Wait, this Art Deco skyscraper was in Cleveland?!

Cuyahoga County Criminal Court Building, July 1936. Created by the staff of the Ohio Federal Writers' Project. Image used courtesy of the Ohio Historical Society.

When I first came across photographs of this building, in the documention collected by the Historica American Buildings Survey, I was sure that the caption was wrong. A building like this, in Cleveland? Surely I would have heard something about it. Surely I would have been able to find some mention of it, somewhere.

A brief search was fruitless. Surely, a building of this stature and of this significance within the criminal justice system would have merited some mention or record, somewhere. (Note: a recent search reveals a photograph in the collections of Cleveland Public Library.)

As a result, the building didn't stick in my mind - I assumed it had to be somewhere other than Cleveland.


Detail of a photograph, used courtesy of the Historic American Buildings Survey.

A recent reinspection of the photographs forced me to accept that this building was, in fact, in Cleveland.


Detail of a photograph, used courtesy of the Historic American Buildings Survey.

Note the text over the front door; "Cuyahoga County Criminial Courts Building".

The structure, designed by Cleveland architects Warner and Mitchell, was completed in 1931. It was located at 1560 East 21st Street.


Detail of a photograph, used courtesy of the Historic American Buildings Survey.

These photographs were likely taken close to the date of demolition, in the 1990s. Even then, the building retained much ornament and architectural detail.


Detail of a photograph, used courtesy of the Historic American Buildings Survey.

This level of detail continued inside. While the space shows considerable decay, the original grandeur is clearly visible.


Detail of a photograph, used courtesy of the Historic American Buildings Survey.

This level of detail continued into the courtrooms, which somehow remained mostly unchanged for decades.

The building was replaced, leading to the decay of this structure. The Historic American Buildings Survey has more photographs - it's worth taking a look.

The Vanishing Forties - No Longer Quite So Vanished

Rudolph Stanley-Brown (American, 1889-1944). The Vanishing Forties, Cleveland, Ohio. Etching. The Cleveland Museum of Art. In memory of Rudolph Stanley-Brown 1950.185

In my quest for compelling historic imagery, I come across plenty of things that I can't use, simply because I can't figure out where the scene portrayed was physically located. This print, The Vanishing Forties, Cleveland, Ohio, by Rudolph Stanley-Brown, is one such case - one that's been bugging me since I first saw it, more than a year ago.

It's likely that Stanley-Brown made the print in 1924 or 1925 - he entered The Thirties and The Fifties into the Cleveland Museum of Art's May Show that year (May Show Database).


Photograph by Carl Waite for the Historic American Buildings Survey, November 2, 1936. Detail of the original, used courtesy of the Library of Congress.

The style of the house is very similar to two Cleveland structures, both now lost - the H. Mould house, at 2637 Cedar Avenue, and the Leonard Case homestead - documented by the Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), one of the many make-work projects that came under the auspices of WPA in the 1930s.


Photograph by Carl Waite for the Historic American Buildings Survey, November 2, 1936. Detail of the original, used courtesy of the Library of Congress.

I covered the Leonard Case house, which was built c. 1820, in detail, back in 2009. The H. Mould house is said to have been built later - 1860 - but the large central chimney makes me suspect an earlier date. I would guess, based on the title of the work, The Vanishing Forties, that the house was built in the 1840s - or at least that's when the artist thought it was built.


Detail, T.P. May residence. Rendered in 1935 by Isadore Wasserstrom for the Historic American Buildings Survey.

Yesterday, I was browsing through the HABS drawings for this region, when I came across the T.P. May residence, at 1458 East 12th Street, Cleveland, Ohio.


Detail, T.P. May residence. Rendered in 1935 by Isadore Wasserstrom for the Historic American Buildings Survey.

It looked similar to the house in Stanley-Brown's print - but only similar - there were several significant differences. The bases of the columns were different, as were the windows. The roof lacks the vertical lines, too, but that could be the artist's choice.

I was going to dismiss the possibility of the HABS drawings being of the same structure that Stanley-Brown depicted, but, out of stubbornness - I really wanted it to be the same one - I persisted, trying to identify details that were the same.

The tops of the columns and the trim above them are the same. So are the proportions of the porch. The same can be said for the spacing of the windows and the pitch of the roof. Both have brick foundations, at a time when stone would have been more common.


Detail, T.P. May residence. Rendered in 1935 by Isadore Wasserstrom for the Historic American Buildings Survey.

The front steps cemented my opinion that The Vanishing Forties does, in fact, depict this house. This detail, of the floorplan, illustrates them clearly. It can also be seen, in less detail, in the renderings above. Note that the steps aren't entirely in front of the porch, as would usually be the case, but partially set into it. Perhaps this was done when the sidewalk was widened, or perhaps the house was originally this way, allowing the builder to make the house a little bigger than he might have otherwise. Whatever the cause, it's an uncommon detail, one that confirms the identity.

I've seen other houses where the HABS architects reconstructed the original appearance of structures that have been changed considerably. One example is the H. M. Gillette residence, near Wellington, Ohio. In that case, a porch had been added around most of the house, concealing much of the detail. They were able to make measured drawings to show it as it was, and used an earlier photograph, by I.T. Frary, to aid in the illustration.

The HABS documentation includes some background information about the house:

The East Twelfth Street House was built previous to 1865 on the easterly end of T.P. May's sub-division. T.P. May was an influential early settler of Cleveland and a member of the first Board of Health. His sub-division extended from Erie Street (E. 9th) to Muirson Street (E. 12th) along the northerly side of what in 1865 became the extension of Superior Street...

The house while still having evidence of good design and sturdy construction has been used in recent years as a ware house and consequently many of the better details have been destroyed.

T.P. May residence. Rendered in 1935 by Isadore Wasserstrom for the Historic American Buildings Survey.

The four pages of renderings provide an incredible amount of detail - the hardware is included, as is the exact dimensions of the seam on the metal roof. With the information present here, one could build a house virtually identical to the original. The biggest obstacle would likely replicating the method of construction - modern tools simply don't leave the same tool marks as tools used in the 1840s.

One final note: the building in the background is the Hotel Statler, at the corner of Euclid Avenue and East 12th Street.

Chester Commons: A Last Look

Photograph by Traci Hlafka

A little over two weeks ago, I shared some photographs of Chester Commons, the park at the northwest corner of Chester Avenue and East 12th Street that has been demolished and is in the process of being reborn, now as Perk Park. I noted, in the color slides, from the early 1970s, "the presence of color in the figures on the concrete walls." I continued that "I can't recall whether they were still in color at the time of demolition - what I do recall is that they felt quite gray - the vibrance in these images was definitely gone from them."

Cleveland Area History reader Traci Hlafka was kind enough to share this group of photographs she took of the park, a couple months prior to the demolition.


Photograph by Traci Hlafka

Peeling paint was visible everywhere, including on the fountain, which appears to either be drained or be out of commission completely.


Photograph by Traci Hlafka

The abstract figures, painted on the concrete - figures that were once brilliant colors - are now dull and muted.


Photograph by Traci Hlafka

The toll caused by lack of maintenance is obvious.


Photograph by Traci Hlafka

Erosion has changed the physical landscape. And the growth of trees has made the space very different from how it appeared in the early 1970s.

These photos help to provide a record of how the park changed over time, as well as what has been lost.

---

If you have photographs or other images that might provide for an interesting follow-up to a story, please email them to ClevelandAreaHistory@gmail.com.

A Park as it Was: Chester Commons

Photograph by Frank J. Aleksandrowicz, June, 1973, for the Environmental Protection Agency.

In recent years, the park at Chester Avenue and East 12th Street had fallen into such disrepair that it became somthing less than attractive to the downtown population. It is now in the process of being completely rebuilt.

Indeed, the concrete structures in the park had come to feel brutalist in nature. (Brutalism is the architectural style charaterized by imposing, massive concrete and stone - the wing of the Cleveland Museum of Art designed by Marcel Breuer is an excellent example of this.)

It's worth looking at what this park looked like originally, in the 1970s, when it was built.


Photograph by Clay Herrick. Courtesy of the Cleveland Memory Project.

Eric Johannesen, in his classic work on the city's built environment, Cleveland Architecture: 1876-1976 described it as follows:

Visually the most successful part of the [Erieview] project area by 1976 was the square at East 12th Street and Chester Avenue. Built by the city in 1972 and called Chester Commons Park, the square is one of the best genuinely urban pedestrian spaces in Cleveland. Considerable spatial drama is created wtihin a small compass on a stage set of concrete and plantings. The space is divided and made to appear much larger than it is by the use of numerous levels built up of stepped platforms at irregular angles. Some of the concrete parapets take on the shape of imaginary fortified bastions. Trees, wooden benches, brightly colored graphic designs, and a small cascade at the center of the square add variety and freshness, and the ensemble has a distinctly playful quality. However, the urban character of the square is dependent on the backdrop of the older Chester Twelfth Building, the new Diamond Shamrock and Penton Plaza Buildings, the Chesterfield Apartments, and Park Centre.

Photograph by Frank J. Aleksandrowicz, June, 1973, for the Environmental Protection Agency.

There are a few major differences between the park as originally built and how it was up until a few years ago that are worth noting.

One is the presence of color in the figures on the concrete walls. I can't recall whether they were still in color at the time of demolition - what I do recall is that they felt quite gray - the vibrance in these images was definitely gone from them.


Photograph by Frank J. Aleksandrowicz, June, 1973, for the Environmental Protection Agency.

Further, as built, the space feels far more open. While my tendency is generally to be in favor of trees in parks, it seems that in this situation, they space, as originally concieved, worked better with them being much shorter. I'm not sure why.


Photograph by Frank J. Aleksandrowicz, June, 1973, for the Environmental Protection Agency.

Perhaps these slides will provide some insights into what has and hasn't worked in the way of parks in downtown Cleveland. In this sort of history, we ought to be able learn something about which paths will and won't work in the future development of this area.

Another look at the Columbia Building

From Ohio Architect and Builder, January, 1909, page 80.

In light of the threatened demolition of the Columbia Building, I've done a bit more research, and can now provide some details of its construction. The following is from Ohio Architect and Builder, January, 1909, page 39.

The First Eight Story Concrete Building

The first eight-story reinforced concrete skeleton frame was finished Saturday, Dec. 12, 1908, for Mr. M. A. Bradley's building.

The concreting of basement columns was started October 8, 1908, and concreting of roof slab completed on Dec. 12, 1908. Over 200 ton of steel reinforcement and 3,000 barrels of Portland cement were used. All concrete is slag concrete, the slag is manufactured by The Cleveland Macadam Company. The column rods are upset and threaded and connected by sleeve nut splices making same continuous from basement footing to seventh floor. The column rods for the two upper stories are connected by pipe splices. All columns are hooped with band steel wrapped spirally. The column reinforcement is round rods and beam and floor reinforcement twisted rods.

This building is being erected for Mr. M. A. Bradley for office purposes.

The Building Code was revised to allow the construction of this building to go eight stories.

The Reaugh Construction Company are contractors for the reinforced concrete and masonry. Mr. Marion E. Wells, architect.

In order to continue the concreting during the cold weather, the owner, Mr. M. A. Bradley furnished steam from one of his adjoining buildings through a large pipe line extended over the entire floor area of the eight floors and the roof.

The brick work of this building has just been started and rapid progress on the same is promised.

The photograph of the above building in its present state can be seen on the last page in this book in connection with The Reaugh Construction Company's advertisement.

An advertisment the following month (Ohio Architect and Builder, February, 1909, page 80) shows the progress in the construction.

A 1911 article in Ohio Architect and Builder goes into detail about the Reaugh Construction Company. The article is illustrated in detail - it's worth taking a look at the structures that they built. One of note is shown here:


From Ohio Architect and Builder, October, 1911, page 35.

This is one of the structures that was just demolished to make way for the new innerbelt bridge. Correction, as pointed out by Steven McQuillin: It was, in fact, the Higgins Buidling, which he notes was located "At the northwest corner of Huron Road and Ontario Street, demolished for the rail approaches to the Terminal Tower in the 1920s."

---

It's worth noting again that the Columbia Building is a Cleveland Landmark, one in good, usable condition, and that that should be considered in any decision.

Threatened: The Columbia Building

Note: This was originally posted on Wednesday, May 11, 2011. Due to an outage, the original file was lost. The text and images remain the same, but some of the formatting may have changed.


Photo courtesy of the Cleveland Landmarks Commission.

The Columbia building on Prospect-av. at E. 2d-st. stands alone as the only eight-story reinforced concrete building in Cleveland. It was the first to be built under the provisions of the revised building code. It was erected by M.A. Bradley, who has erected a number of other buildings during the past year. Cleveland Plain Dealer, December 26, 1909, page 25.

This new fireproof office building, now a Cleveland Landmark, was designed by architect M.E. Wells. It has been the home to many different businesses over the years. The most recent tenant was David N. Myers University, who occupied the space from 1985 until the recent move to Chester Avenue and East 40th Streets.

The Columbia Building (112 Prospect Avenue, in downtown Cleveland) is threatened with demolition for a parking garage for the new casino. A report on the matter will be presented at the Cleveland Landmarks Commission meeting tomorrow, Thursday, May 12.

---

This 1909 photograph shows the newly-finished Columbia Building. The first floor featured plate glass windows and retail space yet unfilled. The photo was used in an advertisement, published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on August 26, 1909, page 8.



Another ad, a detail of which is used here, extolls the virtues of the location - on the streetcar line and close to Public Square. It was published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on October 3, 1909, page 8.

The full history of this building is not known. It has been an office building since it was built, but the full tenant history remains to be investigated. It would be interesting to learn everything that might have happened within in these walls.


Photograph by Warner Thomas, City of Cleveland Bureau of Photographic Services.

This 1981 photograph shows the entrance to the building, now marred by a less than pleasing awning. This could be remedied with relative ease.


Courtesy of the Cleveland Landmarks Commission.

Some parts of the ornamentation surrounding the entrance can be seen in more detail here.

The building, while not as grand as some, is an attractive, solid structure, that contributes to the history of the city and the character of the neighborhood. It remains in good physical condition and could readily be used for any number of things.

You might ask, why, then, is it being demolished?

---

The demolition of this Cleveland Landmark will make way for this, the "welcome center" (parking garage) for the new downtown casino. This rendering shows the side facing Ontario. The older building in the center of the image is the Stanley Block, one of the oldest commercial structures in downtown Cleveland, which, thanks to your efforts, was saved.

I really try to avoid architectural criticism. It's better left to people who are more knowledgable, like Steven Litt. Further, I attempt to keep my opinions here limited to those surrounding history and historic preservation.

With that said, the proposed parking garage seems like almost as much an assault on the historic Stanley Block as condemning it was. I see no attempt to make the new structure harmonize with the existing one. This could have been done through use of similar lines, or through similar materials, or through any number of other means.

It seems almost as if they're trying to make the Stanley Block stick out so much from the surroundings that the public will want it gone. Further, no attempt has been made to make it fit with the neighborhood. A design that would appeal to casinogoers could surely also make this concession.

How does this relate to the Columbia Building? Because the land the Columbia Building is standing on will be part of the parking garage.

I understand that parking is necessary. But it seems stupid to replace a perfectly good building with a parking garage of questionable merit when there's a vacant lot but a block away that's being used for surface parking.

The lot in question is bounded by Prospect, East 4th, and Huron. It could be used for a combined parking lot for the Q and the casino. This would free up the lot utilized by the Q Arena on Ontario for use by the casino.

---

The plans may be found in the agenda for the Cleveland Landmarks Commission meeting tomorrow, May 12, 2011. An archive of the plans can be found here.

You may register your opinion either by appearing at the Landmarks Commission meeting tomorrow morning at Cleveland City Hall, at 9:00 am, or contact either Commission chair Jennifer Coleman, Commission secretary Robert Keiser (216-664-2531) or Councilman Joe Cimperman (216-664-2691).

Identifying Your Photographs: The Wilshire and Garlock Buildings

Last week, I started the series, Identifying Your Photographs. I hadn't meant to do two in a row, but I can't seem to finish the other stories that I'm working on.

A reader asked me about these two buildings, which were both pictured in the 1889 edition of Cleveland Illustrated. His inquiry involved not merely their address, but their exact location on the block.

I checked the usual sources, which, these days tend toward architectural magazines in the public domain available through Google Books. I checked the Cleveland Memory Project.

The Cleveland Architects Database was a bit helpful. It revealed that the Wilshire Building was built in 1881, on Superior Avenue, and was designed by architect John Edelmann. I also learned that the Garlock Building was built in 1894, and was located at 1602 Euclid Avenue. The architects were French and Chapman.

It's worth noting that the search, as set up for the Cleveland Architects Database tends to be limited to just the names of the architects. If you're searching for a building, one can get better results using Google search and limiting it to the web site in question, for instance, in this case, "wilshire site:http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/arch/", was the search that led me to the information about the Wilshire Building.

I still didn't have firm locations for these structures. This led me to the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps for Ohio. This database is available to anyone with a library card in Ohio. The database often includes the names of buildings, and in this case, I found both of them.



This is a detail from an 1896 Sanborn map. It shows the area bounded by Bank Street (now West 6th) on the west, Frankfort Avenue on the north, Seneca on the east (now West 3rd Street), and Superior Avenue on the south. Just off-center, at the bottom, is the Wilshire Block.



How do we know that this is the building that we are looking for, and not another structure with the same name? (This is not uncommon.) This detail helps illustrate the building a bit better. The Wilshire Block is outlined in red. In the lower right corner, you can see the notation "6B" - this indicates that the building is six stories high and constructed from brick. In the building to the right, a notation in the corresponding corner indicates it is three stories and also brick. One can almost make out a "4" in the building to the left, on this map. These correspond exactly to the buildings shown in the photograph.

We might also note that while the first floor occupies the entire footprint of the structure, the map shows that remaining floors opened onto an atrium.



While working on this, I stumbled across another illustration of the Wilshire Block, in Cleveland Illustrated, page 32. (Consolidated Illustrating Co., Cleveland, 1893) Provided courtesy of Cleveland Public Library. It illustrates an ornate and imposing commercial structure. The name "Wilshire" can be seen clearly at the top, centered. None of the buildings pictured here remain - instead, there is just parking.



Now, for the Garlock building. This detail, also from an 1896 Sanborn map, shows the area bounded by Euclid Avenue on the north, East 18th Street on the east, Prospect Avenue on the south, and East 14th Street on the west. "The Garlock" can be seen just to the left of center, at the top, on Euclid Avenue.



This detail, with the Garlock building outlined in red, helps us acertain that the structure is, in fact, the one we are looking for. Note, based on the same information we have above, that this is a six story building, with three story structures flanking it on either side. It shows a building set forward from the rest of the block, just as it is in the photo.

Do you have a photograph that you would like to have researched and included in this series?

Get the best quality scan that you can still email - note that the crucial information here was pulled from tiny details - and send it to ClevelandAreaHistory@gmail.com. If you don't have access to a scanner, you can mail me your original photograph, well-protected and at your own risk, with a self-addressed stamped envelope for its return, and I'll scan it.

I look forward to identifying your Cleveland area photographic mysteries.

Stanley Block Landmark Hearing TOMORROW!

Photograph by Tim Barrett

Back in June, it came to the public attention that the historic Stanley Block had been condemned.

The Stanley Block is located at 2121 Ontario Street, on the east side of the street, between Prospect and High. It was built circa 1874. It is one of a few stone-faced commercial buildings of this vintage still standing in Cleveland.

The Stanley Block has had an interesting history, due partially to the ballroom on its top floor, where many meetings and events were held. More detail on these can be found in my initial story on the subject.

Previous efforts to designate the structure a landmark failed due to the opposition of the owner, who appears to want to demolish it. Now the city councilman associated with this ward is willing to override this opposition, in the public interest.

A public hearing will be held on the matter tomorrow (Thursday), March 3, 2011 at 1:00 pm in Room 6 of City Hall, 601 Lakeside Avenue. If you are unable to attend, please consider emailing Commission Secretary Robert D. Keiser (rkeiser@city.cleveland.oh.us) or City Planner Donald J. Petit (dpetit@city.cleveland.oh.us) and let them know that you believe this historic structure is worth preserving.

Holiday shopping in Cleveland, Ohio

Where have you done your Holiday shopping this season? Wherever it was, I bet there was not a 73-foot high Christmas tree there like the one seen below (photo courtesy of the Cleveland Memory website) at the Sterling-Lindner-Davis store that was formerly located in Playhouse Square.


Some of the best holiday window displays that Cleveland had to offer were shown in the windows of Higbee's at Terminal Tower. Higbee's was moved to the Tower in 1931 after the Van Sweringen's purchased the company to compliment their Cleveland Union Terminal project. According to the Cleveland Memory site, this photo was taken in 1958.



Kudos to Tower City for carrying on the tradition of the window display. My 3-year-old son and I thoroughly enjoyed this extremely colorful advertisement for Kringle's Inventionasium.



It wouldn't be right to mention the holidays in Cleveland without a nod to the Halle's created character, Mr. Jingeling who was keeper of Santa's keys. Christopher constructed an excellent three part series on Mr. Jingeling. Start reading part 1 here.



It's enjoyable to look back and think about the magical feelings that Cleveland retailers and commercial districts stirred up for our young ones. Many people might remark that things just are not the same.

How do you create magic for your children and grandchildren in Cleveland during the holiday season?

---

Keri Zipay moved to Cleveland from Pennsylvania in 1999 and has since discovered a love for local historic architecture. She has been volunteering with the Cleveland Restoration Society since 2004, and historic structures are her favorite photographic subject, particularly the remaining Millionaire's Row mansions. Contact Keri by email

The two oldest buildings in Downtown Cleveland

A little while ago, I wrote about the Mechanics Block, built circa 1835 and demolished in 1971. At the time of the demolition, it was the oldest building in downtown Cleveland. I wasn't able to learn much about its early history because, for most of its lifespan - probably because, for most of its history, it wasn't seen as that significant - there were plenty of larger, more (commercially) important buildings built soon after. Only with the loss of those buildings does this early structure begin to seem more important.

I encountered the same problem in trying to learn about the early history of the two oldest buildings in downtown Cleveland. While good examples of the style for the time they were built, they weren't considered fancy or otherwise architecturally special. They had escaped academic notice as late as 1964, when Edmund H. Chapman's classic analysis of this city's growth, Cleveland: Village to Metropolis, was published. Only now that they are the last of their type do we try to look further.


Photograph by Jenny Carpenter Valencic

The Hilliard Block, at 1415 West 9th Street, Cleveland, Ohio, was constructed circa 1850. It was built for Richard Hilliard, for his grocery business, Hilliard and Hays. Hilliard, a Cleveland resident since 1824, was involved in both business and politics. He was elected president of the village council twice, in the early 1830s, and in 1836, when Cleveland became a city, he was elected alderman.

The condition of this historic brick late Federal has improved considerably since it appeared in Landmark Architecture of Cleveland by Mary-Peale Schofield, in 1976. At the time, almost all of the windows were boarded up.


Photograph by Jenny Carpenter Valencic

Since that date, the building, seen here from the rear, has been restored. The chimneys, built right into the sides of the structure, and which were missing in 1976, have been reconstructed. The peeling paint (and lovely patina) of the sign, reading "Drug Sundries Co." are now gone, replaced with paint in a color that is probably similar to that of the bricks. While it would be nice to remove the paint from the bricks, there isn't a safe way to do that, short of using a dental pick. Further, it's possible that the bricks are somewhat deteriorated and that the paint affords a measure of waterproofness.


Photograph by Jenny Carpenter Valencic

The Central Exchange, now Frank Morrison & Son, is similar in style. The historic structure, at 1330 Old River Road, was built at about the same time as the Hilliard Block - circa 1850. Schofield's guide is the first pubication to notice the historical importance of this structure as well.

The unusual curved corner of the front of the building, shown here, is likely original.


Photograph by Jenny Carpenter Valencic

The Central Exchange is wedge shaped - the angles of the walls in the photographs are not the result of some wide-angle lens. Schofield noted that part of the riverside dock remained, though it appears obscured in this photograph. The windows on the side of the structure have been widened - they would have originally been of the same proportions as those on the front of the building, like the Hilliard Block. Further, the windows on the rear have been shortened.

It's worth noting that the Central Exchange also appears in better condition than it did in 1976 - the glass block on the front of the structure has been replaced with traditional windows.

---

The dates for both of these structures are estimates. There's still plenty that could be learned about their history. This research would better illuminate these few remaining elements of this period of our history that are left in downtown Cleveland.