great to see how close that transit center is to becoming reality.  I think it's a very big piece to the puzzle around University of Cleveland.

great to see how close that transit center is to becoming reality.  I think it's a very big piece to the puzzle around University of Cleveland.

 

LMAO!

I love that name - University of Cleveland.  It has a more professional feel than CSU and hey, sometimes comestic changes count

I agree.  It's a perfect time for a rebranding, right as the campus is being remade.

Too bad they don't use that old logo, "The city is our Classroom."

I decided a few days ago that I'm officially only using the name University of Cleveland from now on.

I decided a few days ago that I'm officially only using the name University of Cleveland from now on.

 

Well you are "the Mayor"!

i really like that large red crane that is on cleveland state. any pics from that area?

Sorry, no pics, but the College of Education has some steel off the ground!

I decided a few days ago that I'm officially only using the name University of Cleveland from now on.

I believe both Cincinnati and Memphis dropped State several years ago for similar reasons.  Has it worked for them?

i would believe that the public perception of University of Cincinnati and University of Memphis are both significantly higher than that of the future University of Cleveland.  It currently has the reputation of a glorified community college commuter school with some nice graduate programs, and I think the "state" helps enforce that image.  Time for a change.

^I completely agree.  Perception is a huge deal when it comes to attracting good students to your university.  Couple the name change with the new student housing going in along with all the other changes on campus and the new UCleve could turn into a great school and do wonders for downtown Cleveland.

^To be continued on the other CSU (non-project related) thread...

:clap:

Do we have a timeframe for which this rooftop garden project might get off the ground? 

 

Any other information or sites?

As it says on the flier. Its on the rec center (see graphic) and everything else is student driven. You should go to the  event in order to find out more information. If you do, please pass it on to us. (That goes for anyone who might be going.)

 

When the Rec Center was being built, the green roof was abandoned due to Value Engineering. It needed, at the time, an additional $30,000 to make it happen. The University need to make cuts in its capital budget and that was one of many things taken out. They figured someone eventually would pony up the relatively small amount to have their name placed on said roof.

I really have to applaud CSU for all of its accomplishments and  investments in downtown Cleveland.  It's very easy for Boston residents to be proud of BU and Chicago residents to be proud of University of Chicago because these schools have always excelled... but to see the quiet rise of CSU is something that really does not occur with most schools, and whenever I'm down about Cleveland (face it, it's been a brutal month here), I think of this fine university and give it the ULTIMATE kudos.  They've accomplished so much and did so quietly.  I really can't applaud it enough, and things are only improving there.

Hopefully our next President will be as progressive and forward thinking as the current one.

Hopefully our next President will be as progressive and forward thinking as the current one.

 

If not even more so. Any word on who the next candidate(s) is/are?

Hopefully our next President will be as progressive and forward thinking as the current one.

 

Agreed, upward and onward..

Dear  Musky

 

Please join us for light beverages and appetizers on November 19th from 6:30 to 8:30 pm at the CSU Recreation Center for our "Rasing the Roof" event.

 

This event is to raise funds and awareness for the student driven Roof Top Garden Project on top of the Recreation Center.  Members and Non-Members are welcome and all who donate towards the project will be eligible to win a Free One Year Membership to the Recreation Center.

 

Attendees can view renderings of the finished product, listen to presentations on the benefits of a "Green Roof", and see sample plots of the vegetation.

 

The LEED-certified Recreation Center was built with the intention of having a 7,000 square foot Green Roof, and the efforts of a few dedicated students are making it happen.  You can learn more about the project at http://www.csuohio.edu/sciences/news_rooftop.html.

 

Thank you for your support.

 

Greg Ross

Director

And I made an error. The cost is $300,000, not $30,000.

My bad.

'The Politician-a toy' sculpture is to be moved to E18th and Chester by October

 

http://www.wcpn.org/index.php/WCPN/news/12995/

 

http://www.the-politician-moveon.org/

 

In case anyone is curious they've got this 'thing' installed. I saw it this morning (sorry, no pictures) and I'm glad to see it set back from the road more than I had imagined. It doesn't look so bad that way. In fact I'm sure its been there for weeks with me riding by it on the bus everyday and not noticing it. (Actually maybe I should say you're welcome, no pictures.)

More dorm building pics from the Design Review Agenda: (http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2008/112108/index.php)

Slightly better than the first go-round, but still they leave a lot to be desired. There is no place for siding (vinyl, hardiboard, or whatever) in downtown. I'm glad that there is going to be more housing in CSU, but the design is bad. Looks like they added an arch to the housing bridge over the new street. This is better, but I still think that they shouldn't have this bridge element.

I love the Gateway on Propect. And its good to see the site plan still includes the proposed extension to Carnegie, adjacent to the Walker Weeks Building.

Slightly better than the first go-round, but still they leave a lot to be desired. There is no place for siding (vinyl, hardiboard, or whatever) in downtown. I'm glad that there is going to be more housing in CSU, but the design is bad. Looks like they added an arch to the housing bridge over the new street. This is better, but I still think that they shouldn't have this bridge element.

 

I agree! I'm not impressed with this at all! Its only slightly above Viking Hall! lol

Spot on 327.  This really looks like a Kent State University dorm retread.  I smell Volpe's hand in this no?

Spot on 327. This really looks like a Kent State University dorm retread. I smell Volpe's hand in this no?

 

That wasn't me, it was the other number guy.  I agree though.  Except about the bridge, I kinda like that.

Spot on 327. This really looks like a Kent State University dorm retread. I smell Volpe's hand in this no?

 

Nope. City Architecture had nothing to do with this project. Different developer

If nothing else, I do like the siting of the project.  The siding however (whatever it's made of)... needs. to. be. stopped.

Agreed. Wish I could be at the Planning Commission meeting today.

This siding craze does need to end.  Is it like RTA, is there somebody high up in zoning who just hates brick and wants to make sure we get as little as possible?

I'm frustrated by a lot of Cleveland architecture firms' inability to think originally. I feel like this design is something that we've seen over and over and over again, in slightly tweaked/adjusted forms. It's like they all copy off of one another, and I don't understand why we don't see more original designs from Cleveland firms.

I don't believe this is a Cleveland Firm.

 

Isn't this supposed to break ground in January?

I don't believe this is a Cleveland Firm.

 

Isn't this supposed to break ground in January?

 

Yeah, after I posted that I wondered if my comments were accurate.

 

Still, the fact remains. Whoever designed this wasn't very original.

I see that those site plans include a cap over the Innerbelt at Carnegie, as well as a new E. 27th St. between Prospect and Carnegie.

I'm frustrated by a lot of Cleveland architecture firms' inability to think originally. I feel like this design is something that we've seen over and over and over again, in slightly tweaked/adjusted forms. It's like they all copy off of one another, and I don't understand why we don't see more original designs from Cleveland firms.

 

Yeah.  I'm not even looking for original anymore, just good.  Siding isn't the only thing wrong with this rendering, it's also the plasticy-looking grey panels and the little bitty windows.  What it really needs is for one corner to come up at an odd angle for no reason.  These are all unfortuately becoming recognizable local style elements. 

A source told me that the ability to finance this project does not exist right now because it's not available with the university's bonds or with the private sector developers the university was counting on.  It's not being tabled, but "normal" lending will need to resume to start construction.  CSU needs a private partner/developer to do this project because the university is not able to access additional credit (maxed out on bonds from building rec center/ student center/ several parking garages, etc.). 

 

Also, that siding looks dreadful.  Once funding is available, pray for a spike in vinyl and aluminum prices!

Not sure who your "source" is, Pete, but they are giving you a huge pile. First of all, CSU does not and will not not, now or in the foreseeable future, do housing of any kind - alone or with a partner. Fenn tower was done completely by an outside developer. Any future will be done by an outside developer. And not just any run of the mill developer, but those that specialize in campus housing.

 

Those are the facts - now my opinion:

 

We have the largest group of people entering their college years since the baby boomers. This boom, according to the Census Bureau, is anticipated to last another ten years. CSU, under direction from its current president, has positioned itself to be a highly attractive choice for these students. It could be argued that investing in almost any university development is one of the only sure things right now.

 

But that's just me.

and if you were really smart you would open a franchise restaurant (or something of your own) very close to campus if not right on it. just make sure it stays open late and is fairly cheap and relatively good.. or very much one or the other.

 

i.e. taco bell, penn station, jimmy johns, raising canes, etc.

 

;)

First of all, CSU does not and will not not, now or in the foreseeable future, do housing of any kind - alone or with a partner. Fenn tower was done completely by an outside developer. Any future will be done by an outside developer.

 

Musky, I hate to tell something that you probably already know, but CSU still owns Fenn Tower.  The University and developer struck an agreement (i.e. formed a partnership) and the developer turned Fenn into a dormitory.  The University didn't run the construction or operations, but they obviously have had some input into the project.  This past agreement is a similar type of partnership with a private developer that will be/has been formed for future residential construction on campus.  Thus CSU and a private company are partners in building more housing on campus on land that CSU owns, but the developer will build run the project.

 

American Campus Communities (NYSE: ACC) (they may have done Fenn) is one of the largest campus housing companies.  Their stock has lost more than half of its' value in the last 3 months despite only moderate losses.  Encouraging future demographic trends aren't enough to overcome the lack of investor confidence in campus housing, much like the broader market.  In the current economic climate, when you are highly leveraged as real estate companies tend to be, banks are less than eager to lend.  Significantly more capital is required for financing than two years ago.  Schwartz has done a phenomenal job and hopefully his successor will make sure that projects such as this continue but don't expect to hear about secured financing any time soon.  They've got some time before the bookstore moves anyway, so hopefully lenders will resume "normal lending" by then.

Point taken.

I didn't see a better thread for this:  University Lofts on Euclid just west of 21st appears to be moving forward.  They now have signage up with a rendering and equipment is parked on site.  Sorry no camera.  So that's at least 4 projects currently underway at/near CSU:  student center, education building, parking deck on prospect, and this.  The new dorms would make 5 projects, which ain't bad for the current climate. 

There is no place for siding (vinyl, hardiboard, or whatever) in downtown. I'm glad that there is going to be more housing in CSU, but the design is bad.

 

Many folks on this thread seem overly concerned with how the skin of the this building is going to look, rather than considering the function.  So long as it functions well, as Avogadro discusses, I've no issue if the building itself just fades to the background.

@3231  What do you mean by  'there's no place for siding downtown?  There is already siding on Parker Hannifin & Ave Dstrct.

How is hardiboard siding any different than facade brick or stone, or granite for that matter?  They are all natural materials and they are all purely for decoration.  I don't get it. 

I take issue with vinyl solely b/c of the overly toxic manufacturing cycle, though I did have it installed on my home b/c it was 1/10 the price of hardiboard w/ little difference in long term durability/maintenance.

There is no place for siding (vinyl, hardiboard, or whatever) in downtown. I'm glad that there is going to be more housing in CSU, but the design is bad.

 

Many folks on this thread seem overly concerned with how the skin of the this building is going to look, rather than considering the function.  So long as it functions well, as Avogadro discusses, I've no issue if the building itself just fades to the background.

@3231  What do you mean by  'there's no place for siding downtown?  There is already siding on Parker Hannifin & Ave Dstrct.

How is hardiboard siding any different than facade brick or stone, or granite for that matter?  They are all natural materials and they are all purely for decoration.  I don't get it. 

I take issue with vinyl solely b/c of the overly toxic manufacturing cycle, though I did have it installed on my home b/c it was 1/10 the price of hardiboard w/ little difference in long term durability/maintenance.

 

Despite the positives it may offer, vinyl certainly looks cheaper than brick or stone-- even if the brick or stone is fake.  I doubt anyone thinks first of vinyl or this hardiboard stuff when they think of an attractive downtown streetscape.  This project is directly across from the Mather Mansion.  It doesn't seem to be a good fit for what was once millionaires' row, or for what we're trying to develop as our once and future showpiece street. 

 

If one is going for decoration, why would one use blank grey/beige surfaces that resemble cardboard or styrofoam?  Brick and stone have much more textural richness.  I think there's such a wide gulf in the aeesthetics of the two options that I'm disappointed they haven't banned siding for downtown and Euclid Ave.  To me it's a no-brainer.

"If one is going for decoration, why would one use blank grey/beige surfaces that resemble cardboard or styrofoam?  Brick and stone have much more textural richness.

 

Thi$ i$ true, but I'm $ure there'$ a good rea$on they're not opting for brick or $tone.

I don't get out much.  To what extent are these materials used in key areas of other cities?  I've seen non-Cleveland UO members make fun of how much siding we have vs. how little brick.  I don't know if a study has been done or will ever be done, but my sense is that our proportions are way off-kilter in favor of cheap materials.  I don't think that will help us over the next 20 years as we argue that we aren't significantly more poor than other cities.  Not only do we need to keep up with the Joneses, we have ground to make up.  This situation calls for a siding ban-- immediately. 

A siding ban?  I can't think of a less pressing issue for our city to pursue.  I would think that the abandoned homes, empty lots, and vacant storefronts have a much greater impact on people's assessment of Cleveland's poverty level than siding material.  For that matter, what about the gangs of feral youth hanging out on street corners during school hours, or the guys sleeping on sidewalk grates?

A siding ban? I can't think of a less pressing issue for our city to pursue. I would think that the abandoned homes, empty lots, and vacant storefronts have a much greater impact on people's assessment of Cleveland's poverty level than siding material. For that matter, what about the gangs of feral youth hanging out on street corners during school hours, or the guys sleeping on sidewalk grates?

 

I think your point is a valid one, X. Cleveland should be taking care of those things.

 

But in my opinion, higher design standards will attract more people to the city. I think better design standards are hugely important to the future of Cleveland, not just so things look prettier. Good design/architecture makes a city more attractive, gives it a coveted "cool" factor, which attracts more of the younger, hipper crowd, which, in turn, can bring more progressive, ambitious people. That's what Cleveland needs.

 

I'm not advocating the neglect of crime, poverty, etc. But there needs to be a priority placed on higher design standards, too .. and if it's not one excuse, it'll be another that will stop them from being priorities.