Baskervilles

Retail and anchor may no longer fit together in the near future I wouldn't mind seeing a retail anchor in the Higbee building but it seems like a long shot. I think a department store is a real long shot given the current retail landscape (I know the poster above said it was a dream). Despite our growing downtown population and renaissance department stores have become very rare downtown outside the 10-15 largest cities and I don't see that changing. I would be perfectly happy with something like one of the new amazon bookstores as an anchor though (seems more likely but still a long shot). That said, I hope the casino survives there because I'm terrified of it closing and nothing rushing in to fill the void. There was an article in 2016 when Gilbert acquired the Avenue which mentioned that the casino phase 2 was dead and he was looking at the phase 2 site as a mixed use development. However, if I remember right there was no timetable mentioned for that mixed use development so its probably safe to put that at the bottom of the list given the other things on his plate. My dream of dreams is that they resurrect the old tower city master plan (attached) and put some height spaced out across the length that site. But if they have something ambitious like that in mind we might be waiting a long time. I would probably put the Jacob's West Bank development halfway up the list. He's acquired a lot of the pieces he needs and he seems determined to get those remaining.

I could be wrong but it sounds like they intend to have two floors of parking with three floors of apartments above it. "Joseph Kassouf said the plan calls for the attached new building to climb five floors while the Liberty is only four stories high, thanks to Liberty's tall ceilings of around 19 feet. The first floor on West Sixth will incorporate a total of 7,000 square feet of first floor retail space. 'We won't have a bar there," Joseph Kassouf said, 'but a restaurant that will be open longer hours because it has a bar.' A drawing Kassouf displayed of the proposed project shows uses such as a bakery and others in at least five storefronts. Final numbers, along with the number of suites, are in flux."

You could fit their usual 500-600 ft driving range on the lot north of Ernst Young but it would be about a third the width of a usual top golf. Pretty much the same problem with the lot on the other side of west 9th. I guess they could put it across the railroad tracks on the land where the old FEB plans had an office building going?

I like the placement. I love the way it looks from wade lagoon (between fenway and crawford halls), it packs in a lot of residents on that side of MLK, and it will fit in well with the potential future UC3 buildings between Stokes/Chester on the other side of Euclid. Keep in mind that there's also the potential for a phase 2 development on the empty land north of the pnc bank.

Where would Phase III go? North of the current developments? The parking lot between phase I and phase II

Hopefully those two hulking parking garages have ground level retail. If that's the case, this could be a pretty nice lakefront development.

Not trying to use my 9th post to pick a fight with a global moderator. But change the word "boats" to "land" and this could be the response to every complaint about a poorly designed non-urban development on this forum. Hopefully activity down there this season is high enough to convince them to support an extended line next year.

Yeah I think we are. I think that is exactly what they're intending to do though. If you look at the interactive map in their 2012 master plan (http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2012/01/cleveland_clinics_new_master_p.html#) it looks like they're intending to construct a line of glassy buildings (with tons of natural light + views of greenspace) with minimal setbacks between East 105th and East 83rd. A linear park will then run between those buildings from East 105th to East 83rd (broken up with interior passages where it goes through a couple buildings). Nothing in the portion of that master plan dealing with green space strikes me as a problem. While their incorporation of greenspace with respect to this dental clinic is bad, their larger plan incorporates it quite well. If they stick pretty close to that plan going forward I think the bigger problem is how they continue to use parking lots/garages rather than greenspace.

Your standards must be pretty low if you're trying to defend this atrocity. So I'm not going to defend this particular building given its location and the nature of its green space. However, I think you guys are dismissing his general point out of hand and that the Clinic gets a little too much flak for its love of green space. There is a growing body of evidence that the ability to look at green space outside of your hospital window really does aid in patient recovery. Quite a few hospitals around the country are attempting to add green space in urban settings for this very reason. So while I agree 100% that a lot of what the clinic does is horribly designed from an urbanism perspective... I think we should keep in mind that they're probably attempting to balance good urban design against the desire to have a pretty green campus for their patients to look at out the windows. That said, I don't like this building. Most unfortunate for people who get sick in Paris or Tokyo. Funny thing is, the illusion falls apart unless your room is on the first couple floors. But hey, the more blocks we bulldoze, the more people we can heal! Yes, exactly, it is most unfortunate for those people. Stop trying to create a straw man argument. I'm not advocating for the Clinic to bulldoze every block in sight. I'm saying that it is ridiculous to flat out reject the benefits of greenspace on a medical campus when I'm willing to bet you've never even glanced at the literature regarding it. If you have and you don't find it compelling.. fine agree to disagree. But I do find it compelling, which is why I don't reject the concept of a medical campus with green space. And I reject the thought that a healthy urban density and greenspace have to be mutually exclusive if done right. The goal shouldn't be no green space on a medical campus, the goal should be green space done in a way to maximize health benefits to patients with as little disruption to the urban fabric as possible. Listen, I probably worship at the alter of urban density as much as anyone on this board but I do so precisely because I believe cities are supposed to serve people. And I think there's a pretty compelling argument that this is one of the few areas where block after block of nothing but buildings doesn't serve people. This may be what they are attempting, but they've done a miserable job of it over the years. There's a middle ground here: build an attractive campus with greenspace to be looked at and used; and encourage healthy activity by employees and visitors by providing attractive, safe, and shaded pedestrian circulation access and walkable destinations. But the idea the Clinic is promoting health by surrounding itself with a mote of massive, empty lawns and surface parking, demolishing every old building in a quarter mile radius, and inhibiting nearby commercial development with its butt ugly power substations, is, frankly, absurd. Completely agree that they've done a miserable job of it over the years. My whole point is that there is a middle ground and that it's quite frankly absurd to not acknowledge that there are benefits to having greenspace on a medical campus.

Your standards must be pretty low if you're trying to defend this atrocity. So I'm not going to defend this particular building given its location and the nature of its green space. However, I think you guys are dismissing his general point out of hand and that the Clinic gets a little too much flak for its love of green space. There is a growing body of evidence that the ability to look at green space outside of your hospital window really does aid in patient recovery. Quite a few hospitals around the country are attempting to add green space in urban settings for this very reason. So while I agree 100% that a lot of what the clinic does is horribly designed from an urbanism perspective... I think we should keep in mind that they're probably attempting to balance good urban design against the desire to have a pretty green campus for their patients to look at out the windows. That said, I don't like this building.

It does, on the surface, seem like a problem but people seem to adjust to trains. Keep in mind Centric is going up on the other side, which is adjacent to the freight tracks and away from the quieter Rapid tracks which will be across the street/driveway from Mayfield Station. Also keep in mind that renters are paying big bucks to live down at Flats East Bank which close to those extremely busy RR tracks crossing the "Iron Curtain" across the river -- and then there's the horns from both the ore ships and the bridge... it's extremely noisy down there, ... but residents deal with it. Speaking as someone who lives 20 yards from freight tracks... people adjust remarkably quickly. I don't even consciously notice trains going by anymore unless I have the window open and the tv volume set too low.

Yeah that will be a four story CIA housing building.

Haha you're not alone ... the rendering looks absolutely hideous. Maybe it'll change

A new CIA dorm is scheduled for completion by September 2018 along Euclid Avenue at East 117th Street.

Looking through the Nord Family Greenway plans reminded me that there is supposed to be a phase 2 of the Maltz Performing Arts Center. I couldn't find anything with the search... has there been any news about that project progressing?