Author Topic: Cleveland: A.J. Celebrezze Federal Building Renovation (Read 13541 times)

Scav · « **Reply #70 on:** October 17, 2011, 02:23:00 AM »

I feel you there gottaplan. The energy savings are not going to make the money back. I am glad, though, to see that there is an effort to reinvest and repurpose... if only they could do something like this to the Breuer tower! ugh haha

IIRC they mentioned something in one of the articles that they couldn't use the triple-pane glazing b/c the wall joints/mullion system in place wasn't thick/strong enough and it came too close to the floor plate so they would have to lift off the entire skin and thus it would have been more expensive, and would have impacted the (arguably) historic structure.

This article (of course the Chicago Tribune, not PD!) can help explain
http://tinyurl.com/3uvz43m

ClevelandOhio · « **Reply #71 on:** October 17, 2011, 02:46:34 AM »

The money would be spent in another city if not here. So for that reason alone, I am glad.

ClevelandOhio · « **Reply #72 on:** December 10, 2011, 04:40:31 PM »

Whats going on here? I saw wooden boards on the front support beams.

KJP · « **Reply #73 on:** December 11, 2011, 01:11:54 AM »

They're going to board-up the federal building instead of doing the wrap. Five thousand years worth of human experience with building wooden structures to protect against the weather can't be all wrong!

McLovin · « **Reply #74 on:** December 11, 2011, 04:26:07 AM »

Quote from: WestBLVD on January 29, 2011, 01:48:47 AM

You know what excites me most about that rendering? Look to the middle left hand side of the building. Looks like Cleveland gains about 40-50 skyscrapers along the Euclid corridor! Not bad for $121 million!

I saw that to hopefully that's apart of the design!! lol

MyTwoSense · « **Reply #75 on:** December 11, 2011, 04:30:10 AM »

Quote from: Scav on October 17, 2011, 02:23:00 AM

I feel you there gottaplan. The energy savings are not going to make the money back. I am glad, though, to see that there is an effort to reinvest and repurpose... if only they could do something like this to the Breuer tower! ugh haha

IIRC they mentioned something in one of the articles that they couldn't use the triple-pane glazing b/c the wall joints/mullion system in place wasn't thick/strong enough and it came too close to the floor plate so they would have to lift off the entire skin and thus it would have been more expensive, and would have impacted the (arguably) historic structure.

This article (of course the Chicago Tribune, not PD!) can help explain
http://tinyurl.com/3uvz43m

This link doesn't work for me.

Scav · « **Reply #76 on:** December 11, 2011, 06:27:34 AM »

Quote from: MyTwoSense on December 11, 2011, 04:30:10 AM

Quote from: Scav on October 17, 2011, 02:23:00 AM
I feel you there gottaplan. The energy savings are not going to make the money back. I am glad, though, to see that there is an effort to reinvest and repurpose... if only they could do something like this to the Breuer tower! ugh haha

IIRC they mentioned something in one of the articles that they couldn't use the triple-pane glazing b/c the wall joints/mullion system in place wasn't thick/strong enough and it came too close to the floor plate so they would have to lift off the entire skin and thus it would have been more expensive, and would have impacted the (arguably) historic structure.

This article (of course the Chicago Tribune, not PD!) can help explain
http://tinyurl.com/3uvz43m

This link doesn't work for me.

Thought maybe the Tribune took the story down but looks like its just the Tinyurl that doesnt work... here it is!

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2011/01/a-team-of-chicago-architects-on-thursday-unveiled-a-design-that-will-wrap-a-new-skin-of-metal-fins-and-high-strength-laminate.html

Keith · « **Reply #77 on:** December 11, 2011, 10:05:26 AM »

Quote from: ClevelandOhio on December 10, 2011, 04:40:31 PM

Whats going on here? I saw wooden boards on the front support beams.

They're starting prep work and boarded up the beams so they don't damage the stained steel skin around the beams when they put up the scaffolding. The latest I heard is that they're going to be focusing on scaffolding and replacing the roof in 2012, and will be building the new skin around the building in 2013 with some finishing up stretching into 2014. (Considering GSA is managing the project though, that seems ambitious.)

urb-a-saurus · « **Reply #78 on:** December 11, 2011, 11:37:04 AM »

What is the Ohio connection to Bloomingdale's alluded to above? Federated Department Stores in Cincinnati?

musky · « **Reply #79 on:** February 08, 2012, 06:57:02 AM »

Seen today - let the refacing begin:

mrclifton88 · « **Reply #80 on:** February 08, 2012, 08:20:07 AM »

Wow! Almost forgot this, so many projects announced a long time ago are finally starting this year

surfohio · « **Reply #81 on:** February 08, 2012, 08:57:21 AM »

Not to be a negative nancy, but I think this could be a complete waste of taxpayers money. My first impression was that this project is just an over the top security measure. Just like that "urban forest" aka concrete bunker that surrounds the place. Admittedly it will look cool, but really that building is nowhere near an eyesore; it looks just fine as is.

hubz1124 · « **Reply #82 on:** February 08, 2012, 09:13:25 AM »

Quote from: surfohio on February 08, 2012, 08:57:21 AM

Not to be a negative nancy, but I think this could be a complete waste of taxpayers money. My first impression was that this project is just an over the top security measure. Just like that "urban forest" aka concrete bunker that surrounds the place. Admittedly it will look cool, but really that building is nowhere near an eyesore; it looks just fine as is.

From what I understand its going to enveloped in glass, not concrete and according to a PD article a few months back, its going to save the building 500,000.00 a year in heating/cooling costs

Scav · « **Reply #83 on:** February 08, 2012, 09:47:40 AM »

^^ thats correct hubz. The new facade is only an encasement of glass, therefore creating a layer of air that can make a large stride in the overall thermal system of the building. The facade is fine and will stay the same. They would have updated it by putting in new windows, but due to the construction of it that would have been more costly. This is going to be one giant curtain wall. I am excited to see the finished product!

surfohio · « **Reply #84 on:** February 08, 2012, 11:27:02 AM »

Quote from: hubz1124 on February 08, 2012, 09:13:25 AM

Quote from: surfohio on February 08, 2012, 08:57:21 AM
Not to be a negative nancy, but I think this could be a complete waste of taxpayers money. My first impression was that this project is just an over the top security measure. Just like that "urban forest" aka concrete bunker that surrounds the place. Admittedly it will look cool, but really that building is nowhere near an eyesore; it looks just fine as is.

From what I understand its going to enveloped in glass, not concrete and according to a PD article a few months back, its going to save the building 500,000.00 a year in heating/cooling costs

500K a year savings on a 120 million investment. I don't know guys, the math....it doesn't seem cost efficient.

p.s. is there no safety component to this?

ClevelandOhio · « **Reply #85 on:** February 08, 2012, 12:12:22 PM »

The money would have been spent somewhere else so Im glad we got it. I dont necessarily agree with it but if someone is going to get the money it might as well be us.

Keith · « **Reply #86 on:** February 08, 2012, 01:24:41 PM »

Quote from: surfohio on February 08, 2012, 11:27:02 AM

Quote from: hubz1124 on February 08, 2012, 09:13:25 AM
Quote from: surfohio on February 08, 2012, 08:57:21 AM
Not to be a negative nancy, but I think this could be a complete waste of taxpayers money. My first impression was that this project is just an over the top security measure. Just like that "urban forest" aka concrete bunker that surrounds the place. Admittedly it will look cool, but really that building is nowhere near an eyesore; it looks just fine as is.

From what I understand its going to enveloped in glass, not concrete and according to a PD article a few months back, its going to save the building 500,000.00 a year in heating/cooling costs

500K a year savings on a 120 million investment. I don't know guys, the math....it doesn't seem cost efficient.

p.s. is there no safety component to this?

It's a combination of energy saving retrofit and security update. The glass is supposed to be impact resistant and laminated so that in the case of an explosion there won't be shards flying everywhere. At the same time by providing an extra layer it will reduce heating and cooling costs. (Though of course not enough to offset the cost of the renovation.) The idea is that by significantly renovating the exterior and doing a few minor renovations to the interior they in effect get a newish building without ever having to vacate any portions of it.

Also the current windows are being replaced as well, (at night and on weekends) but they can't just replace them with the high efficiency impact resistant glass without making some fairly significant reconstruction, which would actually cost more because it would have required closing each floor of the building as it's windows were replaced, (which means moving costs, and having to rent space in another building) plus the building as it stands is just one massive pile of asbestos and they're trying to minimize how much of that they have to deal with during this project.

Side note, the interior of the 27th floor is being gutted and remodeled over the last year and a half as part of a separate contract. It hadn't been updated at all since the 60s when it was first built so everyone knew going in that there would be asbestos but they didn't realize to what extent. The remodel ended up costing about $1.7 million (slightly over budget) mostly due to the asbestos removal.

Clevecane · « **Reply #87 on:** March 13, 2012, 11:49:43 AM »

Not much but you can see some scaffolding

jjames0408 · « **Reply #88 on:** March 13, 2012, 11:56:50 AM »

Haha...thanks!!! I've been too lazy to walk over there!!!

clevezip · « **Reply #89 on:** March 13, 2012, 07:47:56 PM »

Quote from: jjames0408 on March 13, 2012, 11:56:50 AM

Haha...thanks!!! I've been too lazy to walk over there!!!

I don't really post a lot, however this is Urban Porn.... we can't complain about sky walks or no store front when we can't even walk a few blocks... LOL but I need to drive back to the burbs.... J/K

Clevecane · « **Reply #90 on:** March 15, 2012, 02:43:45 PM »

In jjames' defense, there is a difference between walking down a corridor like Euclid and walking down to that little corner where there is nothing but city hall and the federal building... the public auditorium isn't used, and the aforementioned buildings are only for government employees so it is a bit out of the way

jjames0408 · « **Reply #91 on:** March 15, 2012, 03:39:19 PM »

Exactly...I spend all my time in Gateway (where I live), Playhouse, Tower City, or Warehouse District. I was waiting until I went to the library, but now I don't have to.

Clevecane · « **Reply #92 on:** March 15, 2012, 06:04:15 PM »

haha, you're welcome for destroying any chance of you furthering you literary education I suppose....

jjames0408 · « **Reply #93 on:** March 16, 2012, 01:18:52 AM »

hahaha

jjames0408 · « **Reply #94 on:** May 13, 2012, 10:20:56 AM »

Looks like they may be prepping the building to begin the casing soon.

MayDay · « **Reply #95 on:** May 17, 2012, 12:16:25 PM »

Yep, on the eastern facade they've started to attach the supports for the casing - the light silver squares at each 'intersect' on the curtain wall - pardon the crappy quality, cell phone pic

ink · « **Reply #96 on:** May 17, 2012, 01:06:06 PM »

The GSA/federal government has been nice to downtown Cleveland--complete rehab of the old post office and federal building, new federal courthouse on the river, and now a major upgrade to this tower, all within the past 15 years or so.

Clueless,Ohio · « **Reply #97 on:** May 21, 2012, 10:53:32 AM »

Yes that is substantial amount of work, but they cant keep the lights on at the courthouse on the river (cost-cutting measure?).
THese lights near the top havent come on for a year...

(April 2010 picture)

mrclifton88 · « **Reply #98 on:** May 21, 2012, 11:34:43 AM »

Did they ever light the curved piece above the roof? Seems like that would be cool at night...

Htsguy · « **Reply #99 on:** May 21, 2012, 12:22:01 PM »

Quote from: ink on May 17, 2012, 01:06:06 PM

The GSA/federal government has been nice to downtown Cleveland--complete rehab of the old post office and federal building, new federal courthouse on the river, and now a major upgrade to this tower, all within the past 15 years or so.

They have been good to us...it would have been even better if they spent some $$$ in town partying.

Clueless,Ohio · « **Reply #100 on:** May 21, 2012, 12:58:19 PM »

Quote from: mrclifton88 on May 21, 2012, 11:34:43 AM

Did they ever light the curved piece above the roof? Seems like that would be cool at night...

No, but the lighting did accent it somewhat. Hard to tell from the picture.
Of course that western view is now just nothingness at night, save for some lighted office windows.

musky · « **Reply #101 on:** May 22, 2012, 01:32:47 AM »

Here's how it looked in 2006:

Coneybear · « **Reply #102 on:** May 22, 2012, 06:52:47 PM »

0.0 why can't we have that now?

MayDay · « **Reply #103 on:** May 22, 2012, 10:37:27 PM »

^Because that's the Federal Courthouse Tower, not the A.J. Celebrezze Federal Building - which happens to be the topic of this thread.

MissinOhio · « **Reply #104 on:** May 23, 2012, 12:21:51 PM »

Went by last Friday and it didn't seem like much was going on. Some stuff on the bottom floor windows, and looks like they are getting ready to with cables to hoist stuff to the top, but not much besides that. Not that I am rushing it or anything, just not much to write about.

News:

Author Topic: Cleveland: A.J. Celebrezze Federal Building Renovation (Read 13541 times)