STATEMENT
From: Office of the Mayor
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
Andrea V. Taylor, Press Secretary
(216) 664-4171 or (216) 857-7998
Michelle Watts, Assist. to Chief of Communications
(216)664-3999
For Immediate Release
June 29, 2007
Mayor Jackson’s Statement on the Ameritrust Tower Decision
“The Planning Commission made the right decision. The Euclid Avenue and 9th Street area of the corridor is an important part of the future of downtown. With approximately 1500 additional people in that area, along with the 25,000 people we are working to attract to the Downtown neighborhood, this decision becomes key to the revitalization of the City of Cleveland and the region,” said Mayor Frank Jackson.-30-
CLEVELAND -- By a 5-2 vote, the city planning commission has given the green light to a plan to demolish the Ameritrust tower at the corner of East 9th and Prospect.The county wants to build a new headquarters complex on the site.
Architects, preservationists and tax watchdogs had all argued against demolition.
Some argued the building was an important piece of architectural history. It was designed by famed architect Marcel Breuer.
But in the end, the county managed to convince the planning commission that the present building could not be adequately renovated to meet needs.
Demolition is expected to take place in the spring with a new building opening by 2011.
The building will house 1,700 county workers.
It's hoped that the building will help revitalize Euclid Avenue.
Thank Yew very Much!!
I have another post to write about the arrogance of supposed power and who do “they” think they are. But first, I wanted to put out some “thank yous” to some VERY important people who are demanding that the decision about the Breuer Tower takes a reasoned appproach to a very thorny issue. A decision of such magnitude should never be made behind the scenes if we are truly going to be a democratic society. Vague assertions by elected county officials attesting to the fact that architects and engineers are on board with our decision are not enough. We the public need to know who these individuals are. Let them come forth and speak. Have they? No! We have heard of “concepts” and refutations that say others’ figures are incorrect and too high or too low, but we have never seen the actual costs of what the county’s proposal will be. The county architect has never weighed in on this issue. The Cuyahoga County Commission was never consulted. Who made these decisions that Commissioners Dimora and Hagan are pushing so vehemently? Where are these people who stand behind the decision of these two?
See how easily it is to be taken off point. This post was about thank yous. And, here they are. The first thank you goes to my fellow bloggers who linked to my post that said we needed to be there to witness the meeting. Obviously, the word spread wider than my small blog. The second thank you goes to the number of regular citizens who took time to attend the City Planning Commission Meeting to hear for themselves Chairman Coyne’s impassioned speech comparing Cleveland to Chicago and how we in Cleveland “don’t get it, we just don’t get it! But he did, as well as three of his colleagues when they voted to deny Joe Cimperman’s long, convoluted motion with more caveats than Carter’s has little liver pills.
in all my years, I have never heard such a motion put before a board. What a sham! The motion essentially agreed to demolition IF the County showed a master plan, IF the County showed that public access from Euclid and Ninth would be a priority, IF it was shown that the rotunda would be an integral part of the plan, and I think there were two or three other IFS that I don’t even remember. And then, Larry Lumpkin seconded this sorry excuse for a motion and proceeded to again parrot Cimperman’s ‘these are our partners and we must have faith’ speech’. But then, Lillian Kuri questioned the use of partners when talking about the county. She cited that her June 8th packet from the county was missing pieces, she also waved a sheet of blue paper containing the summary that she said she still had not received by 6 p.m. Thursday the 14th. She didn’t buy the partner speech and she demanded to see real numbers and real statistics so that she and the other members of the City Planning Commission could make a reasoned decision. David Bowen again reiterated his contention that there was not enough information to make a decision. Jean Pinkney just shook her head in disbelief at what she was hearing and witnessing during this meeting. She too voted against the motion on the floor. If Norm Krumholz had been in attendance, he would have been proud of his colleagues.
So a big thank you goes out to the second oldest planning commission in the nation–our own Cleveland Planning Commission. They stepped up to the plate, refused to be bullied into making an uninformed decision, and did what they were appointed to do. They truly were the check and balance to a shoddy piece of work presented by the County. And as Chairman Coyne said, his commission is charged with making Cleveland and the County a ”Better Place” and, he just isn’t convinced.
And my last but very important thank you goes to those of you who have had the courage to phone me and email me with insight and added information that was freely given in a spirit of civic pride and concern.
Thanks to all of you.
Breuer Update...
I just caught word through the grapevine that the City of Cleveland Planning Commission has in fact decided to force Cuyahoga County to follow due process and provide significantly more information about their plans for the Marcel Breuer Ameritrust Tower.
The World Is Watching…
June 14th, 2007and so are we. The City Planning Commission decision concerning the Breuer Tower is being watched worldwide by architects, preservationists, historians, and artists. But will the most important segment of society “US” be watching and sitting in those chairs tomorrow when the City Planning Commission decides whether the Breuer Tower lives or dies? As sad as it may be to see that building die through demolition, sadder still will it be if the Cleveland Planning Commission allows itself to slip into obscurity. Something that will be inevitable if they allow a demolition permit to slide through without the seven step process that Hunter Morrison so eloquently and succinctly outlined June 8.
When a “partner” doesn’t feel you are worthy of consideration or consultation or for that matter does not think that the guidelines you have put in place are even worth addressing, is that “partner” truly a “partner”? When that same “partner” doesn’t think it important to consult with their own planning commission, where do you stand in the order of what they find important? How insulting to have someone come before you with “concepts” and the latest “buzz words” and expect you to hand what they want to them on a silver platter with no questions!
The waste of taxpayers’ money and of our asset “The Euclid Heritage Corridor” is unexplainable to me. What are the goals in this endeavor? Is it to bail out a rich developer-the purchase of the building from The Jacobs conglomerate? Is it to award contracts to friends and contributors? Is it to have a building named after one’s self? Is it to be used as a stepping stone to higher office? Is it to cover the street with slick oil so that the next demolition permit will be oh so much easier to obtain because the credibility and the integrity of the city planning commission will already be compromised from this decision?
I don’t know if the reasons behind this request for demolition are this sleazy and self-serving, but when you listen to Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones’ reasoned and thoughtful pondering of his decision, it makes you wonder. I do know that this is a tipping point for our community, and therefore, it is incumbent on as many of as possible to be in Room 514 in City Hall tomorrow at 9 a.m. to watch the execution order come down.
I have had phone calls and conversations with people–many who have said that the decision to demolish this building was made long before the first planning commission meeting. Don’t let them do this without witnesses. Be there with me the modern day Madame LaFarge watching and listening and recording. Another call I had said that there is much consternation and nervousness on the amount of publicity and questions that have arisen over this decision. This person said that there is hope if we can just make them see that this decision is critical to the future of our community. At the very least, a decision of this magnitude that involves the city and the county needs to have full disclosure, full investigation, and reasoned deliberation before a vote is taken. Make sure that happens. Be there!
Word on the Street vs. Fact
June 1, I attended the City Planning Commission Committee Hearing where Architect Doug Hoffman of Weber Murphy Fox used the above title for his powerpoint presentation. It was informative and gave a good case for renovation and restoration of the Breuer Tower. A study paid for by the architectural firm itself was used as the fact to refute the “word on the street”. It built a good case for adaptive reuse of the only skyscraper Marcel Breuer designed. Mr. Hoffman showed why his team chose adaptive reuse of the existing building tying it to our heritage with the rotunda and bringing it into the 21st century by wrapping the Breuer Tower partially with glass. Detailed architecural plans were submitted showing how the historic Cleveland Trust Rotunda would be used in the overall scheme of things. It showed how public spaces would draw pedestrians and others into the building. It showed a space for a public garden. It showed floor plans of how the infrastructure would change so that the floor space would be more efficient. It showed how cables and other things needed for newer technologies would be hidden from view and that it would not hinder the aesthetics or the effficiency of the building.
And then, and then, he talked about the EMPLOYEES of the county and how their comfort level would be enhanced by temperature controls in the cubicles so that they controlled their own COMFORT level. He talked about how DAYLIGHT reached almost to the core of the building. He talked about privacy for employees but also work spaces where they could come together to collaborate. And I thought to myself now this is innovation-considering the employees-so that productivity and efficiency would be enhanced. I thought to myself why didn’t they choose this plan, but I left with an open mind and a heart filled with hope that next week on June 8th when Robert Madison International Inc. and his team presented their plan for the site, I would see an even better plan since this was the team chosen to tear down the Beuer Tower and build new.
Instead, I saw nothing that I could use to compare the two. There were no numbers to stand side by side in comparison. Instead this team refuted the numbers of the week before by saying the savings were too high and the costs were too low, but I didn’t see much of this team’s stand alone costs so that the public and the planning commission could be informed ensuring that a reasoned decision could be made. In fact, I said as much during my testimony. I said I had come seeking answers to specific monetary questions, but I was left with aesthetics and “pie-in-the-sky” promises that the rotunda was the core and central to the complex but when asked how it would be incorporated Mr. Madison replied that that had not been decided yet. I came to see architectural plans of what the new complex would look like; I saw conceptual plans. Disclaimers abounded that these were concepts and were not meant to be considered as the actual plans. Huh? This firm and its partners just won a multi-million contract with the county and these were CONCEPTS.
And the employee portion, I heard a lot about transformational workplaces, the need to guard against asbestos exposure, and a spokesman from a company indicted for kickbacks on a Lorain project, but more importantly, a company that has never demolished a building taller than thirteen stories. The one time that we need a national expert not available here in Cleveland, we award the contract to an intown boy and his crew. And this use of transformational in regards to tearing down and building new really rubbed me the wrong way. Tearing down and building new is simply replacement. Transformational means taking what is and changing it into something brighter and better.
All of this vague talk concerning a multi-million dollar expenditure of taxypayer’s money was disturbing, but the most disturbing thing to me was the way a meeting that began very organized and methodical turned into such a muddled mess at the end with people left scratching their heads and wondering what had just happened. Well, folks, here is my theory and understand it is just that. In fact, it is nothing more than word on the street, but I think it is worth pondering because of what happened at that meeting. This is my prediction and I am sticking to it. Joe Cimperman has his eyes set on a much bigger piece of the pie than being councilman of Ward 13. And soon, I will tell you what position he is vying for and why.
Norm Krumholz moved that the City Planning Commission vote to deny the demolition permit. Voting for this denial would have put a six month review process in place which would have answered many of the thoughtful and valid questions that the commision had. The motion was defeated by a four to three vote. David Bowen said that he could not vote for denying the permit at this point in time because he needed a lot more information such as detailed plans, why the figures this week differed so greatly from last week, why the ceiling height this week was a foot and a half lower than what was told to the commission last week if renovation was used. He shared Lillian Kuri’s concerns about public spaces and public access and the use of the rotunda. And this one was huge, but no one from the county had an answer. How many downtown spaces would be empty when the county moves to the new location? What exactly are the economic advantages of this ”complex”? How did federal and state historic credits fit into this plan? No one knew.
And then, and then, Joe opens his mouth and says how long are we going to hold up this project, these are our partners, are you saying we mistrust them, we have parking lots all over town because people came before this commission with no better plans than we have seen today. Huh?What’s up with that? And then, as far as I am concerned the whole meeting went up for grabs. Someone asked when was the county planning commission consulted on the project probably thinking if there were results from those meetings they would be very helpful and there would be less time needed. But then, Lee Trotter looked at those sitting beside him, and he had to tell the commission that the COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION had NOT been involved in the decision making. So, there we were, a county project in the making for the last ten years has no architecural plan, did not consult its own planning commission, and said that they would need longer than one week to answer these questions. But the planning commission decides to go ahead with a one week time frame anyway.
Here is my theory. Joe Cimperman is going to run for county commissioner. Why else would he turn his back on the reasoned testimony of former City Planner Hunter Morrison who presented a seven point plan used in the past when planning a major project like this one-Key Tower probably being the most prominent one. Why would he turn his back on his own colleagues and push for unsupported claims of “better” ? Why would he sacrifice the reputation of the second oldest planning commission in the nation if he were not only thinking of his own ambitions? Why would he turn his back on the city that he vowed to serve if he was not ready to move on? And let’s face it, he needs the County Democratic Chairman in his corner if he intends to replace Tim Hagan on the commission? And, he needs to set the stage for the Medical Mart and the Convention Center votes which will also come before this august commission. If this demolition permit is approved with as little oversight as it appears there is now, the case will be made for any other county project coming before the CITY Planning Commission to be rubber stamped just as Joe feels this one should be.
This Commission needs to stand firm and insist that they receive the information needed to make an informed decision. We need an appointed board to stand up and represent the taxpayers of this city and this county. We need them to make sure that the numbers make sense, and that we know what we will have at the end of the day when the County Complex is reality not “concept”. Listen to the urban planners in your midst-Norm Kruholz and Hunter Morrison and INSIST on the information needed to make a decision worthy of a Planning Commission that understands the word plan. Do not be swayed by the politicians in your midst-Mayor Frank Jackson, Council President Martin Sweeney. If these men were true leaders, they would trust their judgment in appointing you and allow you to do your job. And certainly, do not be swayed by the member in your midst guided by personal ambition. Please, please do something truly transformational and make a reasoned decision, not an expedient political one.
Breuer Building on World Monuments Watch List
Submitted by Susan Miller on June 6, 2007 - 4:53pm.The Central Library in Grosse Point Michigan designed by Marcel Breuer made it onto the World's Most Endangered Monuments list for 2008. Here's an except: "Main Street Modern: Buildings of the recent past that lack a consensus on preservation but are considered worth saving by the monuments fund include Paul Rudolph's Riverview High School, built in 1957 in Sarasota, Fla., and Marcel Breuer's Grosse Pointe Public Library, built in 1953 in Grosse Pointe Farms, Mich." from the AP today titled, "Warming threatens cultural gems". Yeah, here in Cleveland it is not warming that threatens our Main Street Moderns; it's lack of foresight.
I thought the library had been saved... maybe not... It's caused quite a stir though in the preservation community. Read about it here in the National Trust publication. MAPA is hosting a design charette to SAVE the library.
From an article in the Seattle Post:
"In 2007 the community's library board plans to demolish the Grosse Pointe Central Library and replace it with a newer, bigger structure"
No renovation, no preservation, no restoration just demolition.
If the site doesn't work for the library they should sell it or donate it to a historical society. I can't imagine there isn't another property available in Detroit where they can build their dream home.
The sanity award of the day goes to local architect and member of the historical commission William Hartman who told the library trustees- "that destroying Breuer's library would be a form of cultural illiteracy -- a plundering of the contribution that modernism has made to Michigan"."
Who might get the sanity award in Cleveland if we don't let the county demolish our Breuer Tower? Therein lies the legacy... there is no legacy in destroying a cultural icon. (And, I must add, just after passing a sin tax to fund the arts and culture. Who made Tim and Jimmy the arbiters of taste? Watch out arts community!) More than likely it won't be awarded to our local preservation society. It must go to David Ellison who said tearing down the tower to build a green building is hypocrisy. Right on David! Anyone in elected office listening? The World Monuments Watch has us in the crosshairs. Just salivating waiting for Cleveland to do something right!
Check out the list at World Monuments Fund. Here's an excerpt: "The work of these designers was united by certain core principles, including a departure from traditional forms, the integration of arts and design disciplines, and the use of industrial materials and innovative technologies.
The primary threats faced by Modern architecture are demolition or inappropriate renovations, and the technical challenges of conserving the experimental materials and innovative building systems used in their construction. The greatest threat, however, is perhaps public apathy-a lack of consensus or confidence-that buildings of the recent past can be important enough to be preserved for the future.
It is hoped that this Watch listing will encourage these and other communities (insert Cleveland, Ohio) to consider alternatives to the demolition of these buildings, which are important pieces of American architectural and social history."
What will we see happen to our Breuer? His only high-rise? Sanity or stupidity?
For Immediate Release
Yesterday at 4:15 pm $1000 and a letter from an anonymous donor arrived at the D. H.Ellison Co. addressed to Taxpayers Against Waste, one of the organizations concerned with Cuyahoga County's plan for a new administration center.
June 12, 2007
Contact: Ms. Daryl Davis, 216-310-0557 (day) or daryl.davisATsbcglobal.net"It was a complete surprise," said David Ellison. "The letter really focuses the issue. Our problem with this project was never about the Breuer building, but with the outrageous waste of money. Up until now our work has been funded by personal and in-kind donations. This donation makes things a little easier." The letter's contents include a numbered list of questions regarding the money and financing of the proposed county administration center.
Two questions pertain to R. P. Carbone's involvement and current indictment over racketeering, conspiracy, money laundering, bribery and unlawful interest in a public contract.Two more questions involve R. P. Madison International's role and its inability to present a complete application to the Cleveland city planning commission, making a justifiable case for demolition.
Daryl Davis added, "This whole issue has been diverted into historic preservation, aesthetics and environmentalism. While these things are important, the money, cronyism and political patronage are what are so disgusting. A good economic development plan would conserve our assets and resources, create the maximum number of jobs, and the most spin-off development, all at the least cost to the public. Hagan and Dimora have created a bad plan with mediocre architecture at the highest cost possible; never mind the facts, put aside the values of democratic process, and just keep repeating lies and half truths until people start believing them."
The other questions included in the letter relate to the apparent flaws in the overall strategy of economic development conceived in the project.
Friday, June 08, 2007
interesting dialogue brewing over Breuer Tower
We spent four hours this morning in a meeting of the City/Cleveland Planning Commission (CPC) going over the county's request to demolish the Breuer Tower. It was interesting. All the public non-insider commentary was against granting the demolition permit.
We got the start of a great community dialogue, hitherto suppressed except for a few forays by the PD's Steve Litt, Peter Lawson Jones, tons of NEO blogs, and a MeetTheBloggers podcast. The public commentary was delivered by Jennifer Coleman (lots of good insights and citings of what the standards really are), Hunter Morrison (super delivery, wish we had it on tape), Steve McQuillin, Paul Volpe, David Ellison, Daryl Davis, Peter Lawson Jones, Susan Miller, Bob Miller (a former Cleveland Trust employee, there at the beginning, with some fantastic background materials) of the Generation Foundation, Anthony Hiti for the local AIA chapter, Tom Yablonski, Todd deGarmo (who has worked on the Pentagon and describes the Breuer Tower as the "jewel" among all such buildings), Gloria, and myself--and I've missed a few others whom I don't know so well. All in all, it's a great collation of new thought on what the two dark commissioners consider a done deal. It was all done out of the dark and the shadows, in the full light of day.
Then, the CPC took a poll of who was for denying the permit, and 4 would deny it and 3 were against denying it. Then, the downtown councilman mentioned that to deny the demolition would show a lack of cooperation with the county commissioners, and he had to make nice with them so he could continue to work with them--yes, it was that meretricious, and silly. So, over Norm Krumholz' objections, they dragged the issue out of the light of day and back into the shadows, to meet again next Friday, when Norm won't be there, to see if they can keep wearing away at the issue until they get the vote where they need it, in favor of granting the permit for demolition.
Folks, the downtown councilman Cimperman and county commissioners DiMora and Hagan are trying to give this short shrift and a quick burial, despite what all the rest of the public say and do. They are not serving the public interest. They are ignoring the numbers. They are not working for you. They have other, more special interests in mind, because they certainly ignore the public interest. Hunter Morrison specifically and in great detail delineated the absence of a suitable process at the city level, like what they had with the Society Tower and Gateway.
More on this later. I'm beginning to think the three of them--Cimperman, DiMore, and Hagan--are unfit for public office.
I'm hoping a transcript or a recording of this session will surface somehow, someplace.
Breuer, that's a (very modern) wrap
Submitted by Marc Lefkowitz on June 1, 2007 - 4:17pm.
While it’s now clear the firms vying for the county administration project didn’t compare costs of building new versus rehab, Doug Hoffman knows one thing for certain: The existing building—it’s steel beams, granite façade, and cast-in-place concrete walls and ‘bathtub’ windows—is valued conservatively at $20,000,000.
Hoffman, a principal at Weber Murphy Fox, the local architects who teamed with New York firm Davis Brody Bond on a proposal to adaptively reuse the Breuer tower, presented their findings to the Cleveland Planning Commission today. The county purchased the Breuer and three small buildings attached to it for $21 million, and proposes to spend another $10 million to demolish it before building a new office tower for about $175-200 million. A group consisting of architects, preservationists, environmentalists and citizens concerned about government waste attended the presentation.
Hoffman told the commission that his firm’s proposal addressed all of the county’s concerns, including its small floors, lower ceilings, and asbestos, and even offered a flip-side – the existing space has built-in benefits such as good natural light, more privacy and smaller spaces make personal comfort easier to control. A slide of his presentation titled, Word on the Street vs. Our Findings, Hoffman wrote:
“One of the myths is the usability of the building is poor, it’s a bad performer, the net to gross ratio is terrible, the ceilings are too low and the floorplates too small. Our response is the building was ahead of its time, is a great performer and the problems of net-to-gross, ceiling height and floorplate issues can be solved.”
Reusing the building might require removing its exterior skin, which contains asbestos, and recasting the heavy exterior, Cleveland architect Robert Madison, part of the team that won the county job to design the new building, told the PD.
Hoffman’s firm planned to keep the exterior, and thus the asbestos, in place by wrapping the entire tower in a glass envelope. A similar wrap was used in the New York Times Office Tower, Hoffman says, adding, it makes up for the Breuer’s single-pane windows by acting as a “thermal barrier”—holding in heat during the winter, and operable vents allow air to flow out in the summer.
After gutting the building inside, their plan called for new mechanical systems and a design that squeezed in some 2,000 square feet of more usable space. “A modest addition coupled with redesign of the restrooms and a new underfloor mechanical system increased the net to gross ratio from 69% to 78%.”
That would be enough of an increase to accommodate most if not all county departments on the same floor, Hoffman said. Internal staircases could, in certain cases, connect departments between two floors. And, the removal of the small buildings would make way for a two-story atrium providing gathering spaces like a public café, an arcade, and council chambers.
Still, there might be other, better ideas on how to reuse the tower, Hoffman said, “We’re making the case for preservation; we don’t want to promote ours as the only solution. We think the building has great civic, cultural and financial value.”
Besides the $20 million in construction costs, the tower could get a minimum of $15 million in historic tax credits, Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones, who voted for reuse, has said. That's money the county could use for health and human services in the poorest city in the nation.
The benefits of adaptive reuse as summarized by Weber Murphy Fox:
- Less demolition
- Less asbestos abatement
- Less energy consumed
- Shorter project timetable
- Cost savings in re-using the base structure
- Cost savings with less construction time
- More usable area for $/sf
- Better opportunity to seek LEED certification
Even if the Planning Commission votes against giving the county a demolition permit, the county can appeal. "There's always appeals actions," says Linda Henrichsen, a staffer at the Planning Commission. "The normal appeal for planning commission would be the Board of Zoning Appeals. After that it would go to the courts."
On June 8 at 8 a.m. in Council's committee room, the Planning Commission will hear a presentation on the Breuer from the county and take public comment. It may vote at that time.
Supporters of reusing the Breuer are gathering for a fundraiser tomorrow morning (June 2) at Johnny Mango restaurant in Ohio City. Breuer Tower Waffles (in honor of the building’s façade) and butter pecan ice cream will be served. And, details of a design competition seeking alternatives to the county’s planned use of the Breuer, with winners displayed at July’s Ingenuity Festival, will be announced soon. For more information on both, contact
Daryl Davis.
June 4, 2007 - 1:56pmslides posted from June 1st presentation by Doug Hoffman
TimFerris Says:
Over at http://save-our-land.blogspot.com/2007/06/slide-show-excerpts-from-june-1st-cpc.html I have posted the more salient slides from Doug Hoffman's June 1st presentation for the CPC.
There is a great conversation going on over in the Urban Ohio forum regarding the Breuer Tower issue. Here a very engaged group of citizens discuss every possible view of urban, suburban, rural, regional, state, national and international issues involving city life. Check it out for yourself. Anyway, one of the members wrote an email to Commissioner Peter Lawson-Jones regarding the possible demolition of the former Ameritrust Tower and he nice enough to forward it to us members. Here is the commissioners most excellent response:Dear Concerned Citizen:
Thank you for your correspondence regarding the prospective demolition
of the Ameritrust Tower, located at the corner of Euclid Avenue and East
Ninth Street and designed by the renowned modernist architect, Marcel
Breuer.
As you are probably aware, on Thursday, March 29, 2007, the Cuyahoga
County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) voted 2-1 to raze the tower, with
me casting the dissenting vote to preserve the building. In determining
as I did, I employed a *decision matrix* that considered the
following factors: (1) architectural significance; (2) aesthetics; (3)
preservation/sustainability; (4) functionality/work flow; and (5) cost.
The Breuer Tower*s architectural significance is well documented and
cannot be dismissed. By retaining the *brutalist* structure as part
of a new complex that includes the neoclassical rotunda and a new 21st
century contemporary building, an opportunity is presented for a rare
*dialogue* amongst three different architectural expressions. The
resulting campus will provide not only a living laboratory for students
of architecture but also an attraction for our citizens and visitors
alike. The architectural significance of the tower clearly favors its
preservation.
As regards aesthetics, some critics of the tower find it physically
unattractive. At the risk of sounding cliché, however, beauty is in the
eye of the beholder. Furthermore, tastes have a tendency to change over
time. Because some do not find the building visually pleasing, however,
is not reason enough to justify its demolition. Moreover, the highly
regarded firm of Davis, Brody and Bond demonstrated in a presentation to
the BOCC that the tower can be externally treated and the new structure
designed in a way that creates a physically compelling final product.
Our relatively recent embrace of preservation and sustainability as a
society and a community also militates for the preservation of the
tower. With the new administrative complex, we aspire at a minimum to
achieve silver LEEDS certification. The demolition of the tower will
jeopardize this goal, particularly as it has been designated a historic
structure by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office. Furthermore,
demolition will be tricky, given the proximity of other structures to
the site. Finally, the waste of the thousands of tons of materials that
went into the construction - less than forty years ago - of this
building as well as the adverse environmental impact resulting from the
dumping of the debris in local landfills hardly constitutes a positive
ecological outcome.
A fourth consideration is functionality and work flow. Although the
tower*s floor plates are too small to accommodate County departments
on a single and, in most cases, on even two floors, this concern is
exaggerated. Most office communication today is conducted via e-mail
and telephone. Moreover, through creative intra-departmental
organization and grouping, the desired face-to-face interaction can be
achieved. A competent interior workplace architect and designer need
only, as Tim exhorts the contestants in Project Runway, *Make it
work!* Floor plate sizes and ceiling heights should not be viewed as
insurmountable obstacles in our efforts to provide a physical
environment conducive to the delivery of world-class service to our
citizenry.
Finally, impossible to ignore is the matter of cost. A minimum of $20
million can be saved by choosing adaptive reuse over new construction.
An additional $15 million in federal historic tax credits will accompany
the preservation of the tower. As stewards of public funds, we must ask
if there is a better use of the $35 million that could be saved in the
short run by retaining the structure. Considering the burgeoning
economic development, workforce training and health and human service
needs of our community, the answer is self-evident. An investment that
addresses our critical social challenges will yield a far greater
return, a more consequential community benefit than will the expenditure
of valuable dollars on a pubic edifice.
The Marcel Breuer Tower debate now proceeds to the City of Cleveland
Planning Commission, which, by charter, must approve the demolition and
construction of all public buildings within the municipality*s
boundaries. On Friday, March 30, 2007, the Planning Commission voted to
approve the demolition of three smaller structures on the site and
passed a motion that no action is to be taken regarding the Breuer
building until the panel has the opportunity to:
1) review a master plan for the entire site;
2) review plans to ensure the safe removal of art work currently in
the building;
3) tour both the Breuer Tower and the remainder of the site; and
4) hear a comprehensive presentation on the merits of preserving
the Breuer Tower.
The Planning Commission also required that no asbestos abatement take
place in the Breuer Tower without prior Commission approval.
Now that the fate of the building resides with the Planning Commission,
I urge you to share your views to that body as well. The names, phone
numbers, and e-mail addresses of the panel members are provided below. I
also urge you to communicate with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, which, in
an editorial dated Tuesday, April 3, 2007, declared that the Marcel
Breuer Tower is not a *serious candidate for renovation.* You can
read the editorial at:
http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1175589150262091.xml&coll=2
You may also wish to express your opinion on this important issue with
other news publications. In addition to that for the Plain Dealer, I
have included the contact information for the editorial departments of
the Call & Post, News-Herald and Sun Newspapers.
Again, I thank you for taking the time to share your views and concerns
regarding the Breuer Tower with me. As always, please do not hesitate
to contact my office if we can ever be of any assistance whatsoever.
Sincerely,
Peter Lawson Jones
Cuyahoga County Commissioner
ADDITIONAL CONTACTS
CITY OF CLEVELAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Anthony Coyne, Chair: 216-523-1500 (o)
acoyne@MGGMLPA.com
David Bowen: 216-491-9300, ext. 808
dbowen@RLBA.com
Joe Cimpermann:216-664-2691
ward13@clevelandcitycouncil.org
Norman Krumholz:216-687-6946
norm@urban.csuohio.edu
Lillian Kuri:216-659-4926
lkuri@clevefdn.org
Larwrence Lumpkin: 216-299-1550
lalumpkin@sbcglobal.net
Gloria Pinkney: 216-751-5131
jfpinkney@aol.com
CLEVELAND CITY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
Robert N. Brown, Director
601 Lakeside Ave.
City Hall Room 501
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
Phone: 216-664-2210 ~ Fax: 216-664-3281
Meetings are held the first and third Friday*s of everything month @
9:00 am Please call for the schedule and the agenda.
Robert N. Brown, Director
rnbrown@city.cleveland.oh.us
Gary Newbacher, Chief City Planner
gnewbacher@city.cleveland.oh.us
Jean Crawford, Private Secretary
jcrawford@city.cleveland.oh.us
Letters to the Editor
The Cleveland Plain Dealer
Letters to the Editor
1801 Superior Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
e-mail letters to: letters@plaind.com
fax: 216-999-6209
Include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for
verification purposes. Submissions should not exceed 200 words.
Call & Post
Attn. Constance Harper
11800 Shaker Boulevard
Cleveland, Ohio 44120
e-mail letters to charper@call-post.com
fax 216-451-0404
The New-Herald
Letters to the Editor
7085 Mentor Avenue
Willoughby, Ohio 44094
e-mail: editor@News-Herald.com
fax: 440-975-2293
The Sun News
The Sun News welcomes letters to the editor which are brief and to the
point, typewritten and double-spaced. We reserve the right to edit
letters. Deadline is 9 a.m. Monday, though we urge readers to submit
letters as early as possible. Letters are printed as space permits and
may not appear in the next edition, even when deadlines are met.
Sign your letter and include a telephone number at which you may be
called during business hours for verification purposes. Only names and
cities will be printed, not street addresses. We never print unsigned
letters.
Send "Letters to the Editor" to your local office or e-mail if you wish
with your address to: sun@sunnews.com
It appears there is still a small chance of survival for the Breuer Ameritrust Tower. The following comes from the Plain Dealer:2 Ameritrust demolitions OK'dI cannot give you the feeling of the actual discussion at last Friday's Planning Commission meeting since I was not there. (As you may have noticed from the lack of Planning Commission Meeting summaries, I have been able to attend - nor will in the near future - many of the meetings.) Regardless, there are people who are still fighting to save the tower, including some who are willing to chain themselves to the columns on the East 9th street side of the building for demonstration purposes. (Comment if you are interested and I might forward your information to the person attempting to set it up)
The city's Planning Commission voted Friday to allow the demolition of two buildings to begin making way for Cuyhoga County's new administration center. The commission also signaled it wants a lot more information before it votes to demolish a taller building on the site - the old Ameritrust Tower, which a number of preservationists want saved. The commission voted to approve razing the Huron and Prospect buildings and three pedestrian bridges, near the corner of Prospect Avenue and East Ninth Street. The approval came with six conditions, including a commission tour of the Ameritrust Tower, a master plan for redeveloping the site and a presentation on plans to preserve the tower. Commissioners voted 2-1 this week to demolish the tower.
The message that you sent was undeliverable to the following:
cntfh (UNUSED)
Ameritrust Tower to come down
By JAY MILLER
4:21 pm, March 29, 2007
The Cuyahoga County commissioners voted 2-1 today to tear down the Ameritrust Tower at East Ninth Street and Euclid Avenue and replace it with a new county administration building.
The dissenting vote was cast by Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones. Commissioners Jimmy Dimora and Tim Hagan were in favor of replacing the 1971 tower designed by French architect Marcel Breuer.
The decision to bring the building down was part of $22.6 million in contracts approved to remove asbestos from four buildings in the Ameritrust complex and demolish the tower and the 1010 Euclid Building.
The architectural team of Kohn Pederson Fox of New York and Cleveland-based Robert P. Madison International recommended tearing the Breuer building down and will design the new building.
Mr. Madison, who studied architecture in France and told the commissioners that his student work had been critiqued by Mr. Breuer, disagreed with those who want the building saved. He said while the opponents describe the Ameritrust Tower as an excellent example of Brutalism, a style of architecture that sought to elevate raw concrete forms, “It isn’t.” He said other buildings better represented the style.
the Cleveland Chapter of the American Institute of Architects:"AIA Cleveland Urgent - Advocacy Bulletin"
Cuyahoga County Commissioners to Determine Fate of Breuer Tower
The Cuyahoga County Commissioners will be discussing the demolition of the Marcel Breuer designed Cleveland Trust (Ameritrust) Tower at it's next meeting at 11:30 AM on Thursday, March 29, 2007 at the Board of Cuyahoga County Commissioners Chambers, 1219 Ontario Street, 4th Floor.
All AIA Cleveland Members are invited to attend the meeting and express their views on this matter.
Over the course of the last several months, AIA Cleveland's Executive Board and Committee on Historic Resources has urged the Commissioners to reconsider demolishing the Tower and has called for them to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study of adaptively reusing the Breuer Tower for the new County Administration Center.
If you cannot attend, please call or e-mail your position on this important matter directly to the Commissioners before Thursday's meeting. Their contact information is as follows:
Commissioner Jimmy Dimora
Phone (216) 443-7180
CNJCD@cuyahogacounty.us
Commissioner Peter Lawson Jones
Phone (216) 443-7182
CNPLJ@cuyahogacounty.us
Commissioner Timothy F. Hagan
Phone (216) 443-7181
CNTFH@cuyahogacounty.us
AIA Cleveland Statement
Cleveland, Ohio, January 30, 2007 - AIA Cleveland, a Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, urges The Cuyahoga County Board of Commissioners to preserve and renovate the Cleveland Trust (Ameritrust) Tower.
Designed by the pioneering modernist architect Marcel Breuer in 1971, the tower's prominent location, noteworthy design and contribution to downtown Cleveland's skyline, make the building potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. As stewards of the built environment, it is our community's responsibility to ensure that significant examples of modern architecture like the Cleveland Trust Tower endure for future generations.
Furthermore, AIA Cleveland encourages the Commissioners to undertake a comprehensive feasibility study of adaptively reusing the Breuer Tower for the new County Administration Center. This study must thoroughly analyze the overall project development costs to the tax payers of Cuyahoga County and definitively justify the decisions made by the Commissioners. In addition, the impact of demolishing the twenty-nine story structure must be carefully considered from an economic, environmental and sustainability perspective. This study, coupled with a creative and transparent design process, will determine if and how the existing building can best meet the County's needs.
Most importantly, we urge the County to engage the community during the decision making process so that all voices are heard on this major expenditure of public resources. AIA Cleveland stands ready to provide the Cuyahoga County Board of Commissioners with assistance and counsel in this most important matter and we look forward to a constructive community dialogue on this issue.
The topic of the Tower in this Commissioners' meeting was news to me... check out the agenda on their webpage (http://bocc.cuyahogacounty.us/) and note Item 23c where the Commissioners will vote on the abatement and demolition of the Tower contract going out to bid. From what AIA's release indicates, the Commissioners will hear statements from the public for the Tower's future.
The meeting is on Thursday at 11:30 am in the Commissioners' Chambers at the County Admin Building on Ontario and Lakeside.
The commissioners are going to design review on Thursday afternoon to ask to demolish two other buildings (I believe they are the one immediately east of the rotunda and the ungly shorter gray building on Prospect)
Taxpayers Against Breuer Tower Demolition
This tri-fold brochure from "Taxpayers Against Waste" was sent to The Design Rag and has recently been circulating around Cuyahoga County (I apologize for any difficulty in viewing):
Posts
All Comments
