MayDay

The temperature is supposed to be upper 80s and it'll be humid - dress appropriately!

The problem is that replacing the deteriorated terra cotta with more terra cotta would be 1. cost prohibitive, and 2. foolhardy. Most older buildings across the country have undergone similar renovations and either "micro cotta" (a resin-based substance) or fiberglass is used for decorative elements - the end result is that the building's decorative elements read the same, and those elements are much more durable than the original materials. FC is not being cheap here, and Coon Restoration is quite the competent contractor. Terra cotta simply lacks the durability and resistance to the elements that's necessary.

The meets are always arranged so people can use the Rapid, or their car if they choose.

As fabulous as Halite was, it was a little too off the beaten path (aka Market Square) to draw enough clientele. That and the fact that Clinton terminates at West 28th, rather than West 25th made it a little more difficult to find for people not familiar with the area.

Cool - and if anyone has requests, post them here so we can bat 'em around.

The meets have always been "stay as long as you want, leave as early as you need". There's no "required" time, so if you can only show up for a drink at Great Lakes, that's okay. Btw, who (of those who are going) have taken photos or checked out the Detroit Superior Bridge since they've replaced sections of the ugly fencing with stuff you can actually see through? More to the point, would anyone be interested in checking that out?

Oh and before you ask, I wasn't able to make it to Stark's booth. :-(

During my visit to Las Vegas, I was able to drop in at the ICSC (shopping center convention) and lo and behold, I found an updated rendering for the Flats East Bank project. Of course, I had my camera with me ;-) Latest and greatest: Original rendering:

Sorry that it's not as umm, interesting as PigBoy's photo - just me at the Grand Canyon:

clvlndr - you clearly misread my post. I said the proposed glassy midrise designed by KPF/Madison was mediocre, not Cleveland Trust. Cleveland Trust ain't pretty but it's a well-designed building - if that makes sense.

Keep in mind - in addition to the tower is the 5-story section that connects to the garage via skywalk, and the 1010 Euclid building. Also - the AT Tower was built with the infrastructure for the unbuilt second phase - so they're not just demo'ing one building, they'd be demo'ing a building that's ready for expansion. I personally think the 5-story section should be demo'd with an expansion to the south of the tower, the 1010 Building restored, possibly for residential use (just like the trio of buildings across the street).

Honestly I think most people - myself included - don't consider this building to be very attractive. In certain light it can look dramatic but my opinion is that it's not one that inspires people (as opposed to the Arcade or Terminal Tower). However, I think most people opposed to demolition believe that: 1. Public funds should not be used to discard a building that, with a little ingenuity, could be adapted to suit the County's needs. 2. Dimora and Hagan make statements about wanting a green building and a signature building - but demolition and discarding existing materials AND burning fuel, expending energy to create and import all-new materials completely contradicts the basic principles of sustainable design. 3. As far as "signature building" - the proposal by KPF/Madison is garden-variety schlock. If the proposed design was a suitable replacement of the "highest" design, I would be less opposed to demolition of the Breuer tower. But it isn't - it's a mediocre glass-curtained mid-rise that isn't suitable for the site, and isn't worthy of Ohio's most populous county, much less a key intersection of downtown Cleveland. I don't think the argument that demolish it because it's ugly holds much water when you're talking about using taxpayer funds. When you're public servants, you are obligated to be frugal and work with what you have, and not give concepts of signature buildings and green design lip service - particularly when we're talking about something of this scale.

Folks... I'm as anxious as anyone to hear the latest on Stark's plans - but for the love of all that's holy, can we exercise a little self-control and if god forbid something isn't announced until next week, it isn't the end of the world.

"Lady, you aren't going to make too many friends here making statements like that " I don't think it was a malicious statement - an ignorant one, maybe.

Okay folks, we've had our fun - I'm going to clean up the faux post (and related responses). Sorry - got to keep things tidy. :-)

I'm not the biggest fan of children either - I mean, I went out and *bought* 'Mommie Dearest' on DVD. :whip: Plus, my mom cursed me - she said "one day, I hope you grow up and have kids just like you.". So the idea of a mini-Me who's just as much of a smart@ss as I am? Oh noooo...

Again, my argument isn't that the Breuer Tower is aesthetically pleasing - my concern is that taxpayers' money is being wasted, and that sustainable principles are being given lip service by two public servants, and please tell me you're joking that you think the KPF/Madison proposal resembles anything approaching "highest design". I'm sorry - the minds of the county? The commissioners have said that they want a "green" building but anyone with a cursory understanding of sustainable design knows that demolition of a 383-foot tower is contrary to the tenets of sustainable design. Anyone with a basic knowledge of sustainable design is aware that utilizing existing materials is preferable to using new. Anyone with the most simple grasp of sustainable design and green principles knows that the fuel used and effort exerted to import foreign steel and materials to the site would contradict and invalidate any notions of green design. Finally, anyone who has a little bit of knowledge of sustainable design knows that demolition would result in tons of granite, steel, concrete and god knows what else needing to be disposed of. Tell me again how the minds of the county commissioners are beyond reproach? The one thing that hasn't been done enough with Cleveland's built environment is questioning the powers that be. So they say the building is inefficient - how so? Beyond small floorplates (which could be remedied by constructing on the site of 1010 Euclid to expand the existing footprint), how is the building "inefficient"? Why is it that the county commissioners don't have to be creative and work with what they have? It doesn't help that one of the commissioners spearheaded one of Cleveland's largest public projects and it was plagued by cost overruns. So two of the commissioners are threatening to dump the building because they're acting like selfish schoolchildren - if the Breuer Tower is demolished and the new construction follows suit of previous projects (cost overruns, etc.), I can assure you the commissioners will be dumped at the ballot box.

lewarctj, my biggest concern is the waste of money because of Hagan's bullheadedness - and pointing out his less-than-stellar track record is hardly a personal attack.

I'll never suggest that the Breuer Tower is gorgeous, but it's certainly better than that boring piece of garbage!

"Hagan has said the government for Ohio's most populous county deserves a signature building." And the POS designed by KPF/Madison is a signature building? Then again, Hagan has a history of being off the mark (aka Gateway's job creation potential; Gateway's ROI for the city...).

Am I the only one who finds that photo just a little disturbing?

"''We've even tried to teach our son that you have to change your lifestyle if you want to do things. It's just ridiculous.'' " Teaching your child how to adapt is ridiculous? :roll:

"Every living scenario has it's pros and cons...instead of judging what is better for everyone else....make decisions on what is best for you as an individual..listen to what others have to say, and try to understand why people make the choices they do." I understand a lot of the reasons people choose to move to exurbs like Brunswick, Bainbridge, etc. That's all well and good until you factor in the issues of sustainability and subsidizing of sprawl with public funds. When the choices made result in the abandonment and decline of the city and inner suburbs, when the choices made result in funds going to widening highways in formerly rural areas (which as we all know, does NOT reduce congestion) instead of improving existing infrastructure and public transit systems... the list goes on and on, and it's exacerbated by the fact that our region's population is stagnant and thus resources are getting spread thin. Those choices are having a harmful impact on our economy, our environment, our schools and our quality of life. I'm sorry - but those choices have dire consequences and it's disingenuous to suggest that "it's all good".

That's a pretty tactless comment - care to elaborate?

"How do the populations of Ohio City, Lakewood and Tremont compare?" I'd say Ohio City and Tremont tend to have a more electic slant, with Ohio City having a younger demographic and Tremont slight older. Lakewood tends to have younger couples with children - those couples tend to be more city-minded but want a good public school system. As far as stumbling distance - Ohio City, Tremont, and downtown are your best bets. Lakewood's a close second there.