I love the fact that it seems as though, in every corner of Cleveland, someone is planning some sort of redevelopment project.  It makes me proud and excited and, I'll say it: giddy, at times.  I can't wait until everything comes to fruition.  It seems like there is so much about to happen.

 

But, has this all happened before?

 

Is this new?  Is the fact that all of these projects are in various stages of "about-to-happen" something new?  Or has Cleveland always had a roster of projects that are this close to happening and never do?

 

I'm not trying to bring any one down or kill any buzzes or anything like that.  Far from it.  I'm probably one of the biggest fans of every project that's being talked about.  Flats East Bank, Convention Center, Euclid Corridor:  Let's do it.  Breuer tower, Avenue District, Warehouse District: how can I help?  But, since I'm new to this urban development thing (and a relatively young citizen of the Cleveland area), I wonder if projects like this have always been talked about (or at least since the last big successful project: Gateway) and most never get done.

 

I know some are getting done.  Avenue District and Euclid Corridor are almost finished.  Flats Eastbank is going to happen.  So, is this different, as I hope?  Or is it more of the same?

 

Cleveland history-buffs, I'm looking at you... what do you think?

Peter Pan and Battlestar Galactica.....  Yeah, I'm the loser who felt like googling it.

Ah, Doc!  You cheated!  Although, I didn't know the Peter Pan reference,  so, you get half of a no-prize.

 

:)

Haha, yeah, sorry.  Random things like that sometimes bother me to the point that I need to look them up to avoid having a nervous twitch.  Can't say Battlestar Galactica was ever my thing....  I'm more of an X-Files fan as far as sci-fi is concerned :).  Anywho, I can't actually answer your history questions since I've only been here for 6 years, but back to those who can!

I don't know if the city has really seen the amount of developments it's seeing now at the scale they're happening all at the same time. So I think it's a bit hard to say because I'm not sure if it would be a very fair comparison.

 

I can think of things like the Ameritrust and Progressive headquarters buildings which ended up never happening .. but I'm not sure how far along those were before they got axed. These examples might not be in the same vein.

My head hurts trying to think of good reasons not to lock this thread. Anyone?

^Because it's harmless and somewhat related to urban development.

 

OP has a good point (one I made several months ago, and you locked btw): With the many, many projects coming more or less all at once, you have to wonder if this is normal or does Cleveland really have a higher development surge than other cities

This is not scientific by any means, but my father, who is almost 60, says this is the most activity he has seen in his lifetime. He recently told me, he feels the city may have finally turned a corner. Again, he couldn't point to specifics. This is from a guy who has seen the city go through default and population loss.

"^Because it's harmless and somewhat related to urban development."

 

How many threads have you personally had to go through and prune? How many forumers have you had to tolerate calling you a nazi, a heavy-handed b!tch, etc? How much time have you had to spend cleaning up after people who should know better? :-)

 

There is no such thing as a harmless thread - all it takes is one jack@ss, and then the Admins and Mods get the pleasure of taking time out of OUR lives/workday to clean things up. Sure, we could just let things go, but this isn't cleveland.com, is it? ;-)

 

Now as far as Cleveland having a higher development surge than other cities - are we really planning to scour the web, find out what other cities are doing, post allllll that info here, number crunch the investment dollars and physical scope of said developments, etc.? I have to ask for all of you who are wondering what other cities are doing - have you ever checked the following section of the skyscraperpage.com forum? http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=87

Whoa.  I just wanted to start a discussion about Cleveland and it's past.  I'm not talking about numbers or money or anything.  I was just wondering if there's always talk of projects like this, and I'm just discovering it now, or if it's, in fact, kind of historical or unprecedented that all of these things are about to happen.

 

Sorry if it's in the wrong forum, but I thought it was city discussion.

This is not scientific by any means, but my father, who is almost 60, says this is the most activity he has seen in his lifetime. He recently told me, he feels the city may have finally turned a corner. Again, he couldn't point to specifics. This is from a guy who has seen the city go through default and population loss.

 

This is the kind of answer I was looking for.  Thanks. :)

The mister's dad's girlfriend who has lived in Cleveland most of her life says that she's never seen so much urban activity here.

^I'll have to ask my parents (virtually Cleveland lifers) for their comparative impressions.

We do have several discussion thread on the past, clevelands history, neighborhoods, a "what if/why doesn't Cleveland have" and a detailed discussion thread on each project/development.

 

With all due respect, is another warranted?

 

UO has become popular and the subscriber base large.  We really need to look at merging some of these threads.

It's not in the wrong forum necessarily, it's just that as I've said - there's no such thing as a harmless thread. And with questions that are somewhat leading (i.e. "Or has Cleveland always had a roster of projects that are this close to happening and never do?", and "I wonder if projects like this have always been talked about (or at least since the last big successful project: Gateway) and most never get done."), well - this thread could bring the "bahhh, Cleveland's demolished everything and built nothing" troglodytes out from under their rocks. That wouldn't bother me, except I can only guess who will have to keep the thread on topic and civil. I know we (Admins and Mods) can come off cranky but please try to see it from our perspective - any fallout from people being idiots is on OUR hands, and time comes out of OUR day to keep this place from being the mess that cleveland.com is.

 

That said, this thread can stay as long as people can keep it civil and on-topic. I'm also moving it to Projects and Construction.

 

My take? We're definitely seeing an uptick in significant projects (Avenue District, Flats East Bank, Uptown) along with the smaller developments (1007-1021 Euclid and 668 Euclid renovations, etc.). Back in the early 90s there were a few things here and there but nothing to this extent. Prior to that it seemed like one mega-project at a time but those weren't happening with any cohesion, if that makes any sense.

Maybe move it to urban bar?

 

In my 29++++ years most of the developments have been downtown or outerbelt related. 

I can't recall developments like uptown.  It was just a few years ago that the Pinnacle building was the most exiting thing going on in the Cleveburg.

I think this is an interesting topic, actually.  I've been thinking about the same thing myself.  Anyway I could write a small book, but instead I'll just kick in with a summary of some of the large (multiple buildings or blocks) downtown redevelopment projects of the 20th century off the top of my head.

 

The Group Plan (started in 1900's or 1910's)- partially complete- missing it's west side and a northern cap

Playhouse Square (started 1910's I think)- completed, abandoned, partially demolished and redeveloped

Tower City (started in 1920's with The Renaissance somewhat older)- partially complete- missing it's Riverview phase

Erieview (started in 1960's)- partially complete- much of the parking to the east of E. 12th is empty land from Erieview

CSU (started in 1960's)- not sure how to score this, I guess we could say that CSU is ongoing/everchanging

Ameritrust complex (started 1960's) incomplete, then abandoned, now being redeveloped again

Gateway (started in 1980's)- completed, but spinoff development still in progress

Society for Savings complex (started in 1980's)- completed

Northcoast Harbor (started in 1990's)- partially completed

 

What's interesting is that even the partially completed projects rewrite the fabric of Downtown in profound ways.  Imagine Downtown without Tower City, Erieview or the Group Plan.

 

Also, I do think that when we consider how many things are planned, and planned by developers instead of the City itself, this period could be considered unprecedented.

 

MayDay, if you did want to consolidate, this discussion fits very nicely with the thread about the 1973 NYTimes article w28 posted at http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,16760.msg307861.html#new

 

Ipsilon, I think your question is interesting given the relative youth of most of the participants on this forum.  The NYTimes article certainly shows that there have been other recentish times of great optimism and bold proposals, including one in the early 1970s.  That article talked up the old Higbees Settlers Landing project which was kind of the FEB of its day.  It also talked about a waterfront development scheme (called "Gateway").  These projects obviously never happened.  But the Playhouse Square revitalization that it mentioned did happen, as did some new office buildings and Reserve Square, etc. that were very new then.

 

I guess only time will tell if the current bloom of project announcements really is something different.  At the very least though, FEB seems to be a definite go (at least some portion of it) as well as 668 Euclid.  But if UARD and the Breuer projects fell apart (which I am in no way predicting!!!), it wouldn't be unprecedented. 

This is what I was hoping to get out of this.  Thanks everybody.  Keep sharing.

"The Group Plan (started in 1900's or 1910's)- partially complete- missing it's west side and a northern cap"

 

It was 1903. You can thank the Van Sweringens for the missing northern cap - Cleveland's main train station was located just west of the area north of Mall C. But instead of a northern cap, 27 years later we ended up with:

 

From the Wikipedia entry:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Sweringen_brothers

 

"The Van Sweringens realized that if their plans for a Public Square station were to succeed, they would have to include all the electric railways -- streetcars, rapid transit, and interurban lines -- as well as local freight and warehousing facilities. Following the suggestion of an official of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, they added plans to include steam railways.

 

On March 1, 1917, the engineers of the Erie Railroad, the Nickel Plate, and the Cleveland Terminal Company reported that a new freight-and-passenger terminal located on Public Square in downtown Cleveland would be economical. The plan provided twelve stub-end tracks for the steam passenger trains, with loops for local and interurban cars above. The space above the tracks was to be developed for stores and office buildings.

 

In 1918, A.H. Smith, the regional Director of the Eastern Division of the United States Railroad Administration, asked whether or not the proposed facility could be sufficiently enlarged to include the railroads using the lakefront station. Thus, it was Smith who initiated the idea for a "Union Station" on Public Square. In 1919, the Pennsylvania Railroad withdrew from the project.

 

In 1923, the Van Sweringens announced their plans to build The Terminal Tower (a tall building to increase office space) over the Union Station to compare to the Woolworth Building in New York City. It was necessary to design the buildings to avoid vibrations from the trains below. Construction began in 1926 as 16 caissons each went down 200 to 250 feet (60 to 75 m) to support the weight of the building. Construction was completed in 1930."

I think we will see a totally different Cleveland in the next 5 years.  If Chicago gets the 2016 Olympics, I definetly see us setting ourselves up for a very legimate 2032-2036 bid.  Again, it's not the end result of the 6-8 mega projects we're hearing about, but it's what they will provoke-physically and socially.  This is just the beginning!!!

The big ticket items of the late 80’s and early 90’s focused mostly on entertainment/sports venues and buildings that were successful at bringing people back downtown. However they failed at being a true renaissance as there was no focus on the neighborhoods. This time it is a different. The projects being planned and built will bring folks downtown to live, not just come in and see a ball game on the weekend and head back to the burbs.

I was born here 30 years ago and have been following urban development for about 20 years.  The current era reminds me of the buzz when TC was built.  The vision around that time was much grander for downtown, but very unrealistic in hindsight.  Somewhere on here there are photos of a model that was displayed at TC which showed a skyline rivaling any city in the USA, save NYC, Chicago and San Fran.  It was on the level with what Philly did to Center City in the early 90's.

 

That vision mainly related to the CBD, not UC and other areas of town where we are seeing so much investiment now.  I think the plan this time around is more sound and realistic.  I predict that most of the major projects, if not all, being discussed now will actually get built.  I can't say I am more optimistic than 20 years ago, but that is not saying much since I was a 10 year old kid who had no knowledge of the financial aspects.... I just had a fascination with skyscrapers and assumed they would get built as depicted.  Looking back, it seems that the proposal being touted around by Mayor White had as much of a "green light" as Campbell's lakefront development plan. 

 

In the end, the early 90's at least brought us Key Center (and Marriot), 5/3 Building, US Bank Building, TC Complex, Gateway, NorthPoint, and RRHOF.... not too bad IMO, but not nearly the grand scale that was contemplated.

 

The only complaint I have now is why wait so long.  Some of these projects would not be scaled down if they could have come to fruitiion prior to the monumental rise in construction costs.  This is especially true of the new CC.

I wonder if projects like this have always been talked about (or at least since the last big successful project: Gateway) and most never get done

I've seen quite a few abandoned projects over the past 20-30 years, most were ill-concieved though. Aside from the more obvious ones such as Progressive & Ameritrust, here they are:

I like the DoubleTree one and the Tower City one.

 

Kassouf's and Bowen's look horrible.

I always thought that Tower City plan looked amazing!!!!

 

Look how it opens up to the Cuyahoga, giving the riverside the prominence it deserves.

^Anything would be better than that horrid looking surface lot with exposed garage that looks like something out of a horror movie.

 

Barney thanks for posting those, some interesting stuff... By the way I'd take the avenue district any day of the week over whatever compound it is that Bowen was proposing.

 

Otherwise, regarding the overall theme of the thread.  To steal from Phil Savage, at some point the town needs to get over the "Woah is me" syndrome.  Some of the projects on the table now may never make it, but if they fail, it will be for completely different reasons than past ones failed.  You can't say because one developers project working in a different lending climate, with a different administration, 20 or 30 years ago... that the same holds true for a different developer, in a different area, with different administrations, etc.  There's too many variables to compare different eras.

 

That being said, I think in the late 80's early 90's people were throwing around a lot of ideas, that didn't particuarly make a lot of sense, just because a few good things were happening.  What's happening now seems to be more realistic sustainable developments... so I think they've got a much better chance of happening and succeeding.

 

But just look at the amount of things that are ACTUALLY happening RIGHT NOW:

Flats East Bank

Avenue District

668

John Hartness Brown

East 4th

Several Large Scale CSU projects

Reconstruction of Euclid Avenue

 

I'd Be willing to bet money on the following projects happening:

Ameritrust (say what you want about K&D, but their track record for getting things done is pretty outsanding)

Uptown (again, developers involved have an outstanding track record)

Convention Center / Med Mart

 

So what does that leave us with:

PESHT (I'm convinced this will get done, but guessing it will take a couple years to get together. at some point the momentum of whats happening in the flats / warehouse will NEED to merge with Euclid... market conditions will become ideal)

Jacobs PS Property (currently skeptical, but again, I think once all that's listed above, I think the market conditions will be ripe)

District of Design... I'd still be a little surprised if this doesn't happen, but I'll wait to here more.

 

Seriously that is A LOT of stuff that is absolutely happening, and surely has to rival any period of construction in downtown since it started tanking in the 60's.

I've seen quite a few abandoned projects over the past 20-30 years, most were ill-concieved though. Aside from the more obvious ones such as Progressive & Ameritrust.

You should seriously consider putting a website together with the never ending collection of information/photos you have.

Does anyone know why that original Tower City plan fell through?  I realize that plans can change from the way they are originally designed, but the difference between the way that proposal looks compared to what they actually ended up building seems a bit extreme.  Any idea on what was supposed to go in it?  I can't seem to find any info about the details of the original plan. 

 

The "Tower City" name would have made a lot more sense if they actually built what they proposed.

I think the TC model shown was more of a long term "master plan", meant to implemented over time...

 

welcome aboard urbanomics.

You can clearly see the Rock Hall in the Tower City model. I have to wonder how things would have been different (for both Tower City and North Coast Harbor), had it been built there.

I asked my sister about OP's topic (she grew up around here in the late 80s/early 90s).  She didn't really have an answer as to whether or not there was a better overall vibe about developments downtown; however, this whole concept of living in Cleveland was relatively unheard of then and she is really impressed by a lot of the residential projects she's read about. 

Thanks McCleveland.

 

I would just like to see them finish that area along the river with something (although I would still rather see the convention center get built at the mall site).

Is that supposed to be the Rock Hall on the riverfront in the Tower City master plan picture?

^Indeed.  And it wasn't just Forest City wishful thinking: the R&RHOF was initially designed by Pei for that site, but was later moved to North Coast Harbor (don't remember why though).

^ So is that why the "Hard Rock" is in TC as opposed to a location closer to the Hall?  Not sure where it could have been built closer, but I always wondered why it wasn't bit closer.

^ So is that why the "Hard Rock" is in TC as opposed to a location closer to the Hall?  Not sure where it could have been built closer, but I always wondered why it wasn't bit closer.

No. the Hard Rock is an "after thought".  The Hard Rock is in the Barney's New York/Calvin Klein space.

 

The RRHoF has their own "restaurant" and didn't want to compete with the Hard Rock.  So years after the RRHoF opened, the Hard Rock was then persued by the folks at Tower City.

I think the TC model shown was more of a long term "master plan", meant to implemented over time...

Tower City is a story unto itself of unfulfilled proposals. Some, such as Neiman-Marcus and the expansion of Stouffer's (Renaissance) were victims of the economic and cultural climate. The original plans from the 80's, compared with what's being considered today are light years apart.

Wow, I had NO idea that the original plans were so extensive, nor (seemingly) so far along (i.e. asserting the Neimen Marcus WOULD be an anchor, having the Stouffer expansion designed, etc).

 

Seeing the RRHOF on the edge of the Cuyahoga is really neat, although I do think I prefer it in its current location. Question though: the caption on the photo is hard to read, but does it really say "Pei's 1968 design"?

It should say 1988.

I believe it does, it's just the scanning/small type makes it look like a 6. Again - awesome images, Barneyboy!!

I for one and glad most of that stuff, sans the the hotels.

 

We'd be where Atlanta, Houston and Miami are now.  Great skyline with a bunch of empty/half-empty buildings.

MTS I completely agree with you... while "looking cool", most of that TC development on the river would have been ill conceived.  That stuff is expansion.  We're just not at the expansion stage yet (and certainly weren't then).  We've got plenty of holes that need in the center of the city first.

 

EDIT: But yes, the hotel in that hole in the ground would have been (and still would be) a great addition.

Has anyone ever seen renderings for what the riverside phase of the  Union Terminal Complex was originally supposed to look like in the Van Swerringen's day?

Yes. Imagine the Guildhall and Midland buildings all along the south side of Huron, and becoming increasingly smaller in scale on the river side of Ontario Street the farther south from downtown you go. The buildings along Ontario would have been built over the rapid transit and Cleveland Union Terminal Railroad tracks.

If you'd like to see (visibly) some of the big developments of the past, check out www.clevelandmemory.org, which is the site of the Special Collections Department at Cleveland State University.  They've got some wonderful collections, and two of them pertain to these discussions; The Union Terminal Collection, which details the construction of the Union Terminal and Terminal Tower; and the Cleveland Press Collection, the old "morgue" for the late, great, Cleveland Press.  The Union Terminal collection (http://web.ulib.csuohio.edu/cut2/index.shtml)has a great many photos showing what existed before the area was demolished to build the terminal complex, and gives you a wonderful idea of the sheer scale of the project.  The Mall project's railroad station was planned to be a very grand edifice (http://ech.cwru.edu/Resource/Image/M02.jpg), which sadly was never completed ... there's actually a great series of articles and information available on the group plan (http://groupplan.dhellison.com/articles.php) which has some great renderings as well. 

 

But don't forget development that led to possible negative consequences ... such as the digging of the innerbelt freeway, and the construction of the Willow Freeway (I-77).  Think of the neighborhoods that were disrupted or outright destroyed.  I was always amazed by the photo at the Cleveland Press Collection showing St. Joseph's Church on Woodland Avenue, surrounded by a sea of nothingness, as the surrounding neighborhood was utterly demolished to make way for the freeway and "urban renewal."  Now on that site is Tri-C, some other buildings, and some housing projects.  Renewal?

 

Cities are constantly being made and remade, and there's always been periods of development in Cleveland's history, though the stuff currently going on is intriguing, because a good deal of the development we're talking about here is the reintroduction of living spaces in the downtown area ... which is a development that counters the past trends ... Gateway was nice, but it didn't bring that many people downtown to live ... but the Flats East Bank project, the K&D developments on the West Bank, the Avenue, hopefully someday the Scranton Peninsula, the various developments in Tremont, all are bringing people back downtown, countering much of the urban renewal and "white flight" of the 1960s.  If anything, I'm wondering if this is almost a tipping point ... will these developments bear fruit, and bring more people downtown to live?  And if so, will eventually we get a "critical mass," which will result in more housing and more retail to feed and supply those people living downtown, and thus making downtown more vibrant, and more active?  The past developments were all about offices, civic buildings, buildings with a social purpose (arenas, auditoriums, etc.) or developments that eliminated housing (such as the neighborhoods destroyed for the Union Terminal complex or for freeway construction)... but now these new developments are all about places to live. 

 

It's an exciting time to live in Cleveland, but it'll be even more exciting in the near future as this stuff opens up, and we see if people continue to move back into the city ... and what the spillover will be from that!

But don't forget development that led to possible negative consequences ... such as the digging of the innerbelt freeway, and the construction of the Willow Freeway (I-77). Think of the neighborhoods that were disrupted or outright destroyed. I was always amazed by the photo at the Cleveland Press Collection showing St. Joseph's Church on Woodland Avenue, surrounded by a sea of nothingness, as the surrounding neighborhood was utterly demolished to make way for the freeway and "urban renewal." Now on that site is Tri-C, some other buildings, and some housing projects. Renewal?

 

Cities are constantly being made and remade, and there's always been periods of development in Cleveland's history, though the stuff currently going on is intriguing, because a good deal of the development we're talking about here is the reintroduction of living spaces in the downtown area ... which is a development that counters the past trends ... Gateway was nice, but it didn't bring that many people downtown to live ... but the Flats East Bank project, the K&D developments on the West Bank, the Avenue, hopefully someday the Scranton Peninsula, the various developments in Tremont, all are bringing people back downtown, countering much of the urban renewal and "white flight" of the 1960s. If anything, I'm wondering if this is almost a tipping point ... will these developments bear fruit, and bring more people downtown to live? And if so, will eventually we get a "critical mass," which will result in more housing and more retail to feed and supply those people living downtown, and thus making downtown more vibrant, and more active? The past developments were all about offices, civic buildings, buildings with a social purpose (arenas, auditoriums, etc.) or developments that eliminated housing (such as the neighborhoods destroyed for the Union Terminal complex or for freeway construction)... but now these new developments are all about places to live.

 

It's an exciting time to live in Cleveland, but it'll be even more exciting in the near future as this stuff opens up, and we see if people continue to move back into the city ... and what the spillover will be from that!

 

Rebeard I couldn't agree with this section of your post more...

The Medical Mart is another project that has been in planning a long time.

In 1981 the City of Cleveland was to purchase, for 2.25 mil, what is now MK Ferguson Plaza and turn it over to Forest City to develop a Medical Mart..

Forest city had just purchased Union Terminal property in 1980 for 8.5 mil.

The Federal Government added 3.2 mil for road/bridge repair in 1982. This was to help overcome the dispute resulting from the City of Cleveland Ordinance of 1919 which laid out a framework of who was responsible for the maintenance of the roads/bridges and utilities that are over the Terminal Tower complex.

The book, Cleveland’s Towering Treasure, A Landmark Turns 75, has a site plan with the medical mart labeled in what is now MK Ferguson Plaza.

Forest City was unable to lease the property and that part of the Tower City Development ended in 1984.

Good post. You should also copy and paste that over to the Convention Center/MM thread.

As has been said already, I think we're at a tipping point with residential development Downtown. Success breeds success and as each of these projects is completed and is filled out with residents, more developers will then get on the train.