If they do what they say they are going to do, then I'm fine with it. I think that it is more difficult to get neighborhood retail on Euclid than on Prospect due to the rents. I just don't see how a dry cleaner could justify playing Euclid Ave rents.

 

I agree that the retail economic incentive would be a good idea. I think that they should concentrate on a specific area first.

 

This is what I don't get.  If Euclid ave retail spaces are so hard to fill, why aren't the prices going down?  Where are these market forces I hear so much about?

1. Scaffolding is going up on the front of the building so I'm guessing this is the beginning of the facade restoration

 

2.  In the current environment getting traditional retail anywhere downtown right now I just don't think is going to happen.  I actually think Wyse is a pretty decent fit.  Ad agency's usually have pretty vibrant office spaces, and I think it'll look a heck of a lot better with all that daytime activity going on, then sitting empty.

All the downtown retail "talk" has been moved here:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,17818.msg345417.html#new

 

let's keep this thread for 668 Euclid news. :wink:

Facade work underway:

 

Yay!  I can't wait to see how it turns out.  I also can't wait to find out what is happening on the Prospect side.  I'm surprised that no renderings have surfaced at all.

God I can't wait until glass starts appearing in those huge window openings!

God I can't wait until glass starts appearing in those huge window openings!

 

And I can't wait until there are people occupying those units and they  peer out onto Euclid from the other side of those huge window openings!  HA!

I can't wait till something goes up next door to it on that parking lot!  Too soon?

I can't wait till something goes up next door to it on that parking lot! Too soon?

 

Ha.  I hope you have a comfortable chair to wait in.  If you're lucky maybe by 2050.  :)

Is there a particular roadblock, or are you just commenting on the weakness of the market?

Ha. I hope you have a comfortable chair to wait in. If you're lucky maybe by 2050. :)

 

This chair sucks.  What we need is a new zoning law called ____ or get off the pot.  Downtown asphalt and chronically distressed property only lasts so long.  After a certain timespan with one owner doing that, it goes to auction.  Systematically.  The owner gets the proceeds and there's an appeal process with strict scrutiny, burden on the state, the works.  I'm tired of people holding out and waiting for who knows what.  It isn't that much of a leap under Ohio's eminent domain standard.  In Ohio the law can't be vague and it has to have a purpose beyond economic improvement, if it isn't going to become public land.  Undoing sprawl and repairing its wreckage in our state are purposes that go beyond financial gain.  The public could help finance, and maintain a partial stake, in whatever goes up.  Or it can keep looking like this.  We're kind of already doing this, with all the tax credits and saga of the flats.  It could be done more and done better.

Ha.  I hope you have a comfortable chair to wait in.  If you're lucky maybe by 2050.  :)

 

This chair sucks.  What we need is a new zoning law called ____ or get off the pot.  Downtown asphalt and chronically distressed property only lasts so long.  After a certain timespan with one owner doing that, it goes to auction.  Systematically.  The owner gets the proceeds and there's an appeal process with strict scrutiny, burden on the state, the works.  I'm tired of people holding out and waiting for who knows what.  It isn't that much of a leap under Ohio's eminent domain standard.  In Ohio the law can't be vague and it has to have a purpose beyond economic improvement, if it isn't going to become public land.  Undoing sprawl and repairing its wreckage in our state are purposes that go beyond financial gain.  The public could help finance, and maintain a partial stake, in whatever goes up.  Or it can keep looking like this.  We're kind of already doing this, with all the tax credits and saga of the flats.  It could be done more and done better.

 

Sorry, but what you're talking about (in theory sounds wonderful to me) is "unamerican".  You can't tell someone who owns a successful enterprise as a parking lot owner that they have to sell their property.  There's just no way.  That plot of land has two surface lots and a garage, in an event area of town.  It's a cash cow.

 

There are however laws similar to what you're talking about in terms of demolishing structures to create a surface lot.  Often in order to get a demolition permit, there is a timeframe in which you have to develop the property or pay substantial penalties.  No such thing exists however for existing lots.  Sorry, just telling you like it is.

 

Is there a particular roadblock, or are you just commenting on the weakness of the market?

 

Both X.  One, there currently (I believe) aren't enough "market forces" in play to demand such an acquisition... but also, the guy that owns that parcel of land has owned it for decades, is really old (like 80 something), and as a mentioned above... that's a really successful parking lot, meaning it makes him a LOT of money, meaning whomever wanted to develop that proerty would have to pay him a LOT of money just to get the land, so much so that it probably makes it financially infeasible to develop the property.  Who knows maybe after he passes and his kids inherit the property (I believe there are 2), they'll have a different view, or just want to cash in and sell.  But even on top of that, again, you'd either need a company large enough to commit to a good amount of office space, or an awful lot of residential presales to get a bank to bite on a project that would be that large.  I wouldn't hold my breath on that space getting developed any time soon.

Successful crack dealing enterprises get shut down every day.  So do successful slaughterhouses and refineries that are located to benefit the owner while harming everyone else around.  You're right that it isn't gonna happen soon, but wheels are in motion to move that direction.  We might get there eventually.  For instance, Cleveland's creative "nuisance" approach to suing absentee slumlords.  That theory is typically reserved for industrial polluters.  Still waiting to see how it plays out in court.  Cleveland was also able to bulldoze the flats, including the taking of a parking lot for purposes of making another parking lot.  I still don't get how that one was entirely legal.  If nothing happens with the flats for a while, that could really put a chill on the blight-reduction movement.

Highest and best use.

Right now, market forces have determined that to be parking.

 

Has any more demo/infrastructure work happened on the old Dollar Bank side?

Successful crack dealing enterprises get shut down every day.  So do successful slaughterhouses and refineries that are located to benefit the owner while harming everyone else around.  You're right that it isn't gonna happen soon, but wheels are in motion to move that direction.  We might get there eventually.  For instance, Cleveland's creative "nuisance" approach to suing absentee slumlords.  That theory is typically reserved for industrial polluters.  Still waiting to see how it plays out in court.  Cleveland was also able to bulldoze the flats, including the taking of a parking lot for purposes of making another parking lot.  I still don't get how that one was entirely legal.  If nothing happens with the flats for a while, that could really put a chill on the blight-reduction movement.

 

Ummm... let's not compare illegal drug enterprises to legal ownership of parking lots (as much as I loathe them). The flats parking lots owners sold for a sh*t ton of money, because a developer wanted to develop the entire area.  Until a developer wants to pay the owner of these lots a ton of money to develop it... they will sit as parking lots.

 

Highest and best use.

Right now, market forces have determined that to be parking.

 

Has any more demo/infrastructure work happened on the old Dollar Bank side?

 

Dollar bank is completely leveled.  I haven't seen much work going on recently there, but it is graded all the way back to the colonial arcade.

From today:

 

And I guess I never looked close enough to see these details, but this will look awfully nice when it's restored:

 

Man, I wish the Hippodrome was still there.  I was surfing Cleveland Memory Project today, and sometimes it's just painful to see Euclid pre-1970.

It's too bad we lost the Hippodrome... but I'd like to add a counterpoint to this and say that overall I think we've done a good job with Euclid -- at least downtown. Really, aside from the 'drome and the buildings that BP replaced, most of the worthwhile pre-war architecture has been preserved. Now, if you're talking about 55th/Euclid and 105th/Euclid, then that's an entirely different story.

Don't forget where the National City tower is now.  Goodbye corner, hello plaza-- and the section that is flush with Euclid is just a series of billboards for the bank.  In general though I agree.  It's instructive to look at downtown birdseye views of various cities.  Despite the WHD madness, we've retained a lot of core density that others have lost.

BP was a killer...

Not to venture off topic too much but I feel it relates to 668...

 

Maybe the PNC take over of National City will allow this intersection-the heart of downtown-to turn into the 24/7 neighborhood of which we (and yes, even our beloved mayor...) dream.  Look at the north side of Euclid from PS to E9 and the storefronts are either financial institutions or vacant-save one Starbucks.  It'd be great to see a shift from a 8-5 Euclid to a 24-7 Euclid where one could do more than use an ATM.  I just hope all of the retail/restaurant usages of 668 are enough to generate some sort of activity after Wyse goes home at 6pm.  This is definetly a huge improvement from the eyesore that has sat empty for years but I hope this project takes off and inspires a renaissance in underappreciated neighboring properties.

Hoo Hah.  There is some movement going going on with the facade.  I saw a lot of workers scurrying on the canopy while walking back from a meeting after lunch.  A segment around one of the windows has been completely restored.  Some of the terra cotta that hasn't been replaced on that segment is still absurdly dirty and needs cleaned, but if you look beyond that you can see how beautiful this building is going to be.  Then I noticed that they have completely removed the storefront system on the ground level.  All gone.  I took some pictures, however I recently got a new work computer that does not accept scan disk cards so I need to find the USB cable thing to my camera which may take a bit... Mayday why don't you take your fancy new camera over there and show the kids what they're missing.  :wink:

^Progress!  Thanks for the update.  As slow as things have gotten on the development scene, it's awesome having this huge impact project still moving along.

"Mayday why don't you take your fancy new camera over there and show the kids what they're missing."

 

Like I have anything better to do?!? :?

 

 

 

The restored section is in the center of this pic:

love it.

I just noticed - are they almost done with restoring the cornice?

restoring the cornice where?

 

At the top of the building... that is still part of the aluminum system.  They will be adding on to the top.

Way up at the top - 1st photo.

They're rebuilding a half story(whatever that means) that is missing from the building currently.(whatever that means)  You can see on the rendering that there is quite a bit left to go on the top.

Looks like they are cutting down the size of the window openings quite a bit.  Still it will be great!

I wouldn't say cutting down... just restoring the openings to what they originally were.  :)

I still can't believe they had all that crap covering the facade. What in the world were they thinking?

I wouldn't say cutting down... just restoring the openings to what they originally were. :)

 

Well I hadn't heard anything about the current cutouts not being the actually size when everyone was commenting on the huge size of the windows (when more are done you will see what a reduction in size it is).  Still a nice size and should make for great street presence. 

By my guess that "finished window" is at least 7' tall and 7' wide.

Next time, MayDay, ask a pal to shimmy up the facade and stand in one of the redone window openings so we can see how big it still is!

They look huge.  Units on the front of this thing should go for a lot of $.  I still can't picture exactly what the facade will look like when restored.  They obviously have many steps remaining on the section they've cleaned.

still a pretty good size i'm guessing.  :)

Yes huge, but that level of windows is also taller than the other levels (more than a foot), and the redone one above is nearly (not quite) half that size in height. 

I still can't believe they had all that crap covering the facade. What in the world were they thinking?

 

In 30 years, what we consider attractive architecturally will likely be considered hideous. In the 1950s and 60s, Victorian design was considered awful as architects were on a binge for everything modern. Now we consider Victorian beautiful and the post-war modernity to be offensive. You can never predict how tastes will change, but you can predict one thing -- tastes will change!

I still can't believe they had all that crap covering the facade. What in the world were they thinking?

 

In 30 years, what we consider attractive architecturally will likely be considered hideous. In the 1950s and 60s, Victorian design was considered awful as architects were on a binge for everything modern. Now we consider Victorian beautiful and the post-war modernity to be offensive. You can never predict how tastes will change, but you can predict one thing -- tastes will change!

 

I agree with this to a degree.  However, one must take into consideration the astronomical costs the projects of the early 1900's would be if they were created in the 1950's/1960's.  Labor costs shot thru the roof (min. wage laws, FLSA, host of other regs), and thus something like the Convention Center/City Hall/homes in Ambler Hts, would have been too costly.

I still can't believe they had all that crap covering the facade. What in the world were they thinking?

 

In 30 years, what we consider attractive architecturally will likely be considered hideous. In the 1950s and 60s, Victorian design was considered awful as architects were on a binge for everything modern. Now we consider Victorian beautiful and the post-war modernity to be offensive. You can never predict how tastes will change, but you can predict one thing -- tastes will change!

 

Considered awful by who?  Architects who want to sell you on the latest fashion they have to sell.  Of course what's already built will be "awful".

 

Considered awful by who?  Architects who want to sell you on the latest fashion they have to sell.  Of course what's already built will be "awful".

Amen!  You're right on the money!

I still can't believe they had all that crap covering the facade. What in the world were they thinking?

 

 

 

In 30 years, what we consider attractive architecturally will likely be considered hideous. In the 1950s and 60s, Victorian design was considered awful as architects were on a binge for everything modern. Now we consider Victorian beautiful and the post-war modernity to be offensive. You can never predict how tastes will change, but you can predict one thing -- tastes will change!

 

I agree with this to a degree.  However, one must take into consideration the astronomical costs the projects of the early 1900's would be if they were created in the 1950's/1960's.  Labor costs shot thru the roof (min. wage laws, FLSA, host of other regs), and thus something like the Convention Center/City Hall/homes in Ambler Hts, would have been too costly.

 

this would explain why they dont "build them like they used to" but that wouldnt necesarily explain why they would have covered up the very beautiful structures of the early 1900's with metal sheeting and such, unless your saying they did it because it was too expensive to maintain. 

 

Also you have to realize that our country isnt very old and that we havent experienced that many periods of architecture.  I'd like to think that we've learned from past mistakes (thus the removal of the metal sheeting and the restoration of ornate structures) as well as developed a respect for the past and its wonderful craftsmanship.  Isn't this the case in older parts of the world?  They and we are not necessarily trying to replicate the same architecture of the early 1900's but at the same time have developed an appreciation for it.     

I wish we would replicate pre ware building sytles. 

I wish we would replicate pre ware building sytles.

 

We can.  If "progress" means everything we make and use has to be cheaper and crappier, then we're being sold a pretty weak version of "progress."

We can. If "progress" means everything we make and use has to be cheaper and crappier, then we're being sold a pretty weak version of "progress."

 

I don't think that it is fair to say that we are building things cheaper. Back in the day, it was not as expensive to hire stone masons to do the work that they did. Stone material and the labor involved was relatively much cheaper.

There were no labor laws, not even child labor laws.  So unless we want to enact a new round of slavery, it is not going to happen. 

True, true.  And let's not forget hardwoods, too.  I think these were the real reasons why modernism took off, not because it was ever very popular amongst the public.

We can. If "progress" means everything we make and use has to be cheaper and crappier, then we're being sold a pretty weak version of "progress."

 

I don't think that it is fair to say that we are building things cheaper. Back in the day, it was not as expensive to hire stone masons to do the work that they did. Stone material and the labor involved was relatively much cheaper.

 

Really?  I'm not disagreeing; construction isn't my field.  Just trying to understand... I was unaware that stone supplies had changed that much.  It makes sense that they would, as with anything else that can be depleted.  As for labor, I'd like to know who is negotiating salaries for all these sculpture majors.  Is it a union issue?  I guess that's likely.  But every university art dept has a few sculpture majors, right?  Where are they all working, that it would cost so much to pull them away?  Is their skill set inapplicable to this?  How inapplicable?  I mean, it's not like we're trying to replicate the pyramids using ancient technology.

 

I'm not inclined to believe that we, as a society, have lost this much capability in 100 years.  That would represent a pretty major collapse.  If we are in a full-scale societal collapse, I guess the sooner we admit it the better.

Don't forget that "back in the day" a lot of the stone masons were immigrants, such as the people who settled in Little Italy and worked at Lakeview Cemetary.