grayfields

This seems problematic. How did management proceed with obtaining $166k in services without any authority? Does TVS just eat that invoice if the board declines approval or does Appelbaum have to pay it? This seems ripe for abuse, and I hope this isn't a routine practice of the CCCFDC.

Installed or just the cost of materials?

MRN's deal develop his "wildlife preservation" along the rapid tracts really got under his skin. These guys are collateral damage to that petty spat.

Agreed. If they can activate the two spaces to match the "world class" renders at the 36 to 39 minute marks 42-45 minute marks, it'll justify the additional $45 million and 5 years of construction they need:

I hope everyone maintains this enthusiasm and interest regardless who wins. I'm not sure what "cleaning house" looks like in your mind. But Civil Service protections and collective bargaining agreements makes whole sale terminations impossible. The Commissioners/Assistant Commissioners and managers (and on down the front-line workers) that actually operate the departments are fairly entrenched. The Directors and Assistant Directors lack those bureaucratic safeguards, and will likely receive requests for resignation if they do not resign when the new administration takes office. Generally, the policy makers will go but those that implement policy will stay. And there's a lot more control when implementing policy than you might expect. It might help to manage your expectations on whose heads you want to roll. The same people will go whomever is elected.

Plus Bibb is clearly confused by the purpose of ethics disclosures. I'm not sure how he could misread the clear instructions (and instead defer blame to others for not explaining them to him), and believe that you're only supposed to disclose the income from the public entity necessitating the filing, which itself is public record. I know he has never actually practiced (or passed the bar), but this guy went to law school? This gives rise to serious questions about his judgment, or maybe those positions (unpaid internships?) didn't pay him more than the $500 reporting threshold. https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2021/08/cleveland-mayoral-candidate-justin-bibb-underreported-income-sources-for-3-years-in-state-ethics-disclosure-filings.html

The good folks at the Indianapolis Star made it. You can drill down to tract level by clicking on any county in the U.S. but you can't change their color scheme: https://data.indystar.com/census/total-population/total-population-change/ohio/040-39/

Pretty good data maps here cleaning up the tract boundary changes: https://data.indystar.com/census/total-population/total-population-change/cuyahoga_county_ohio/050-39035/#cmap

Exactly. I think we'll need CPS ASEC data to know the relative strength of these conditions to fire up developer's gravity models, which will occur next month: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/key-dates.html

There's no decennial comparison tool, but you can get tract level data maps using the density or %>18 layers here: https://mtgis-portal.geo.census.gov/arcgis/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=2566121a73de463995ed2b2fd7ff6eb7

I'm curious how Harbor Bay compares to those operators. Can anyone identify what concepts they operate themselves? It's not the first time that's been suggested, and I wouldn't doubt they solicited chains (there's a Target in their East Lansing development). If not chains, someone other than themselves operating a majority of the ground floor retail (there's Barrio, Jolly Pumpkin, local coffee chain in East Lansing too) would reflect favorably on project/neighborhood and validate funding decisions supporting other projects in the pipeline. But maybe I'm just not aware of Harbor Bay's storefront operations and they are the Disney of mixed use developments.

I'm having a hard time identifying their other self-operated "restaurants, event centers and other properties." Anyone else concerned by the developer retaining leasable space for its own use and proprietary concepts? This seems to signal an inability to attract quality tenants. I'm hoping the owner/occupancy will provide proof of viability to follow-on operators. These high-profile spaces would greatly benefit from the support/accountability that nationally licensed brands provide in terms of third-party standards for operations, management and financial resources.

Gabe's - 2044 Broadview Rd Steve's - 4457 Broadview Rd Edit: only seconding Gabe's/Steve's since I just noticed you already identified them. Might give Gus' a try at 4377 State Rd, though I can't vouch for it.

That's the total expense including financing over 15 years. I believe the improvement package (excluding capital repairs) is projected at ~$200 million. But I do not think that's been communicated very well, so I could be wrong.

Right, but even on paper he's been with most his prior employers for two years or less, and was working there while attending grad/law school. He's going to have a hard time convincing me that a 2018 MBA/JD grad is qualified to be mayor.

To borrow a response: money. It's solid, long term cash flow. The "criteria architect" in a design-build project under the County's code, which copies the Revised Code and Administrative Code, merely prepares conceptual plans and specifications and establishes design/performance requirements that are incorporated into the RFP used to select the design-build firm and it's architect of record and, if optioned, serves as the owner's rep. during the detailed design and construction phases. Regardless of the project's end use, the criteria architect is not afforded much aesthetic responsibility or creative design discretion when developing raw project concepts and contract specifications. By chasing/getting this role, HOK took themselves out of the running to partner with the builder to complete the design/construction.

The City contracts with the Group Plan Commission to perform programming and maintenance for the square: https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/10/cleveland-commits-500000-toward-upkeep-programming-at-downtowns-public-square.html. They've been responsive to concerns raised in the past: https://www.groupplan.org/

Design and density issues aside, the developer was poorly advised on the process for generating neighborhood support or at least staving off active or organized opposition. The property is located on the border of two block clubs, and rather than seek informal input from street level residents, the CDC ran this through the website they're trying to push. The website allows anyone comment, applies undisclosed moderating guidelines, and OCI tries to characterize the feedback through their own biased lens. I question what effort was made to vet or approve this newly imposed web-based process by the OCI Board, block clubs, developers or other stakeholders. Another channel of communication is always helpful, but completely supplanting the past practice for educating neighbors on the project's benefits and attributes did not serve the developers well. OCI deserves as much criticism and responsibility for this result as the developer, architect and neighborhood opposition. Hopefully this alternate web based process dies with the pandemic.

Great Lakes Science Center vantage point

Initial demo. of the first structure is nearly complete, and the skyline is visible through the trees across all that asphalt. Metropark’s contract includes clearing and grubbing, but I’m not sure of the project limits or scope with respect to the vegetation.

Chain link is prohibited in residential districts at least since 2001, but under CCO Sec. 358.04(C)(1) "The Board of Zoning Appeals may, however, permit a chain link fence if the Board determines that such fence is common in the immediate vicinity of the subject property." Ridiculous, IMO, that unsightly and otherwise illegal, nonconforming uses are allowed to replicate themselves throughout a neighborhood. But I have a feeling that most existing chain link fences were installed after the prohibition and lack a permit/BZA approval. I'd think such unpermitted chain link could not be used as precedent for BZA approval.

Yeah, cool view. Anyone know when that pedestrian bridge from the Lutheran entrance at Franklin-Fulton/28th was demo'd or what purpose it served?

Each property is inherently unique. I'm not familiar with what neighborhoods are being referenced, but the unique characteristics of this property do not support what is proposed. I'm pro-development, welcome the investment interest, and current conditions on this site could certainly use improvement. But they're preferable over this offering, IMHO.

And appealable to the Court of Common Pleas

Exactly, it's a key point that does not support approval. If the height/density is justified by classifying Fulton Road as a thoroughfare, it's contradictory to push the bulk back towards 31st Place (a narrow, one way street that essentially serves as an alley for the low intensity uses near its junction with Woodbine). The Fulton project is too dense to squeeze on site located between two T-intersections. I do not see how the proposal could possibly satisfy the standard for obtaining the numerous to zoning variances required.