Just a short blurb in Crains Cleveland....

 

 

High-tech office bldg. planned near the Jake

 

By SHANNON PETTYPIECE

 

July 25. 2005 6:01AM

 

The sign for that project has been there for ages - good to see they might actually be moving on it. More info at http://www.ontariopointe.com/Why_Ontario_Pointe.asp

 

 

Interesting.  From the one pic, it looks to be almost nothing more than a glass shell.  Where is the meeting space/offices/whatever?  Underground?  That would be a little odd, as you'd lose the views they tout.  But anything ther will look better than the current vacant (grassy) lot.

 

Here's a past proposal for the site.  I love the lightning, too funny ...

 

 

At one time there was going to be some sort of tickettron outlet on that parcel.  It's a small island...can't imagine how a large building would fit in.

The building above looks like a Florida resort..cool!  Isn't that where the Landmark at Gateway was suposed to be.

The little sliver appears to be about 260 or so feet long at it's longest face (the one facing gateway) and about 120 feet at it's shortest..

You can fit more on that small island than you think.  This is the area where there used to be a shell station, right?

On the website, it looks more like one of the new rapid stations that have gone up in recent years.  Could we actually call this an office building? 

Looks like a totally inefficient use of prime land.  Look how much of the area is dedicated to surface parking.  There's gotta be something better to do with this land than this proposal.

The nice thing, though, is that the way it is set up, it leaves a buildable area where that parking lot is that can always be filled later with another building if the demand is there for it.

^I agree, it's a strange project and a waste of land (including potential land). Like the Ontario Pointe website says, this may be something you might see in New York City -- but in its suburbs! If it were built in Manhattan, you'd see the large office building pictured in the posting by Paul. That was proposed to be built on a vacated section of what was once a continuation of old Ontario Street (before the Cleveland Union Terminal right of way was built in the 1920s). Vacating this lightly used street would allow the developers to acquire land fairly cheaply.

 

Vacating this street was something I proposed a couple of years ago to make way for a transit-oriented development. I suggested a rapid station be built next to the site, but RTA officials said a station would have to be built a little farther south, on the opposite side of Lorain-Carnegie, to avoid conflicting with signalling and track switches for the approaches to Tower City Center. OK, no problem.

 

So, if this Ontario Pointe is something you'd see in New York City, why didn't they tie it in with the rail transit lines just below the bluff? They would have in New York! Otherwise, how are people going to get to this thing? I see the parking, but the traffic around this area is horrendous. I can't imagine trying to make a left turn here. I'd just drive past it. Are pedestrians from Jacobs Field going to try to cross the eight lanes of traffic to reach it? This isn't a New York-style project. It's a cheap, suburban kiosk with an advertising ticker wrapping around it. I might expect to see something like this in the center of a suburban mall.

 

If this is the best, most imaginative thing we can do for that site, Cleveland is in trouble.

 

KJP

KJP,

 

I am kind of confused about what you are saying.  Where is this vacated land?

From the drawing it looks like the width of the building is 2 car lengths.  Thats some tight office space.

Wimwar,

 

I was looking at the office building Paul posted, thinking that was the proposed project (I wish it was!). I since visited the Ontario Pointe website and adjusted my response (OK, I totally re-wrote it!).

 

KJP

the rendering looks like a suburban office tower, and an outdated one at that. i'm sure the new proposal, the ticker tape (?) version, will look much better and more modern. but i hope they keep the lightning -- that's hot!

 

oh wait a sec....from the website, is this it?

 

yee-ow! what is with these people and their armageddon skies???

 

here's the land parcel, looking south

 

and north

 

i have to think about that weak initial design, but hey it could work --- and it's some good news!

 

 

Do you guys not like anything that is not art deco?

well yeah, i usually like what you don't like.

I think that building at the top of the page would be awesome.  That would be Cleveland's best building after the Key Tower, IMO.

 

Usage of glass in building is both practical and beautiful.

^and the use of lightning bolts

The building at the top is not the plan.  Anyways, I don't see how it would ever fit on this lot.  The lot used to house a gas station! 

 

If the developer wants to build, then let him build something as long as he doesnt throw vinyl siding on it.  New development would boost tax revenues, so I am for it.  I really can't imagine anything doing well on this parcel.  I wouldnt want to live or work there.  Its in the middle of the street!  This developer either is crazy or sees something that I don't.

Ah, I see what you mean about that little chunk of Ontario, KJP.  It would make sense to vacate and develop that.  It's pretty useless, and needlessly complicates the traffic flow in that area.

 

BTW, in addition to my comments about the site plan leaving room for another building being the best thing about it, I would say that there is the consolation that this building seems very "temporary".  It wouldn't be hard to imagine it coming down in say 10 years if something grander were to be called for on this site.  Obviously I'd love to see a grand skyscraper like what Paul posted (but less suburban) built now, but I'll take something over nothing.  It isn't a critical intersection for pedestrians.

Re: New office building in Cleveland near the Jake

 

What's the Jake?

Jacob's Field, home of the Cleveland Indians.

Ah, I see what you mean about that little chunk of Ontario, KJP.  It would make sense to vacate and develop that.  It's pretty useless, and needlessly complicates the traffic flow in that area.

 

BTW, in addition to my comments about the site plan leaving room for another building being the best thing about it, I would say that there is the consolation that this building seems very "temporary".  It wouldn't be hard to imagine it coming down in say 10 years if something grander were to be called for on this site.  Obviously I'd love to see a grand skyscraper like what Paul posted (but less suburban) built now, but I'll take something over nothing.  It isn't a critical intersection for pedestrians.

 

Could this developer be thinking "outside" the box?   

 

Stranger things have happened and something we think is "wrong" or "not well thought out" or "in a less desirable location" could turn out to be really cool, just because of all the "perceived" negatives.  The developer could actually pull off something different and unexpected that we could be proud of.

 

I mean this could be the start of development on southern Ontario?  Sherwin-Williams never developed the hotel, at Huron and Ontario overlooking the peninsula, could this be a sign of new development along this busy street?  If this building is being built, there needs to be further/future development along the western side of ontario to bridge the gap.    Is this wishful thinking? :wink:

 

this is off topic, but my complaint is we built parking garages for gateway with no ground level retail.  :x

I know, I was just joking.

It kind of looks like the 515 garage on Euclid to me.  Question:  Where are people going to park?

It kind of looks like the 515 garage on Euclid to me.  Question:  Where are people going to park?

 

its suppose to be "new york - esque". ......meaning, no parking buddy...walk or use public transportation!!  :-)

Not quite - if you check the web site, there's a parking area just north of the building (still on that small patch of land).

I see the "limited" parking.  which is why i said "esque"  lol

 

Granted I would love to see MORE building and less surface lot!

I think the land parcel is a perfect spot for what they are trying to use it for. If this project is completed, I can see a lot of techie businesses leasing office space in the building, just because its "high tech".. I also heard that an Ikea was possible near this location, perhaps the side further away from downtown..

i was all excited until i saw the website and renderings. terrible :(

Here is what I proposed for that site several years ago...

 

 

KJP

man one of these days we gotta get KJP in charge of transit and planning in this berg....  something other then the same old same old would be such a refreshing change.

Wow, that's great KJP!  Those narrow, short little streets would harken back to the days when this was the Haymarket.

I, too, am VERY disappointed in the initial drawings for this site.  I've had no inspiring ideas of my own, however, so KJP's drawings are refreshing, although potentially heartbraking, considering what the proposal looks like right now...

 

And KJP, you are a treasure trove of amazing vision for Cleveland.  Too bad you're not a multi-billoinaire to put these things into effect on your own!

 

I'm curious to hear more about your ideas for this location and what the response was from the City.  I see you put this together in 2002...and that you also have quite a few ideas for this area with the realignment of the innerbelt bridge...how do these two play together?  This one obviously requires a fair amount of public intervention, but nothing compared to the innerbelt bridge construction!  So, what have they said?

 

 

I spoke to RTA and Cleveland Growth Association. RTA said the station couldn't be there, because it would conflict with the diverging trackage into/out of Tower City Center. My response was:  then shorten the lead tracks. Their response: do you know how much that would cost? My response: yes, so what?

 

My contact at the Growth Association asked what RTA said about my idea.

 

Now you know why I get so pissed off at this f***ing city sometimes.

 

KJP

This thing looks like it should be located on Rockside road not in downtown Cleveland. Why don't they just take the old May Co. building and reconfigure that into high tech office space? This would have two positives: 1. No ugly office building in downtown 2. Would keep chipping away at the high (but dropping) vacancy rate in DT Cleveland.

I'm going to suggest some possible reasonings why KJP's proposal (which is brilliant, btw) was given a chilly reception.

 

1. There is a Rapid Station located at Tower City Center.

2. There is an enclosed walkway from the Rapid Station at Tower City Center which leads to this area.

3. If Rapid riders had the option of KJP's proposed station, they wouldn't be forced to walk through the walkway from Tower City Center.

4. If the riders weren't forced to walk from Tower City Center, Tower City Center might lose foot traffic.

5. If Tower City Center lost foot traffic, they would lose out on potential customers for The Avenue (shopping center at Tower City).

6. They would also lose out on Rapid riders who might prefer to disembark closer to the southern portion of the CBD.

7. The owners of Tower City Center are in very tight with the Cleveland Growth Association.

 

Is anyone else connecting the dots? Methinks something is rotten at 50 Public Square.

 

Your guess is correct. Now that you mention it, RTA officials did say that part of their reasoning was the proximity of the Tower City station and because they made an investment in the walkway to Gateway. However, the two stations aren't much farther apart than downtown stations in other cities. Yet, Cleveland has only one downtown station on the Red Line. My proposed station would be a logical second downtown stop.

 

All of this is why Tower City needs some high-rise housing around it so it doesn't have to rely on a few traffic sources to survive. Build the traffic base and both stations become viable. I proposed a development scheme for the second station. Forest City needs to develop one for theirs.

 

KJP

^yeah, who says downtowns have to be completely centered around one focal point?

^yeah, who says downtowns have to be completely centered around one focal point?

 

I think that Mr. Forest City said so.

forest city is the problem!  :x

 

we need to buildup street level retail/business at the north coast harbor, 18/19 st. clair & superior, playhouse square.

 

life would be easier for the citizens of cleveland!

By the way, thanks for all your compliments! I recently started a nonprofit consultancy, called NEOtrans, as a program of a nonprofit organization. I am doing transportation and land-use visioning, public outreach and media relations for clients, as well as for the nonprofit organization. The consultancy's website is www.neotrans.org -- but is very early on the design process! But, I do have a public forum there (password-protected), so stop by!

 

KJP

I was wondering if anyone had heard any updates on this project. I recently remembered reading about this building as I drove past the Jake earlier this week and couldn't recall if it had died on the vine or was still progressing.

I sent them an e-mail requesting some kind of update, but have yet to hear back.