WHO NEEDS VICTORIAN WHEN WE HAVE HOME DEPOT

The image with this post is a 1994 photo of a house in Cleveland, Ohio's famed "Ohio City" Historic District. As of this very day, its original 1897 front porch, has been removed and replaced with a psuedo-"Victorian" front porch, parts courtesy of Home Depot. This is nothing less than an outrage. This is nothing less than full-blown ignorance, and certainly full-blown arrogance. This type of work, according to Cleveland law, can not be done without going in front of a design-review-board, and without getting a permit. Neither was done. The owners have been here for a good number of years and must know 'the rules'. But, perhaps the biggest 'crime' is going to be, if previous similar examples dictate, the City will subject the owners to little more than the proverbial slap-on-the-wrist. There never seems to be any actual punishment for acts like this. Knowing this, why should any owners of historic buildings heed the law? If 'right' could prevail, the original columns and balustrades should be ordered replaced, or, if gone, rebuilt in a similar fashion. But, this is just a pipe-dream in this long-pathetic environment, isn't it?

IGNORANCE PIT

Pictured here are images of the latest historic Cleveland building whose senseless demolition is being presently planned by the world-famous Cleveland Clinic, who has devoured an area the size of a small city, sometimes vacating entire former streets in their madness to build more and more shiny new structures to dazzle the eyes with. Reportedly built in 1930 as the Carnegie Medical Building, it is a fairly impressive example of the Art Deco style. According to a recent Cleveland newspaper article, the Clinic construction manager referred to this building as a "money pit", that it would be "substandard in comparison with other Clinic buildings", would always be "dark and cramped", and would have only "half the usable space" that other Clinic buildings have. It's always so convenient to use the tired "money pit" cliche, isn't it? What all this really tells us is that the Clinic wants only new buildings. They have no respect for history. Guess what's presently planned for the site -- a parking lot. And just how well will that "structure" measure up to the Clinic's lofty standards for structures? And what about the collosal waste of embodied energy that destroying such a large building will result in? Who cares about Sustainability, here? The only "pit" that's "substandard" and "dark and cramped" is the shallow cesspool of thought that ultimately leads to decisions to destroy buildings like this -- the Ignorance Pit.

SEA OF HOLES

A perhaps even larger hole [see previous post] to soon appear on a main Cleveland, Ohio, thoroughfare will be on Euclid Avenue, just east of E. 55th. Also scheduled for demolition are two adjacent commercial buildings, one built in 1882 to the designs of Cleveland architects Albert Smith and Anthony Myers [the bottom image], and its 'annex' built in 1895 to the designs of the same, then-partnerless Albert Smith. These two buildings are the sole surviving vestiges of the period when a bustling commercial district existed right here due to the highly used passenger rail station at E. 55th and Euclid. When rail travel declined, so did this district, followed not long after by the severe decline of all of Euclid Avenue and its nearby streets. Interestingly, with the recent cosmetic overhaul of Euclid Avenue, inflatingly promoted as the beginning of a "revival" of the avenue's glorious past, it was easy to think that what was built literally during that hallowed era would be coveted. But, no -- the hypocrisy here knows no bounds. Other historic buildings, across the street from these two, were recently demolished [see the November 2005 archives of this blog] for a 'bike-lane' (which, of course, has since been "used" about as much as the new sidewalks adjacent to it, in front of the expansive now-vacant lots). Clearly, the misguided "Urban Renewal" philosophies of the 1950s are still "alive and well" in Cleveland, even when the "renewal" results in vacant lots. The Beatles wrote about a presumed-imaginary place called the Sea Of Holes -- but, Cleveland is revealing to the whole world that it wasn't imaginary, after all!!

FROM HOLY...TO HOLE

Some unusually large holes will soon appear on certain main thoroughfares in the city of Cleveland, Ohio, due to the unusually large historic buildings whose demolition is planned for the very near future. One is St. Peter's Hall, the Gothic-Second Empire structure next door to St. Peter's Roman Catholic Church, on Superior Avenue at E. 17th. Built in 1874 as a parochial school and hall for St. Peter's, many Clevelanders will remember it as Erieview Catholic High School, functioning at this location from its founding in 1971 to its demise in 1993. A designated Cleveland Landmark for many years, the local Catholic diocese has been wanting to demolish it for nearly as long. Allowing it to slowly deteriorate (even though this sort of willful neglect is in violation of the Landmark ordinances -- which is cancelled out by the fact that the City has NEVER enforced these ordinances), the diocese has finally been able to demonstate that the deterioration now qualifies for official "nuisance/hazard" designation from the City's Building Department. Meanwhile, with the very successful conversion of a greatly deteriorated historic clothing factory to upscale residential suites, only a block or so from this building, St. Peter's Hall has been an obvious candidate (to at least some of us) for bringing yet more disillusioned suburbanites back to "downtown" Cleveland. But, alas, what we get, instead, is yet another example of "Classic Cleveland" -- one step forward, followed by ten steps backwards.

CLEVELAND'S DEMOLITION MONSTER MAKES ANOTHER KILL

If you live in the Cleveland, Ohio, area and are interested in historic buildings, you almost certainly are aware of the historic house, built in 1903, in the local Tremont Historic District that was demolished, last month, by the City, against the owner's wishes. This event ignited a firestorm of controversy. This posting represents this blog's perspective on the matter. It seems there was a pronounced difference of opinion as to whether or not this house was in the sort of physical condition that could 'necessitate' demolition. But, it seems the more important topic is whether or not this building was demolished because the City's Building Department personally disliked the owner. It is an absolute fact that there are seemingly countless buildings, all around the city, that are in far worse condition than this house could have been considered by anyone -- buildings that have been that way for far longer -- and, somehow, this particular house's fate was seemingly "rushed". The Building Department has had several "run-ins" with the owner over the past several years. "Politics", indeed. It is nigh time that the long-standing 'methodology' in Cleveland -- a Building Code that isn't enforced, followed by easily 'enforced' demolitions -- needs to end. Sometimes it seems like there is more vacant lots in Cleveland than there are ones with buildings on them, and it sure seems like the City is pretty damn comfortable with that. [NOTE: The image accompanying this post is a Board Of Zoning Appeals photo, taken in 1981, of this just-demolished house, courtesy of the Cleveland Public Library's Photo Collection. The house still had its front-porch, at this time, as you see.]

MORE HISTORY BEING "DEVELOPED" AWAY

Back to the bad news, unfortunately. And, once again, it is the shameless Cleveland, Ohio, where the latest scene of depravity is playing out. No less than three historic buildings, all adjacent and two unusually large due to multiple units, are being led to the sacrificial alter by the ward councilperson, eager to please a developer who, for some unknown reason, has chosen the site of these three buildings for his plan. This is located in the very historic Brooklyn Centre district, one of the oldest areas on Cleveland's west side. There are vacant tracts nearby, and there are buildings of more recent construction and lesser significance nearby that could be removed, instead. More than likely, the site is appealing because there is no more than three owners to deal with. One of these buildings is a terrace ("rowhousing") built in 1905 and designed by Cleveland architect George King, perhaps best known locally for the Kennedy building on the southeast corner of Detroit & W. 65th. Another building is a strip of stores, built in 1921. The remaining building is a residence, unsympathetically altered, built in the 1880s. Certainly the councilperson is in a position to steer the project away from this site, but, he seems indifferent. Being indifferent about its history is, unfortunately, Cleveland's greatest claim to infamy. One by one, the history of this city is shipped to the local landfills. What will Cleveland be like when the very last historic building is gone?

GOOD THINGS SOMETIMES DO HAPPEN

It will most likely surprise -- or even shock -- the regular visitors to this blog to see a post that is NOT about a threatened or doomed building. But, for a good number of recent years, this actually was a threatened building. It seems nearly unbelievable that this, somehow, reversed itself. Originally known as the George Howe mansion, it is one of the tiny handful of mansions still standing on the long-ago-glorious Euclid Avenue of Cleveland, Ohio. Designed by Cleveland architects Coburn & Barnum and built in 1893, its exterior is more Renaissance Revival than any style one would expect from 1893. Although having suffered losses of some interior features and unrestorable deterioration of other features, an impressive combination restoration-renovation has recently been completed by its owner, Cleveland State University. The main staircase and several fireplace mantels have survived and look great, today. Primarily, it is already being used for some graduate studies offices, and will also be used as a conference center.

RAPE IN THE CHURCHYARD

I hope my readers won't mind the absence of a photo with this particular post. This post is about the very same building whose photo appears in the immediately previous post -- the former convent at St. Stanislaus, Cleveland, Ohio. By an almost 'freak' set of circumstances, I was just told of how some individual has paid $30,000 for "salvage rights" to the old convent, and has already begun to sell off anything and everything, including interior architectural features. I guess the fate of this building is fairly obvious now. It would appear that money -- as always -- has once again emerged "victorious" over History. From a local diocese that has a long and inglorious track-record regarding their planned destruction of buildings they cease to use, this certainly comes as no surprise.