cadmen

^ Agreed, so now that it's pretty much finished l wonder if the opponents still oppose it? I think it is exactly the kind of infill a city moving forward needs.

Not sure if anything will come of it but even a small facility would be great. It would add diversity to our port, a few bucks to the local economy and just some additional life. I would love to see it happen.

Well that is too bad. The development looked very enticing. Open the windows on the Samsel building and adding life to that part of the street thereby extending the Flats scene is a great idea. Not doing that is unfortunate. I know it's not all that uncommon in the development world but man, it seems like we get more than our fare share of cool plans that go nowhere.

Brilliant!

I can't read the article but if George wants an impact presence in the Flats l wish he would start with his project just to the south on Riverview Rd.

I tell you what, those particular lake views really separate this building from a lot of the other downtown conversions.

If Progressive wants to be so ubiquitous l suggest they really put their money where their mouth is and build a hq downtown. Let them put their name on that!

If you look at the pic the part that wasn't constructed is actually not all that big. It's amazing to me that they just didn't finish it. Unless the 1929 crash killed the finished product. I'm actually too lazy to do the research to answer my own speculation since l'm traveling overseas now.

Damn. Where are the windows?

I think a better proposal is a new building to cover the unfinished one.

I can't speak for everyone but my reaction to the Geis proposal is twofold. One: l DO think exceptional sites (and we don't have all that many here) deserve a special design. This is not an original thought of mine. Study any great city and you will see exceptional designs at certain locations. Doing that is one way to create beautiful cities. That doesn't mean you never build anything average. That would be impractical and, really unnecessary. But do put up buildings that special sites warrent. Two: A developer doesn't have to spend a boatload of money on an appealing design. And yes l know different people have their own definition of appealing. Nevertheless, there are so many examples already available of what a general consensus would call appealing. Copy one. The only reason to build a stone cold boring building is simply a lack of interest or awareness. Some developers get it, some don't. Finally, there have been some comments recently on this site that indicated that developers visit here and supposedly they feel we don't have a clue about what it takes to get a project off the ground. Fine. I'll leave the financials to them. But that has nothing to do with putting up an attractive building or not. It can but it doesn't HAVE to cost anymore to incorporate better designs. It just takes desire and maybe a little taste.

I was wondering the same thing.

Thanks Ken. I did not realize how difficult it is to demo a home in a historic district.

If housing is in such demand (and it is) that new construction rents out quickly l wonder when we will begin to see more knock downs of older homes in terrible condition being replaced with new builds? It may be one thing to acquire a large enough site for an apartment building but replacing single homes should be doable.

Maybe they can pack some of those Kia Boyz in them when they move 'em out.

Serious question. How do people get appointed to these Boards? Is there any kind of criteria i.e design or architectural expertise? Are they political appointees. Are they paid, full time positions or part time with a stipend?

Wow that is an odd structure. One side looks like not much while the other is cool as hell.

So one last question. Is the (potential) plan for the theater to used as a theater, some kind of event space or the usual apartment conversion?

The internet is scary.

I'm a lay person. But l think l have a better understanding of what looks good and where to put it than a lot of local developers. What separates me from the developer is he has to make the finances work. I get that. But we see projects actually getting built all over the country and many of them look pretty f***ing good. And because l frequent this forum l have been made aware of the difficulty in getting a required return after expenses (finances, labor, materials) in Cleveland. All that being said, l still think we get shortchanged on design in this town. When we DO get a great design it frequently gets watered-down. Does that happen as much elsewhere? I don't think so. So then it can be done here as well. And l'm not saying you need a great design everywhere. You don't. But what you do need is a great design on certain prominent locations. Detroit and 25th is one of them. It's right across from what will be a gem of a park. It's a gateway to downtown too. In this case the problem is as much to do with the developer as anything. Geis is known for building off the shelf suburban office buildings. Nothing wrong with that in Solon of Mayfield. But not on this site. Mundane won't do, or it shouldn't. Those of you just happy to get something built need to raise your standards a little. This isn't the old Cleveland. We've come along way. Let's act like it. If the present business conditions won't allow something great on a great site let's wait a bit. We haven't built anything there in decades. We can wait a little because if we build this thing we blow the opportunity to create something worthwhile in the future. The site deserves it and we need to stop settling.

I'm pretty sure @Husat77was being tounge in cheek and not seriously lamenting no longer being able to see the TT.

I think it's absolutely true that the biggest reason for our disappointment is we're comparing this iteration with the previous ones. I was going to say that very thing first but a couple of you beat me to it. It's not a terrible building, just very ho-hum. And that is not good enough for that corner. The original design, the color, the location all speak to the need for something MUCM more prominent. So, that being the case l would much prefer that NOTHING get built there until conditions change. The park is still several years away from completion. We don't need the apartment building just yet and we certainly don't need this one. If it was up too me l'd just hold off until the business climate changes. It's somewhat of a risk but building this nothing burger ensures that that prominent corner remains a shadow of what it was supposed to be. We deserve better.

Geography is hugely important in determining a cities growth as it relates to transportation. In that respect Chicago does have the advantage of being the largest city that connects rail to the West. But geography is not the the only determinate. In our case we made a number of blunders that have nothing to do with our location. I think it started when Rockefeller wanted to create a first class university and other local business titans didn't see the merit. So he took his money and funded the University of Chicago instead. We still suffer from that shortsighted decision today. Look no further than Pittsburgh. A large respected university is not a panacea but it sure helps when you're trying to develop a knowledge economy. That decision coincides with another mistake which was our refusal to understand that a future economy would revolve around knowledge and not simply making things. Of course Cleveland is not the only city to make that mistake. Using Pittsburgh again, when the steel industry collapsed they pretty quickly shifted to a knowledge economy using their universities to catapult themselves forward. Our civic leaders were slow to pivot when manufacturing began to shift to cheaper climates. We're still trying to catch up but because of our refusal to see the writing on the wall we're probably a decade or two behind Pittsburgh. All of that being said. I think we're finally on the rebound. But it's going to take time as reinventing an economy is not easy. We're not going back to our standing a hundred plus years ago as one of America's pre-eminent cities but we don't have to be a backwater either.

Yes to all of your questions.

Is there enough room? Maybe one deep. But how cool would it be to dock there and then be a able to walk up the hill to all the new places to eat that take advantage of the view.