bumsquare

I received an email from the chair of the Landmarks Commission that at least seemed to offer a little hope as regards the Columbia: "Thank you for your email regarding the request to demolish the Landmarked Columbia Building that the Landmarks Commission is hearing this week. We have received overwhelming feedback on the issue and personally speaking, I am excited to see so many citizens passionate about the future of downtown Cleveland. The Commission is very seriously considering all the factors involved in making our decision, including the owner's wishes, the recommendations of the Planning Commission department, the Landmarks Commission staff and the local design review board, the public's concerns and most importantly, the Landmarks Commission Ordinance that we must abide by. This issue is a complex one involving a viable landmark and a new project that has strong economic potential for the city, but I assure you all of the commission members are deeply committed to making informed decisions on all items brought in front of us that enhance and benefit Cleveland's landmarks and the city as a whole. Again, thank you for your input. Jennifer Coleman, Clair Cleveland Landmarks Commission" She also pasted a link to the Landmark Ordinance-http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/ordinance08.html

I think the Mavs do have two great individual defenders in Marion and Chandler. I can't believe how bad the Bulls looked at the end of that game yesterday. I couldn't help but think this is virtually the same team (except for Boozer) the Cavs eliminated in 5 games last year. Ugh!

^^^Not really the kind of encouragement I was looking for.

Please, somebody, tell me how the Mavericks are going to beat the Heat. I need some kind of hope.

Isn't Metro owned by Hyde Park?

I think my favorite part is the "Parking Supply", where they come to the conclusion that constructing more parking will reduce the need to construct additional parking.

In other news, as American Greetings and Eaton pack their bags for the sticks, Pittsburgh will be getting a Crystal Palace in the sky courtesy of Cleveland's blood money!

We could market all of downtown Cleveland as the Parking Lot District.

The Columbia is not dilapidated. The May Company building is more dilapidated than the Columbia.

Wack

A city is only as good as its citizens. It's up to us to try and make the city be what we want it to be.

I don't think Brooklyn is that bad off. It certainly won't help, but...

Bob Brown (planning director) is: [email protected] All I could get for Jennifer Coleman (chairperson) was: [email protected] Councilman Brancatelli: [email protected] Robert Keiser (secretary): [email protected]

That was a really weak article. I don't understand being more upset about the walkway than the demolition. I hope everyone here who is concerned about the demolitions has sent letters or emails to commission members, because this seems to be gliding along a little bit too smoothly.

Unsuccessful at the venture of housing students in dorms?

Those maps are awesome!

Maybe somebody mentioned this already. Is tearing down the Columbia the big new development that Gilbert talked about last month? If so I have to say I'm a bit disappointed.

Then why the awful numbers in the south?

It's obviously flawed. But I'm genuinely curious why the study seems to be biased favorably to western towns and unfavorably to southern ones. What is the characteristic that would so clearly distinguish them? I always think of Western and Southern metros as being similar.

The only thing I can think of is that maybe MSA's in the East cover more sparsely populated areas that don't get transit service? But I don't think that makes any sense.

Something in the analysis obviously tilts to western cities. I can't imagine what that thing would be, though.

I heard something about age issues also, but I think that was more an indictment on Turkish practices rather than Kanter in particular. He was born in the accuracy-in-birth-certifying-loving country of Switzerland.

Correct. It's an eagle or a griffin or some other kinda fancy bird/animal.

I've read that Kanter has knee issues, which TERRIFIES me. Taking seven-footers high in the draft is a huge risk, even if they are talented, because there's a much greater chance of breakdown.

Aside from a desire to preserve historic structures, which I am all for, I don't 'get it'. But I would welcome some feedback. I would hardly call this the 'only' option. I think Gilbert would admit that. The question is whether it is the "best option" for the City and the private interests (Gilbert, Columbia owners, etc). I 'hope' Gilbert and crew had some very, very long and detailed discussions behind closed doors about this. I have to think that they did given the amount of money involved. I also have to think that they explored a plethora of options, including the empty lots in the surrounding area. I certainly would have at least explored every 'viable' option. Point is that I get the sense that people think they hastily made this decision, whereas I know that each and every decision in mutli-million dollar developments are scrutinized to the fullest prior to even making any plans public. I have no doubt that many options were discussed. But these options generally revolve around the bottom line. It may indeed be true that this set-up makes the most economic sense for the casino. However there are other considerations.