (and maybe the only way you know it's improving is if you keep up with online blogs like this, which most people don't), or would you rather demo (which is quite obvious progress) and wait to build until a tenant is secured?  I think the demo is the better choice to attract townhome residents and Telecom tenants right now. 

 

I do agree that the new sketches aren't the most attractive thing in the world, but at least there are windows!  And another random thought - I also think it would help attract residents and Telecom tenants if they put signs up saying what the huge building is supposed to be....  Just a thought.

And another random thought - I also think it would help attract residents and Telecom tenants if they put signs up saying what the huge building is supposed to be....  Just a thought.

 

More than a thought.  I remember bringing up this idea a few years ago when Lou Frangos (USA Parking) was convincing the Design Review Board to allow him to demolish the Petersen Nut Building (and another adjacent to Erie Street Cemetery) to build some housing (of course it would be a parking lot for the first two years......and still is today....)  I asked the committee members why there was no provision to mandate that developers/the city post some sort of sign detailing the future use of the site.  While a few design review members thought it was a good idea, it will take, at minimum, some repeat visits to Design Review meetings, to get something like this accomplished. 

I'd rather see a secured abandoned building than a surface lot any day of the week.

I don't personally think the building looked that bad, and I disagree that it wasn't an attractive building worthy of saving.  With a well done rehab, it could have been as nice as any of the warehouse renovations that we've seen elsewhere in the city.

I'll be one of the first people to say that parking lots are ugly and cold.  But that old abandoned building looked horrible.  After they renovate the existing portion it will be providing 1) jobs to Clevelanders, 2) increased taxes to the city/county/state, and 3) revenue to the building's owner.  The owner really has only a few choices.  He could have ripped the entire thing down and made it all a parking lot, which would definitely make the owner a steady stream of cash. Or he could have just let it remain as an abandoned, decaying building in the midst of the cool new Avenue District neighborhood.  But, luckily for Cleveland, he has decided to turn it into a new/rehabilitated facility housing telecom companies.  It's not perfect, but maybe it's the only way the owner can make money (other than using it as parking).

I don't personally think the building looked that bad, and I disagree that it wasn't an attractive building worthy of saving.  With a well done rehab, it could have been as nice as any of the warehouse renovations that we've seen elsewhere in the city.

 

You are assuming that it made financial sense to save.  My guess is it was a mess, and was financially prohibitive to retrofit.  Pair that with the fact that it has little historical value and isn't particuarly special... and boom, the wrecking ball hits.

Perhaps, perhaps not.  I don't know what the cost or condition was one way or the other.  It's far from obvious from where we stand that rehab would have been cost prohibitive.  I do outright disagree with your last two statements.  This building had no more or less historical value or "specialness" than other warehouses that have seen renovations elsewhere in the city.  Is it not a part of our late 19th/early 20th century industrial heritage?

Almost finished....  Well, with the demo part I mean.  I guess we'll see what happens next!

So .. I'm confused. Does this building take up an entire city block currently? Now they're knocking it down, and then building a new center on half of the block and leaving the rest a surface lot?

Pre-Demolition, there was a surface lot dead west of here that took up about 1 block... with the building under demo stretching aproximately another block.  Now they are demoing the building and for the time being it will now be about 2 blocks of surface parking as opposed to one.  When the new building goes up there will be no surface parking.

There are 4 buildings that span Rockwell Ave. from E. 13th to E. 17th. that are all connected and were built over several different years.  Building 1 (which runs from E. 13th to almost E. 15th) is being demolished, and a new building will be built in its place.  The rumor on the street though is that if the company who leases out the building (CBRE) hasn't secured a major tenant yet, they will wait to build the new building until that has been accomplished, and the site will become a temporary surface lot.  Additionally, the facade of the other buildings will be somehow modified to match the new building.  Other than that, the details and timeline of the project are pretty shady.

 

EDIT:  Heh, McCleveland, you beat me to it!

Perhaps, perhaps not.  I don't know what the cost or condition was one way or the other.  It's far from obvious from where we stand that rehab would have been cost prohibitive.  I do outright disagree with your last two statements.  This building had no more or less historical value or "specialness" than other warehouses that have seen renovations elsewhere in the city.  Is it not a part of our late 19th/early 20th century industrial heritage?

 

By the way X we can agree to disagree and all, but from spending the vast majority of my professional life in the office building market (mainly rehabs, and typically coming on site at gutted conditions), I can take one glance at the demo photos and know that it would cost substantially more to get this building the way they want it, than to tear it down and start over... just sayin.  Functionally obsolete and financially prohibitive are 2 terms that many people don't want to hear when it comes to development, but are very real.

Functionally obsolete and financially prohibitive are 2 terms that many people don't want to hear when it comes to development, but are very real.

 

Agreed, agreed, agreed.

There are 4 buildings that span Rockwell Ave. from E. 13th to E. 17th. that are all connected and were built over several different years.  Building 1 (which runs from E. 13th to almost E. 15th) is being demolished, and a new building will be built in its place.  The rumor on the street though is that if the company who leases out the building (CBRE) hasn't secured a major tenant yet, they will wait to build the new building until that has been accomplished, and the site will become a temporary surface lot.  Additionally, the facade of the other buildings will be somehow modified to match the new building.  Other than that, the details and timeline of the project are pretty shady.

 

EDIT:  Heh, McCleveland, you beat me to it!

 

Thanks, McCleveland and DocBroc!

Thanks to you all for the updates on this project...admittedly, this lovely "warm" Cleveland Spring has kept my wanderings over to this site to a minimum (that and the erratic demolition habits of the workers - can't they just wait 'til noon everyday to allow we curious folks the chance to see the destruction!?)  LOL!  :)

When we went for our townhome electrical walk-through a few weeks ago, we had to wait for a bit for the electricians to finish-up with our neighbors, so we watched them demo for a bit.  I have to admit, I enjoyed that more than the electrical walk, lol.  Since I was down taking avenue pics last night, I snapped one of the demo - I guess I'll go ahead and post it :).  Not much left!  Let's hope they make quick work of covering up that now exposed wall cause it's kinda ugly.

When we went for our townhome electrical walk-through a few weeks ago, we had to wait for a bit for the electricians to finish-up with our neighbors, so we watched them demo for a bit.  I have to admit, I enjoyed that more than the electrical walk, lol.  Since I was down taking avenue pics last night, I snapped one of the demo - I guess I'll go ahead and post it :).  Not much left!  Let's hope they make quick work of covering up that now exposed wall cause it's kinda ugly.

 

...you're right Doc - this building, which appears to have no more demo-work to be done, looks HIDEOUS in it's awkward, mid-stage appearance now.

 

:?

 

Thanks for the pics

Still no progress on the new facade

 

 

They still have a huge pile of rubble that needs to go first as of last Friday.  Work seems to have stalled a bit - but it's possible that's just my imagination.

Latest word on what's up - mostly good news I guess (besides the temporary parking lot):

http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2008/06/technology_center_clears_way_f.html

Thanks docta.. there are new renderings up there now, too..

From the developer speak on this one, I feel like we are ways off in seeing that surface lot turn into a new building.

Yeah..... but I was mostly happy to hear that 1. They are gonna start work on the new facade soon and 2. They recognize the importance of the Avenue District and may potentially adjust their initial plans as a result.

^ I hope they adjust!

Yeah, I consider that good news, too.  Hopefully the follow through will be there.

Matrix Realty Group razed Rockwell Avenue building; putting up parking lot

 

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Shaheen Samavati

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Downtown will get one more surface parking lot, at least until a New York investment firm can find an anchor tenant for its proposed new building on the Rockwell Avenue site.

 

Matrix Realty Group is wrapping up demolition on one of four adjoining buildings that make up the Cleveland Technology Center, which it purchased in late 2005.

 

More at http://www.cleveland.com/business/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/business-6/1213259442300500.xml&coll=2

"Work on new facades for two of the buildings will begin within 60 days."

 

That's what I like to hear!

Well, there's one pile of rubble left.  I was amused watching the one guy on the worksite around 6pm yesterday teetering on the edge of the pile. 

 

MTS - I zoomed in as far as I could, but I still can't tell if the guy is cute or not ;).

LMAO!!!  Hey, he's got a job.

Does anyone "in the know" know why they seemed to have stopped work about a month ago?  I'm getting tired of looking at big piles of gravel  :x

The City Planning Commission might be able to tell you something (216) 664-2210.  Or maybe Building & Housing Dept.  It looks like crap.

Skip them and go straight to Councilman Cimperman. Tell them I told you to call.