That building is supposed to be mind boggling? And many buildings have glare that I have witnessed all over the country and never heard of any unusual amounts of bird deaths WTF? I think this building is fine and has some nice things about it. It's different from anything else in Cleveland and although it's not the most amazing building, it's certainly not the monstrosity people are making it out to be.

This is the new addition to Children's Hospital in Columbus:

 

http://www.nationwidechildrens.org/GD/Applications/News/mediafiles/NCH%20rendering%203.4.JPG

 

Well, yes, that's unsightly.  I wasn't referring to that. 

 

I was referring to what Columbus is doing with its main street.  That distinction means more than whether or not a structure is for a cancer hospital.  The OSU cancer hospital, which isn't even on High Street, is several times more attractive than anything UH or the Clinic has built for decades.  It's so attractive and distinctive it's been used as a symbol for the university's hospital system and for OSU in general.  Mayday, are you suggesting that there should be a lower standard for the appearance of cancer hospitals?  I'm suggesting that in some places there isn't.  This building looks ugly for a structure on a city's main street, as well as in comparison to other cancer hospitals in Ohio. 

 

And yes, the modern prevalence of sheer glass buildings has had an adverse effect on birds, as they tend to ram the glass at full speed.  I thought this was well known.  I've worked in many such buildings and I've seen it happen frequently.  If I had said glass buildings open rifts to an alternate dimension... that would be WTF.  But birds ramming the glass is a fact.

 

Back to the issue at hand... considering the cost and prominence of this building, "not a monstrosity" isn't much of a standard.  I think we can afford to have a little more pride than that.   

"Mayday, are you suggesting that there should be a lower standard for the appearance of cancer hospitals?"

 

I wasn't suggesting anything nor was I defending the design of the Ireland Cancer Center; I was asking for examples of "mind bogglingly attractive"* medical buildings in Columbus; and I'm still waiting ;-)

 

*Is this the building you're referring to?

The OSU Cancer hospital isnt exactly the best example.  I remember it for its double chimney look as well as its small square windows that remind me of a jail (probably not the best concept for a hospital), otherwise nothing very unique. 

How very "post modern" and 80's looking.  :|

 

Like it or not I think the UH Cancer building is certainly more unique. 

 

327 I noticed that your arguments actually work better and are more effective when dont provide examples or comparisons.   

And many buildings have glare that I have witnessed all over the country and never heard of any unusual amounts of bird deaths WTF?

 

The curve captures noontime sunlight and directs it right into the eyes of oncoming pedestrians.  Certainly window glass is reflective on any building in the right sun, and of course that has a bigger effect the more glass that there is.  The point is that the form of this building exasperates that issue.  It's almost blinding if you're coming east along Euclid.  It is also the sort of thing that is foreseeable, if the architects had cared to think about it.

That glass also appears from the photos to be particularly reflective- not quite 55 public square, but more reflective than most curtain wall facades. Plus, it's a very wide facade facing SW, so it is guaranteed to produce big time reflections for a large chunk of the day. 

 

I'm still ticked mostly about the crap Euclid frontage though.  The south side of Euclid between the med library and Cornell- about 1000 feet- is going to be lame, set-back institutional frontage.  A junior Cleveland Clinic experience, but worse because it's in the middle of what the UC powers were theoretically focusing on as a marquee avenue segment.

 

Not impossible to fix retroactively down the line though.  Perhaps UH could be bribed by some retail rents to build out its glorious patch of brown-for-six-months-of-the-year grass down the road.  Would cost UH very little or maybe even nothing and could actually improve the quality of life for its employees.

 

Here's a fun example if anyone is interested:  go to http://www.bing.com/maps/explore/?FORM=MLOMAP&PUBL=GOOGLE&crea=userid1743go6a1c1270db6e7f374a897e012428c985e#/95s77dfwt5052x8h and focus on the lame concrete plaza in the middle of the picture in front of the bland office tower.  Now zoom in one level and see what magically appears.

 

 

 

 

I'm a known traditionalist so my examples shouldn't be too surprising.  That OSU building meshes with the campus above and the neighborhood below.  The approaches are specifically addressed.  That used to be important. 

 

In this case here, they'll eventually have to put some sort of awning over it.  And that'll look 50s-70s... moreso than it already does.  Buck Rogers.  Star Trek.  Jetsons.  I'll grant that the OSU cancer building is dated, but if you're gonna be dated, then dated-futuristic is not the way to go.             

University Hospitals receives $35 million gift for cancer research and treatment

Published: Friday, August 06, 2010, 4:00 AM

Angela Townsend, The Plain Dealer

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio — The estate of Dr. Donald J. Goodman and Ruth Weber Goodman has paved the way toward distinguishing the new Cancer Hospital at University Hospitals Case Medical Center from other cancer hospitals in the country.

 

In honor of the estate's $35 million gift, the largest single donation in UH's 143-year history, the couple will have 3,700 square feet of space for clinical cancer research and treatment, and the floor on which

 

The Goodman family became forever linked to UH in 2000 after oncologists at the Ireland Cancer Center successfully treated Dr. Goodman with an experimental drug for acute myelogenous leukemia. In 2004, the Pepper Pike couple -- both inaugural members of UH's National Cancer Leadership Council -- made arrangements to include UH in their estate plan, setting the stage for the gift.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/healthfit/index.ssf/2010/08/university_hospitals_receives.html

Some updates and new photos:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2010/09/university_hospitals_keeps_bot.html

Here are some pictures MuRrAy HiLL took for you guys.

 

 

 

 

what is the second picture view of?

^the parking garage

Stunningly mismatched for the surrounding buildings.  What was the architect thinking?

Stunningly mismatched for the surrounding buildings.  What was the architect thinking?

 

Have you seen it in context, not in a picture?  You have to look at the larger picture.

Sorry I have not.  I am sitting here in Seattle.  Is a larger picture available?

I've seen it in context, and it's pretty awful.  To start, the project is totally out of scale.  While that is not atypical for hospital complexes, it seems particularly arresting here given that the cancer hospital has no setback from the street whatsoever.  While I'm generally opposed to large setbacks, the enormity of the building pressed up against Cornell and Euclid just doesn't fit with the surrounding buildings on Euclid.  And if it had to be this close to street, at least the architect could have made the building interact with Euclid at some level. 

 

Moreover, no effort was made to tailor the buildings to the surrounding area whether in terms of design or exterior materials.  Not only does the skin of both buildings fail to integrate with the existing UH complex (i.e., Lerner Tower, Mather Pavilion, Lakeside), but the aluminum exterior of the cancer hospital is blinding to motorists heading East on a sunny afternoon.  The windows are also already noticably streaking.  Overall, a truly a missed opportunity in the most dynamic part of the city.

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to.  It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance.  This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to.  It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance.  This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

Agreed.  I don't think it's that bad

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to. It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance. This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture.  And I wholeheartedly support that.  My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking.  I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to.  It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance.  This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture.  And I wholeheartedly support that.  My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking.  I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

 

I dont think it looks surburban looking considering it's setting.  If it was built in the 'burbs with a parkinglot surrounding it, it would look ridiculous.

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to. It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance. This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

Agreed. I don't think it's that bad

 

Me too

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to. It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance. This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture. And I wholeheartedly support that. My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking. I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

 

I dont think it looks surburban looking considering it's setting. If it was built in the 'burbs with a parkinglot surrounding it, it would look ridiculous.

 

Oh, I don't know about that.  I could just as easily see the cancer hospital as part of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, or the new UH Ahuja Hospital in Highland Hills. 

 

And have you happened to notice the new ER addition fronting Euclid.  I'd be curious as to your thoughts on that lovely piece of work.

Well.... there is a major difference between Hillcrest and Ahuja in terms of setting and design.... especially with Hillcrest's new addition that brings it much closer to the street.  Ahuja is a tower surround by a parking lot that is surrounded by an open, undeveloped field.

Its only a rendering but I dont find it that bad. I actually like it. Whats so suburban about it. What would you like?

 

 

 

 

 

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to.  It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance.  This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture.  And I wholeheartedly support that.  My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking.  I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

 

I dont think it looks surburban looking considering it's setting.  If it was built in the 'burbs with a parkinglot surrounding it, it would look ridiculous.

 

Oh, I don't know about that.  I could just as easily see the cancer hospital as part of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, or the new UH Ahuja Hospital in Highland Hills. 

 

And have you happened to notice the new ER addition fronting Euclid.  I'd be curious as to your thoughts on that lovely piece of work.

 

I dont think UH is an attractive "hospital" in any form.  However, since it's been built over the course of many decades, it is what it is.  I think the function of the hospital is better than the design, however, I think it adds to the eclectic look of the area.  It's not some mass designed area.  it's what a city should look like.  Varying degrees of architecture, good, bad and ugly.

UC is so diverse in its architecture, I don't think there is a uniform pattern to adhere to. It is a cluster of buildings, all with their own design and architectural significance. This is only going to become more apparent with Uptown and MOCA, the latter of which is going to stick out like a sore thumb (whether you like the design or not).

 

I agree UC is diverse in its architecture. And I wholeheartedly support that. My biggest issue is that the building is just so bland and suburban looking. I think it's going to look horribly dated in a few years.

 

I dont think it looks surburban looking considering it's setting. If it was built in the 'burbs with a parkinglot surrounding it, it would look ridiculous.

 

Oh, I don't know about that. I could just as easily see the cancer hospital as part of Hillcrest Hospital in Mayfield Heights, or the new UH Ahuja Hospital in Highland Hills.

 

And have you happened to notice the new ER addition fronting Euclid. I'd be curious as to your thoughts on that lovely piece of work.

 

I dont think UH is an attractive "hospital" in any form. However, since it's been built over the course of many decades, it is what it is. I think the function of the hospital is better than the design, however, I think it adds to the eclectic look of the area. It's not some mass designed area. it's what a city should look like. Varying degrees of architecture, good, bad and ugly.

 

 

Good point. Imagine Euclid avenue all with the same style buildings on it.

Its only a rendering but I dont find it that bad. I actually like it. Whats so suburban about it. What would you like?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like I said, to start, I'd like something that was more appropriately scaled in size and that interacts at some level with Euclid.  I also would have liked something that was modern, but at least attempted to blend in a bit with the existing UH complex and other buildings in the area.  Take the Gehry building.  It's modern beyond belief, but at least it tries to respect its surroundings through its use of red brick, complementing the Dively building, Mather Memorial, Gund Hall, etc.

I think it fits the surroundings pretty well actually.  As to the scale, yes it is tall and close to the street but the apartment building on ford and Euclid right across the street is taller and a block down is the Triangle which is tall (although not on the street).  The building on the corner of Mayfield and Euclid has no setback and is 5 stories and I believe and the new hotel that will be built across from the cancer hospital on Cornell will also be tall with no setback.  So with all of these buildings in mind I don't think the scale is out of line with what is already there or what will be there in the near future.  As to the aesthetics, the new uptown project and MOCA will definitely stand out from the surroundings and match the Cancer hospital more than the other surrounding buildings.  I agree that it does not seem to interact with Euclid as well as it could but I think it will interact with Cornell well.  We still have to see what the landscaping looks like but I like that it makes the area feel denser and livelier compared to the area around the clinic.  I think we also have to remember that hospitals are going to have different needs than other types of buildings and they don't really value neighborhood connectivity so with that in mind I don't see this project as all that bad.

I used to sell these.  The building always reminds me of the Sony monitors from 5-6yrs ago.

 

The garage has rotating colorful lights on the main corner towards Euclid.  Very subtle, but adds another interesting aspect at night.  I just noticed it this evening.

Also looks like the contemporary hotel at Disney World! What blows my mind about these places is their choice to use inorganic lawn chemicals on the properties...which contain many chemicals blatantly linked to cancer...and are banned in several places. I really don't understand the disconnect. Sure,  I trust my health with those who do stupid things like that.

^EC is there any thread or topic you don't try to highjack with you opinions that are totally irrelevant to the subject at hand.

more exposure to lawn chemicals, more cancer patients, more bizness

While we are at it, the CCF endorses KFC's double down sammich to help fill the beds*

 

*NOTE: Of course the Cleveland Clinic doesn't endorse this grease trap, relax!

 

I'm personally ambivalent. The building makes me think of Star Tours at Disneyland, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. A big part of the patient experience is the look and appearance of the buildings and grounds. By going with a sleek, modern design it's telling the patient not to worry, you're in the newest and best place possible. By keeping the grounds immaculate, it subtly tells the patient that all details of the place are highly scrutinized. Having a nice view from your window may not be necessary, but psychologically it makes everyone involved feel better.

 

While the building may not be for you, it likely wasn't designed with you in mind either.

Well it clearly wasn't designed with street presence or inclusion in the surrounding fabric then either.  There are no excuses for these continued missed opportunities to interact with the city.

^It's a hospital, not a strip mall.  I'm with you, originaljbw.

 

I understand the viewpoint from an urban ethusiasts critical lense and don't mean to say for a minute that our input should not be considered.... but sometimes we just have to let hospitals be hospitals, suburbs be suburbs, and so on.  When we reach a critical mass where every inch of development needs to be scrutinized, then we can start complaining about a 10 foot setback for a building that isn't even supposed to have ground floor retail or anyother interaction with the sidewalk.

Don't want to turn into Cleveland.com posters. I've been seeing people on here bashing little aspects of almost every project going on around the city. They are forgetting that the company/institute is actually investing in the city, we should be happy with that.

Don't want to turn into Cleveland.com posters. I've been seeing people on here bashing little aspects of almost every project going on around the city. They are forgetting that the company/institute is actually investing in the city, we should be happy with that.

I think you're wrong. I dont want to speak for anyone else, but I don't think any UO forumer is taking X company's investments for granted.

 

What is being said, what we need is QUALITY (investments/structuctures) not just buildings. We need full thought out and executable develpment plans that get the city back to being an urbane unique place.

 

However, I stand by my previous posts on this project.

^I agree... and if they had knocked down a few City blocks and built something along the lines of the monstrousity (Ahuja) they are erecting in the Chagrin Highlands, I'd pitch in on the c-4 (kidding).  But this design is not so offensive to urban planning for us to truly despise it.  It just comes down to a matter of taste.  Personally, I like how it interacts with UC.... especially the impact it has when approaching from the east on Euclid.

ClevelandOhio, I agree with you 150%. I don't think it has anything to do with anyone taking the companies investments for granted. From what I have observed it's a Cleveland thing to find something to complain about no matter what. It's as if they can not see the forest for the trees. It's really depressing.

Im not for bad projects but people find one small thing about several projects and then call them complete failures. Now if someone destroyed euclid avenue downtown and lined it with a walmart, giant eagle, target with parking in front then i would call that a complete failure and wouldn't appreciate the investment.

As for what happens when the big hospitals build up to the street walk down carnegie from 89th to 101st. Built to the curb just about as dense as possible with zero doors in or out.

 

From walking past the new cancer center, it may not be the prettiest but it will have street interaction and will probably be the glamour shot of UH for the next few years-much the same way at CCF the arnold and miller building has replaced the crile building in published photos.

Sorry, but the project does need to be scrutinized as a whole.  It's a collection of 3 new buildings all fronting our City's signature street in the most dynamic part of the city.  Let me start by saying I'm thrilled UH is making this investment.  My only issue is that they missed what could have been a big opportunity.  Of the 3 buildings, the cancer hospital is assuredly the best.  But I'm still greatly disappointed that the old Mather dorms that fronted Euclid - a beautiful set of historic buildings - were razed and replaced by a banal parking deck set far back from the street, and the new ER facility, which looks like a shed set off from the street and screened off by heavy vegetation. 

 

I know I will undoubtedly be excoriated by the panel for having an opinion, but I just feel this Vision 2010 project really came up short.  Sorry for wanting more for my City.

 

^Why would you be excoriated "for having an opinion".  That is exactly what this forum is for at long as you express it in the correct thread (which you did) and it is on topic (which it is).

 

I have never been crazy about the cancer hospital because I do not like the way it relates to Euclid.  That said, I agree with Hts121.  It is a hospital and "mixed use" is rarely if ever seen in such facilities nation wide. 

 

I actually don't mind the parking garage so much.  Unfortunately it is built in a much too prominent site, but it does a good job of framing. 

 

Don't have high hopes for the ER from the peeks beyond the fencing I have seen.

I don't think that it is accurate to say that the parking garage and ER are behind a large setback.  They are, rather, behind lots that have not been developed yet.  I don't think either is intended as Euclid Ave. frontages.

^Why would you be excoriated "for having an opinion". That is exactly what this forum is for at long as you express it in the correct thread (which you did) and it is on topic (which it is).

 

Did you read the above posts?  I'm pretty sure I was called a cleveland.bomb poster b/c I had the temerity to criticize something. 

Here's a video as of Nov. 29. 2010:

 

UH Seidman Cancer Center President's Message

Did you read the above posts? I'm pretty sure I was called a cleveland.bomb poster b/c I had the temerity to criticize something.

 

One person said that. One person is not a forum. I think the discussion has been healthy -- hardly an excoriation. And I'm with you -- I don't care for the UH's cancer design design either. Perhaps I'm getting used to being disappointed with hospital facilities not interacting well with their city. Ironically, the Cleveland Clinic parking garage with the offices fronting Euclid at East 90th actually relates to the street better than most other buildings constructed in recent decades by the two hospital systems.

Did you read the above posts? I'm pretty sure I was called a cleveland.bomb poster b/c I had the temerity to criticize something.

 

One person said that. One person is not a forum. I think the discussion has been healthy -- hardly an excoriation. And I'm with you -- I don't care for the UH's cancer design design either. Perhaps I'm getting used to being disappointed with hospital facilities not interacting well with their city. Ironically, the Cleveland Clinic parking garage with the offices fronting Euclid at East 90th actually relates to the street better than most other buildings constructed in recent decades by the two hospital systems.

 

I don't mind the main building.  But the 4-story side building that connects to the rest of the hospital and the parking garage are just awful.  Have we learned nothing about covering buildings with sheets of metal?  We're tearing off all the metal downtown to restore historic facades, and they're just slapping metal on new buildings down here in UC.

Was driving by UH in University Circle and I have included a view of the new parking structure. In a previous thread I had seen the corner unfinished and workers today were completing the skin. In person the campus is looking quite nice.