cadmen

Man, l did not realize SHW would be that visible from Euclid Ave. Looks like l need to spend more time downtown and less time on this site lol.

While l'm usually a proponent of green space l think the best use of the site is mid-rise residential. Of course extending the boardwalk from FEB would only enhance the river front and complement said development. But what do l know? I'm just a frustrated amateur urban planner. Carry on.

Indoubetetly.

Well then...it's my belief that all empires must have a trophy headquarters.

Interesting comments. I think they mean we're making progress without even realizing it. For years all we saw was disinvestment, abandonment. So when a developer wanted to build something our focus wasn't so much on the design but just that something was replacing nothing. Fast forward to today and although we're still not seeing red-hot sun belt development we have seen significant infill, especially housing. The one common denominator in all that design both here and around the country is the ubiquitous multi-shaded boxy look like the one Geis is proposing. That design is here, there and everywhere around the country. It's funny, I remember the first time I saw it, what, 30 years ago? I thought "wow" so fresh, so modern, so different. Now it's just so old, so derivative. So what is the progress we've made? It's that we're no longer satisfied with any 'ol infill. We've progressed to the point that we actually care about a what a development looks like. We're not just be happy that we're getting something, anything. That's progress and it bodes well for our future. I don't know what the next "look" is going to be but I feel confident that we have progressed enough to demand our place at the new design table. Speaking of table, Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Thanks for the pick-me-up Ken. While new projects or those under construction get all of us excited the real meat and potatoes of any region is the economy. We know we've been doing a slow bleed for decades although things seem to have begun turning around in the since the Great Recession. The apparent dichotomy of continual population loss coupled with an increase of people, especially millennials moving here presents an interesting possibility. Some of the most negative Clevelanders are those older suburbanites who have moved or are moving south for retirement. That bad attitude is not all their fault as decades of job loss, bad weather and losing sports teams will do a number on you. Then we have the recent phenomenon of poor Clevelanders moving too. I find that the most surprising as the poor are usually less mobile. And now there is an influx of younger more educated people. I'm always reading different sites/articles about people moving or visiting here and what their thoughts are. One thing that frequently comes up is how impressed they are with the area once they have a chance to experience it. Many of these new people are way more positive than the ones leaving. If this churn continues that old Cleveland negativity might be replaced with something more positive. Maybe we can turn around our national image too. Having a better image along with a more educated workforce will encourage outside companies to see the region as a possibility for expansion. It's been a while since we were on the national radar.

Of course everyone on this forum is very happy that it's going to happen but I'm especially pleased as the look of this building is nothing like what we usually see in Cleveland. If the finished product is anything like the renderings we will have a really cool and colorful addition to the heart of downtown. Throw in a classically lit Centennial, Euclid Grand, Heinen's and Kimpton hotel and we might get 9th and Euclid looking as vibrant as it did 75 years ago. Throw in a hip outdoor cafe with colorful umbrella's and some great landscaping/trees onto that little plaza fronting PNC and we get more life. Here's to the future, may it be a lively one.

Very interesting.

All in all this is good news. There's an obvious need for large modern warehouses. Every one built in the city provides local jobs for city workers plus each one built in the city preserves outlying forest or farmland. At least for the time being. Still l wonder what percent of the goods stored are imports? Looking forward to the day when the bulk of goods stored are manufactured in the US. Let's shorten that supply chain Mr. CEO.

Ageism is a part of the problem too. This is a personal bitch but still true. My wife is 60, has a Master's in education, is burned out from all the changes in teaching so finally quit. Despite a worker shortage in the labor market she had been unable to find work.

Face it folks...the only way Ohio pols will allow turbines in Lake Erie is if they are powered by coal. While Ohio voters are trending Red (54% Republican to 46% Democrat) the most recent rendition creating congressional districts would most likely result in 12 Red and 3 Blue. Regardless of your political leanings we have to admit that Republicans play hardball and Democrats don't. Nationwide Dems may be the majority but they constantly find themselves being outmaneuvered. Dems may be the party of policy but its the Repubs who are the party of shameless power.

The Cleveland Center for Contemporary Art was housed in the old Sears building. I was only there once when my company (pre Cleveland Clinic employer) Acromed used it once for our Christmas party in the early 90's. I thought the venue was great and always planned to go back for a new showing but I never made it. 'Course I also planned on going to an exhibition at the new MOCA if just to see the building. Haven't managed to do that either. I guess I'm more of a theatre guy than a art museum guy.

Now that l think about it the spin off was Exployes (that's not the correct spelling but l think they were bought or merged with IBM and moved into their new building near the campus). At any rate l just assumed the Clinic moved some other employees into the vacated space. Guess they didn't want that space either if it's coming down.

Hmmm, I get tearing down the theater complex but l thought the old Sears building was being used as office space for a spin off medical company or some other offices. I remember driving out of the parking lot onto Carnegie and seeing employees leaving the facility. That was a while ago and l guess l lost track of the change.

Well, to be fair the Clinic buying the property was always much more about the land than the building. The theater complex could only be used for meetings larger than department but smaller than Clinic wide as those take place in the hotel conference center. Even that huge space can be divided when necessary. l attended many meetings in the conference center before l retired. Once the Playhouse moved downtown there was really no organization available who could make use of the building. After the Clinic bought it the only talk l ever heard (and it wasn't much) was that no one could figure out what to do with it. If it is going to be torn down l'm not surprised at all. That land is way more valuable as a clean slate.

Hot damn! I like it and the wider mediums are a good look too. There's nothing like driving/walking on a street with a green canopy reaching from one side to the other. Come on Forest City, you can do it.

That view from the first picture is outstanding! I only have one lament and I understand reaching the 50% pre-build is a tough one but man, I want to see a few high rise condos built here with views to die for. I'll be the first in line with a down payment.

Well that's cryptic Ken. Let's see...I'll assume you were having a conversation with a source on a different subject and they dropped that bit of info into the discussion. My question to you is was that person in local real estate or were they an upper level employee of a sizeable company?

So the disapproval is more about esthetic's than density? A tallish building in a sea of 2 story houses looks wrong but that same building near others is ok. If that IS the issue then l can see their point although Lakewood does have tall buildings at different points along Detroit and it never bothered me. You can argue the benefits of density with facts but whether or not a building looks right or not in a particular location, well that IS subjective so l won't aNever mind. Nevermind.

Thanks. So WHEN the title transfers then the developer will also be the land owner. Do you have any idea what the hold-up is? Seems like at this point it's NOT the city at fault here so then it must be that 'ol bugaboo money as in the land owner wants more than the developer is willing to pay. If that's the case that is too bad because the design is really groundbreaking for downtown. Here's hoping both parties can come to an agreement because not only would another parking lot be filled in but it wouldn't be filled in with just another building but something that would really stand out.

I don't understand the opposition to building height/density. You already live in a dense environment if you live in Cleveland or an inner ring suburb. If you don't want density move further out. Cities work best when they are dense, when development is turned inward. Density encourages public transit over private cars. Density preserves farmland or virgin forest when development takes place in the city vs. the exurbs. If you don't want density why are you living in a city?

Ken, when you refer to the owner are you referring to the owner of the property or the developer? At this late stage are they one and the same?

While not a huge source of employment this development is good news. Not only does it add to jobs in the city as Ken mentioned this infill site will save an undeveloped property in (perhaps a piece of farmland or even a wooded property) from development.

On the face of it this seems like good news for a troubled property.

Nevermind.. l see the info on the Flats/East Bank site.