Generally speaking, in the historic preservation world it's considered a best practice not to have new buildings or additions imitate historic buildings.  The idea is it should be fairly easy to distinguish the historic buildings from the modern.  That doesn't mean they don't want things to fit into the bulk/massing/setback context, just that they don't want architects to emulate the materials and designs of the original historic structures. 

How do unmatched designs/eras in a single building's facade look after 50-100 years?

Generally speaking, in the historic preservation world it's considered a best practice not to have new buildings or additions imitate historic buildings.  The idea is it should be fairly easy to distinguish the historic buildings from the modern.  That doesn't mean they don't want things to fit into the bulk/massing/setback context, just that they don't want architects to emulate the materials and designs of the original historic structures.

 

San Antonio mandates this when a historic structure has a renovation/addition. The materials are complementary, but do not try and match the old design. I can't think of the term for it but it works quite well there.

Generally speaking, in the historic preservation world it's considered a best practice not to have new buildings or additions imitate historic buildings.  The idea is it should be fairly easy to distinguish the historic buildings from the modern.  That doesn't mean they don't want things to fit into the bulk/massing/setback context, just that they don't want architects to emulate the materials and designs of the original historic structures. 

This is pretty much what landmarks said.

They can't emulate historic materials? There should be more brick facades along Lorain, not less. How did they feel about this atrocity?

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2016/10132016/image/West_47_&_Lorain_08.jpg

The common reading of that idea that an addition to a historic building should be distinct often translates into an addition to a historic building must be modern.  Personally, I think that's a very simplistic and juvenile stance often taken by people who aren't experienced enough or competent enough to design a traditional building.  And don't get me started on "of our time". 

Honestly, the local design review districts, landmarks commission, and planning commission are not consistent in their decision making, so it is very difficult to know how to satisfy them. It seems like what they look for changes every couple of months. A form based code could help a lot in this regard and would prevent those committees and commissions from making so many arbitrary decisions.

On 10/18/2016 at 2:44 PM, andrew0816 said:

Honestly, the local design review districts, landmarks commission, and planning commission are not consistent in their decision making, so it is very difficult to know how to satisfy them. It seems like what they look for changes every couple of months. A form based code could help a lot in this regard and would prevent those committees and commissions from making so many arbitrary decisions.

 

 

Edited July 15, 20204 yr by SixthCity

Honestly, the local design review districts, landmarks commission, and planning commission are not consistent in their decision making, so it is very difficult to know how to satisfy them. It seems like what they look for changes every couple of months. A form based code could help a lot in this regard and would prevent those committees and commissions from making so many arbitrary decisions.

And are way too susceptible to the whims of the local politicians and the developers who donate to their campaigns.  I was told by someone on a local design review board that they were told by their councilman that they were going to vote to support a certain project or they would no longer serve on the board.  Honestly, I think they should just disband them all.  None of them are really keeping the bad designs out, garbage is being built all over the region. 

^You're wrong motorist, they do fight against bad design and occasionally succeed. Clearly you aren't involved in the decision making process.

^You're wrong motorist, they do fight against bad design and occasionally succeed. Clearly you aren't involved in the decision making process.

One only needs to drive through the neighborhoods of Cleveland to see that bad design is making it through the process on a regular basis.  I've been through and around the process enough to know that it's broken.  And in my opinion, not worth fixing.  Just abandon it.  What's the worst that could happen?

OK, let's get back to discussion of Ohio City Developments. 

Press release....

 

Brown Gibbons Lang & Company (BGL) Real Estate Advisors Completes Residential and Commercial Mixed-Use Financing for Snavely Group

 

CLEVELAND, Oct. 24, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- BGL Real Estate Advisors LLC is pleased to announce the successful completion of development financing for The Snavely Group. The multi-faceted capital structure will support the adaptive reuse conversion of the former historic Forest City Savings and Loan building and a state-of-the-art, ground-up development of a high-end market rate apartment complex in Cleveland, Ohio.

 

The $60.0 million financing consisted of: (i) senior construction debt, (ii) subordinated bridge debt, (iii) municipal city and state agency debt, (iv) New Markets Tax Credit Equity, and (v) sponsor equity. Financial institutions including First Merchants Bank, Citizens Bank, First National Bank, Enterprise Community Loan Fund, and Cleveland Development Advisors, as well as multiple city and state agencies including the City of Cleveland, Village Capital, and Cuyahoga County were represented in the transaction. Capital One, Cleveland Finance Fund, and Cleveland Development Advisors were involved with the New Markets Tax Credit Equity structuring and syndication.

 

The condominium-ized structure of the transaction allows for the following development at the intersection of West 25th Street and Detroit Avenue in the Ohio City District of Cleveland. The residential "condo" will be a state-of-the-art, ground-up development that will feature: i) 194 Class-A, market-rate apartment units with premier amenities, ii) 250 enclosed and secured parking spaces (180 spaces will be underground), iii) Second-floor pool and amenity deck, iv) 1,750-square-foot fitness center, v) 1,900-square-foot community room, and vi) 1,500-square-foot boutique grocery and convenience store.  The commercial "condo" is an adaptive reuse conversion of the former historic Forest City Savings and Loan building that will feature: i) 38 affordable multi-family units, ii) 36 surface parking spaces, iii) 12,600 square feet of office space for The Beauty Shoppe, iv) 7,000 square feet of restaurant space, v) 19,000-square-foot charter school called The Music Settlement, and vi) another 11,000 square feet of additional office/retail commercial space on the east end of the complex.

 

Peter L. Snavely Jr. commented, "BGL's strong industry relationships and real-time market knowledge were instrumental in achieving the financial closing. In today's ever-changing financial climate, BGL's ability to navigate obstacles and foresee future problems defines their ability to add value to the real estate development process. Their hard working team of professionals delivered."

 

About Brown Gibbons Lang & Company

 

Brown Gibbons Lang & Company is a leading independent investment bank serving the middle market. BGL specializes in mergers and acquisitions advisory services, debt and equity placements, financial restructuring advice, and valuations and fairness opinions, with global industry teams in Business Services, Consumer, Environmental & Industrial Services, Healthcare & Life Sciences, Industrials, and Real Estate. BGL has offices in Chicago and Cleveland and real estate offices in Chicago, Cleveland, Irvine, and San Antonio, in addition to Global M&A partner offices in more than 50 countries across 5 continents.  BGL is able to deliver to our clients unparalleled access to strategic relationships, investors, and opportunities globally. For more information, please visit www.bglco.com.

 

Logo - http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20151210/295054LOGO

 

SOURCE Brown Gibbons Lang & Company

 

Related Links

 

http://Www.bglco.com

 

SOURCE:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/brown-gibbons-lang--company-bgl-real-estate-advisors-completes-residential-and-commercial-mixed-use-financing-for-snavely-group-300348655.html

^You're wrong motorist, they do fight against bad design and occasionally succeed. Clearly you aren't involved in the decision making process.

One only needs to drive through the neighborhoods of Cleveland to see that bad design is making it through the process on a regular basis.  I've been through and around the process enough to know that it's broken.  And in my opinion, not worth fixing.  Just abandon it.  What's the worst that could happen?

 

Legally, municipalities are not allowed to dictate design, only materials. While some do have Architectural Review Boards, they are only allowed to suggest. When they do more than that they can be taken to court.

Honestly, the local design review districts, landmarks commission, and planning commission are not consistent in their decision making, so it is very difficult to know how to satisfy them. It seems like what they look for changes every couple of months. A form based code could help a lot in this regard and would prevent those committees and commissions from making so many arbitrary decisions.

And are way too susceptible to the whims of the local politicians and the developers who donate to their campaigns.  I was told by someone on a local design review board that they were told by their councilman that they were going to vote to support a certain project or they would no longer serve on the board. Honestly, I think they should just disband them all.  None of them are really keeping the bad designs out, garbage is being built all over the region. 

 

This had to be Detroit Shoreway as a certain councilman is known for doing such things (although I'm sure there are others doing it since the city still seems to operate that way). 

Amazing this stuff continues to go on.  But under Jackson you will not see any improvements.   

 

Let's get back on topic, folks.

Another light agenda. Disappointing how few development projects are being submitted....

 

CLEVELAND LANDMARKS COMMISSION

AGENDA - October 27, 2016

 

CONCEPT PLAN

1. Case 16-063

Ohio City Historic District

West 52nd Street and Franklin Boulevard

New Construction of Townhomes

Ward 15

Zone

Bill Sanderson

Knez Builders

Hanna Plessner

Architect

 

 

 

 

 

On the other hand, seeing new housing replace such a cruddy parking lot/corner store eyesore is a huge upgrade, so I feel like this should count for like 5 projects. This is really great to see.

Oh I agree this looks like a terrific project. I'd love to another one similar to it on the north side of the street replacing another fugly convenience store fronted by a parking lot.

 

But the volume of new projects citywide seems to have tailed off in the past year. At least this looks like a quality project.

^So which is it KJP.  Just two weeks ago in this same thread you stated that the number of projects was "mindblowing" and it was hard to focus on so many projects being proposed in Ohio City.

Yep, lots of projects in Ohio City. Nope, not a lot of projects citywide. Are you the KJP police? If so, I'm honored I deserve so much attention.

 

Seriously, though. I have to wonder what share of pending/in-development projects citywide are in Ohio City.

So this is the project the neighborhood block club was concerned about last week.  I like it but whats with the oddball all the way at end, lot "A"  it looks like. Is it to step the project down in an attempt blend with the existing housing stock?

 

 

 

Yep, lots of projects in Ohio City. Nope, not a lot of projects citywide. Are you the KJP police? If so, I'm honored I deserve so much attention.

 

Seriously, though. I have to wonder what share of pending/in-development projects citywide are in Ohio City.

 

I actually think it's the opposite KJP. I feel like there have been quite a few more projects this year than last. I think the difference is that they are all spread out across the neighborhoods and generally smaller in scale than the grand downtown projects of the past. I don't see this as a bad thing because these homes and townhomes/condos are bringing some serious money and ownership commitment back into the city.

 

I also think that we have come to a point where we are running out of big reno projects downtown. Once these new build proposals eventually take off, the floodgates should open again. Plus, I think our standards have increased too with all of the success of late.

Could be. All I'm going on is my perceptions, so it's very subjective.

I'm confused; is the Vine Court Townhomes project the same as that which has been going up for months, which replaced the ugly former factory building?  My confusion stems from the appearance of drawings for the Cine Courts project appearing here very recently, while the project was introduced here over a year ago.  I'm there now and don't see enough land for two projects right here.

 

Yikes. What's with all the variation in set backs and building heights? I understand possibly varying the roof lines to help make each building appear more unique. I don't have a problem with each townhome being a different color or slightly different style. But the varying set backs and the completely different structure on the right side are really puzzling elements of this development. It's an improvement over the current site, but in my opinion this is a mess.

Yes, it's definitely a mess. And I think it's a beautiful mess.

I'm confused; is the Vine Court Townhomes project the same as that which has been going up for months, which replaced the ugly former factory building?  My confusion stems from the appearance of drawings for the Cine Courts project appearing here very recently, while the project was introduced here over a year ago.  I'm there now and don't see enough land for two projects right here.

 

Pretty sure the Vine Court Townhomes will be west of the apartment project, between it and West 32nd Street, on the narrow strip of land along the north side of Vine.

Thanks, but I didn't see that kind of space at all there - not for the apartment project shown above.  There's a tidy  back yard for the corner house on Franklin and not much else.

Yikes. What's with all the variation in set backs and building heights? I understand possibly varying the roof lines to help make each building appear more unique. I don't have a problem with each townhome being a different color or slightly different style. But the varying set backs and the completely different structure on the right side are really puzzling elements of this development. It's an improvement over the current site, but in my opinion this is a mess.

 

Look at the site plan again. All of the houses have the same setback. There is a driveway between the two buildings which makes the rendering look odd from this angle.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2016/10272016/image/West_52nd_&_Franklin_15.jpg

Yikes. What's with all the variation in set backs and building heights? I understand possibly varying the roof lines to help make each building appear more unique. I don't have a problem with each townhome being a different color or slightly different style. But the varying set backs and the completely different structure on the right side are really puzzling elements of this development. It's an improvement over the current site, but in my opinion this is a mess.

 

Look at the site plan again. All of the houses have the same setback. There is a driveway between the two buildings which makes the rendering look odd from this angle.

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2016/10272016/image/West_52nd_&_Franklin_15.jpg

 

Ah, ok, that makes much more sense. There still appears to be a difference in set back between the yellow house and the grey one to its left, no? The exposed sides of the homes are what is throwing me off. There are a few other details I think could use improvement, like removing the random 3rd floor bay window on the house to the left of the yellow one, and a redesign of lot A to more closely resemble the rest of the development. To have 2 roof styles and 3 roof lines in a collection of three townhomes is a lot. But simply having all of the townhomes on the same plane, utilizing the same setback makes the design much better than how I  originally saw it.

I see nothing wrong with a more staggered facade - e.g. not all units having the same setback. Not as long as the setback of the one closest to the sidewalk is legally set back enough.  I'd rather see at least two or more forward houses than one, though.

 

^ I guess I can't think of any examples of attached townhouses having varied setbacks, which is why I'm having trouble envisioning this proposal. Picture looking out your window in say, the third townhouse, and seeing a big, blank yellow wall immediately to your left. That's just strange. Perhaps it's personal preference, but I think townhouses look best when there's some degree of uniformity. Otherwise, just build a dense collection of detached houses, if they aren't going to relate to each other in any way.

 

I've always thought these townhouses in Cincinnati were really beautiful. Despite the staggered roof lines every couple of buildings, the other elements are pretty uniform. There are more modern examples that also demonstrate this, including some great new townhouse developments I saw in Cleveland.  This, in comparison, seems like it's trying to do way too much to make each building appear unique. Just my $.02

 

The staggered roofline of that project seems like the least of its problems. Just looks like superficial faux historicism at its worst. Throw some cornices and porches on some boxes willy nilly and hey, "Victorian"! Not everything needs to be super designy, but that just looks like builder grade dreck.  But whatever. Good site plan, more density, and wipes out an eyesore.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the Nov. 14 BZA agenda....

 

THE FOLLOWING CASES ARE BEING REHEARD AT THE REQUEST OF THE COUNCILMAN TO

ALLOW FOR NEW EVIDENCE/TESTIMONY TO BE PRESENTED:

All testimony given at the October 17, 2016 hearing will be part of the record in this case, therefore

the Board will only entertain new evidence or testimony that was not available at the time of the

original hearing. It is not necessary for witnesses to attend the hearing to repeat the testimony given at that hearing.

 

More graphics at:

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/2016/07142016/index.php

 

Cleveland Landmarks Commission

AGENDA - July 14, 2016

 

Case 16-040

Ohio City Historic District

4504-14 Clinton Avenue, Wheat Court

New Construction of Townhouses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Five parcels, four Detroit and one on Church, sold in mid-October or a total of  $1.25 million. This was the most valuable of the properties as appraised for taxes...

 

2885 DETROIT AVE

CLEVELAND

 

Sales Date 10/14/2016

Amount $1,250,000

Buyer METOO LLC

Seller THE VAN ROY BUILDING, LLC

Deed type LIMITED WA

Land value $58,400

Building value $178,100

Total value $236,500

Parcel 003-27-007

Property Small shops (machine, tool and die, etc.)

Lots of action happening at the intersection of W.29th & Church today -- major demolition happening at the Saucy Brew works building along W. 29th, NEW stop signs and crosswalks, and bonus cars being flipped over in the Transformer Station parking lot as part of the Creative Fusions art installations in the neighborhood.

That's just a tad f'd up...

Oh, I love the flipped over cars! If art is supposed to be an eye-catching conversation starter, this wins.

More beautification:

 

Mural of kids brightens wall dividing Cleveland neighborhood

 

CLEVELAND (AP) — A wall that for decades has isolated one of the country's oldest low-income housing projects from the rest of a Cleveland neighborhood has been covered with a colorful mural of local children as part of an artistic effort to brighten the area.

 

It splits the Ohio City neighborhood from the dozens of buildings in the Lakeview Terrace housing complex, which opened in 1937 and first housed immigrants and military families. Now it's home to mostly minority families, who worry that encroaching development on the other side of the wall may eventually leave them displaced.

 

http://www.dailyprogress.com/mural-of-kids-brightens-wall-dividing-cleveland-neighborhood/article_c18031f5-6e49-5dbd-950b-398dd963d55d.html

The new murals all throughout the neighborhood are just gorgeous. Those in particular along that elevated section of the Shoreway do a great job of brightening up the area and make it much more inviting.

The new murals all throughout the neighborhood are just gorgeous. Those in particular along that elevated section of the Shoreway do a great job of brightening up the area and make it much more inviting.

 

It's still not a good place to go, and rumor has it many of those buildings will be uninhabitable within a decade.  If they can deal with the aroma issues, that area could be redeveloped successfully.  Perhaps wildly so.    It's a millstone around that neighborhood's neck, particularly Stonebridge.

I don't think I'd go as far as saying that. As someone who lives in Stonebridge, I can tell you we don't have any problems from anyone there. From my own limited dealings there, the people are friendly. I wouldn't say its had a negative effect on new development either, as evidence by the Snavely project which is right along the other side of the highway, and everything happening in Hingetown. I don't think we're missing out on any lost opportunity for the land it sits on either, at least not with everything that's currently along the old river channel.

 

The physical condition of the buildings on the other hand are pretty awful, especially the lowrises. I vote inside the tower, and its not as bad, but could definitely use some work. I think that's more to do with CMHA than anything. I would expect them to be rebuilt sometime in the near future, similar to what has been happening in Central. That would all depend on their funding though, I'd imagine.

I don't think I'd go as far as saying that. As someone who lives in Stonebridge, I can tell you we don't have any problems from anyone there. From my own limited dealings there, the people are friendly. I wouldn't say its had a negative effect on new development either, as evidence by the Snavely project which is right along the other side of the highway, and everything happening in Hingetown. I don't think we're missing out on any lost opportunity for the land it sits on either, at least not with everything that's currently along the old river channel.

 

The physical condition of the buildings on the other hand are pretty awful, especially the lowrises. I vote inside the tower, and its not as bad, but could definitely use some work. I think that's more to do with CMHA than anything. I would expect them to be rebuilt sometime in the near future, similar to what has been happening in Central. That would all depend on their funding though, I'd imagine.

 

Are there still issues with loiterers and theft/vandalism in the parking lots at Stonebridge?  I heard that a couple years back, thought it was here.  If they've fixed that, good.

 

The tower is senior housing so that's going to be in better shape.

 

I definitely think they could make one hell of a neighborhood there except for the smell issue, and my CPD sources say just about all the crime in the W. 25th district comes from there.

The real crime there is that 5-way intersection.

I don't think I'd go as far as saying that. As someone who lives in Stonebridge, I can tell you we don't have any problems from anyone there. From my own limited dealings there, the people are friendly. I wouldn't say its had a negative effect on new development either, as evidence by the Snavely project which is right along the other side of the highway, and everything happening in Hingetown. I don't think we're missing out on any lost opportunity for the land it sits on either, at least not with everything that's currently along the old river channel.

 

The physical condition of the buildings on the other hand are pretty awful, especially the lowrises. I vote inside the tower, and its not as bad, but could definitely use some work. I think that's more to do with CMHA than anything. I would expect them to be rebuilt sometime in the near future, similar to what has been happening in Central. That would all depend on their funding though, I'd imagine.

 

Are there still issues with loiterers and theft/vandalism in the parking lots at Stonebridge?  I heard that a couple years back, thought it was here.  If they've fixed that, good.

 

I think it's off and on, but in the past couple weeks dozens of cars have been broken into. Stonebridge finally opted to pay for 24-HR parking lot security.

I don't think I'd go as far as saying that. As someone who lives in Stonebridge, I can tell you we don't have any problems from anyone there. From my own limited dealings there, the people are friendly. I wouldn't say its had a negative effect on new development either, as evidence by the Snavely project which is right along the other side of the highway, and everything happening in Hingetown. I don't think we're missing out on any lost opportunity for the land it sits on either, at least not with everything that's currently along the old river channel.

 

The physical condition of the buildings on the other hand are pretty awful, especially the lowrises. I vote inside the tower, and its not as bad, but could definitely use some work. I think that's more to do with CMHA than anything. I would expect them to be rebuilt sometime in the near future, similar to what has been happening in Central. That would all depend on their funding though, I'd imagine.

 

Are there still issues with loiterers and theft/vandalism in the parking lots at Stonebridge?  I heard that a couple years back, thought it was here.  If they've fixed that, good.

 

The tower is senior housing so that's going to be in better shape.

 

I definitely think they could make one hell of a neighborhood there except for the smell issue, and my CPD sources say just about all the crime in the W. 25th district comes from there.

 

I also live at Stonebridge. There are NOTHING but problems from those apartments. I leave for work at 5:30am every day and I cannot remember the last time I did not drive past at least one car with a window busted out.

 

I challenge each of you, take a right on Detroit Ave (the Viaduct Street), about 1/8 of a mile to your right there will be a row of cars. Once a week, Stonebridge Security picks up the broken glass from a car, and the next week there is new broken glass. If any of you were to drive past right now, I promise you would find glass on the ground from a break in. Before I paid for covered parking, my car was broken into twice.

Okay folks, we have threads to discuss crime- let's get back on topic.

Construction underway at new Ohio City music and early childhood education facility

KARIN CONNELLY RICE | MONDAY, DECEMBER 05, 2016

 

Without fanfare, construction quietly began on the newest Music Settlement location in Ohio City in October, marking a huge step for the 104-year-old music education, music therapy and early childhood education institution.

 

“We’ve already started the initial groundbreaking,” says Patricia Camacho Hughes, the Music Settlement’s interim president. We’re moving forward and on schedule to open in August or September 2018.”

 

Settlement officials announced late last year that they had committed to 19,000 square feet on the first floor of the Snavely Group’s mixed use project on the corner of W. 25th Street and Detroit Avenue.

 

MORE:

http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/devnews/MusicSettlement120516.aspx