LlamaLawyer

Very strange. I do not believe there is any palatable location of 15-20 acres available.

My understanding is that the scoring is in absolute numbers as opposed to bang for the buck, so to speak. That makes me think Centennial is the most likely project to win because of its massive size.

I'm willing to bet Marriott knows more than anyone on this forum about what market conditions will support. If someone here is a high-level hotel executive, then maybe they're an exception. In other words, if Marriott thinks the market can support it, then I think the answer is the market probably can support it.

I've been following this all on Nextdoor, etc. and the concerns of residents are EXTREMELY disjointed. Even Fran Mentsch (who now says the park has nothing to do with the rest of the F&C development) has spent lots of time complaining about how hard parking will be behind the theater. I think the bigger problem isn't about the park specifically. It's that a lot of residents don't want Cleveland Heights to be more like Lakewood. They want Cleveland Heights to be more like Chagrin Falls. And all this new development gets in the way of their dream about an auto-centric exurb with lots of open space. I used to live on Meadowbrook, and there is plenty park access. There's a small area on streets like Dellwood where you're slightly more than 15 minutes (walking) away from Cain Park and slightly more than 15 minutes (walking) away from Shaker Lakes. But even then, you're close to Fairfax Elementary which has a playground and a pretty big park/field area adjoining it on Scarborough. I'm a huge park proponent, but pretty much all of Cleveland Heights already has good greenspace access. The 1.07 acre lot on Lee is in the middle of a business district and has no appealing natural features. From a planning perspective, we oughta develop parkland along bodies of water both for the sake of blue-greenspace and to mitigate flood and erosion issues. I'd love to see tons of the Cuyahoga riverfront turned into a park, tons of the lakefront turned into a park, etc. But there's just no compelling reason that this random 1.07 acre lot needs to be ALL a park, instead of only like half of it being a park (which is what F&C proposes). FWIW, there's also a big parking lot at Lee and Bradford which would make at least as good a location for a park as the Meadowbrook site.

I did not realize they would need $18,000 to get on the ballot. They basically need to get $5 from each person who signed the petition. I would question whether any of the people at the center of this are really gonna put down thousands in their own money to get the proposal on the ballot. The proposal for funding the park is basically "We're gonna raise the money." If that's the blueprint for funding the $18 grand, I am skeptical because I have a hard time believing they're gonna get 4,000 people to give $5 each and a hard time believing anybody is gonna put down several thousand. I guess we will see.

He's also harping on concept B which is (in my view) clearly the worst of the proposals. Maybe somebody oughta show him the boulevard proposals which really, really would not be a problem for Browns games.

OH LAWDY THEY DID IT AGAIN! Absolutely scathing opinion. And it ends by discussing the looming and passed deadlines that the Republicans argue mean a new map has to wait until 2024. The Court basically says “The legislature controls the election deadlines and if the commission is gonna keep playing games you better move the primary because we’re not playing games.” Love it.

It takes into account the traffic conditions at 8:30 AM on this random Monday, so there is probably some rush hour built in there but not necessarily the worst of it.

To jump on one point that I don't think has been fully expressed above. The difference between Rte 2 and 90 is not even ten minutes. Anywhere. I've been playing with it on Google maps, and I am unable to find a possible east-west or west-east route where taking 90 instead of the shoreway adds more than six minutes. And the only place I can find even six minutes added is trips to and from certain parts of the Edgewater neighborhood. If somebody can find a bigger difference in some trip, I'd love to see it. But it looks like the biggest inconvenience will be to people who live in Cleveland (Ward 15 specifically)--all of six minutes. For most trips between east-west suburbs, 90 is actually faster, and for the few trips where Rte 2 is faster, it's only true by like 3 minutes. So, leaving aside the principle-based arguments on cars vs. pedestrians, maybe we oughta let the elected representatives of the people of Cleveland decide because they're the ones most inconvenienced (potentially) by the change.

In 50 years when the Great Lakes are the fastest growing region in the country and Cleveland's population is 1.4 million because of all the climate refugees, then we can demolish these in order to make super dense housing for people who don't need cars because self driving electric Uber cars are a primary means of transportation. But until then, I'm just glad that a barren wasteland spitting distance from downtown is getting filled in with people and things.

My mistake then. New (to me) renders! Lol.

NRP Group new renders look like a SUBSTANTIAL improvement.

Not really. There are some cities that have such requirements (like Dublin, OH). Usually form-based zoning is more aimed at height, setback, parking issues instead of aesthetics. I'm contemplating something more flexible, because I do NOT think we should be telling developers "everybody has to use this kind of brick, you can only have metal paneling on 10% of the exterior surface, you can use tan but not pink, your windows must be this number of square inches, blah blah." I'm talking about giving developers flexibility on aesthetics but saying "these are some examples of how we want our neighborhood to look; please look at them before you start drafting your plans." That way you do get a variety of building styles (as opposed to Dublin, OH), and you avoid imposing costs on developers, but there are distinctive neighborhood elements that emerge instead of every neighborhood looking like random-gentrifiedtown USA.

This is the same size as before. The park people also know exactly what the plan is. Last year, they had stakes and yellow tape set up to show how much space was planned to be used for a park vs. how much they wish was. It's asinine.

Approve this thing quickly so they can get shovels in the ground. They oughta pull a Meigs Field-Mayor Daly bit. The primary isn't until May 3, which means there are over three months to get this thing built! Let's see the NIMBYs stop this thing if it's already built!!! (sarcastic, kinda)

FWIW, this is one of the early renders of Electric Gardens. Ultimate result is a lot better, lol.

The new Tremont development that was posted about has made me wonder something. Do any neighborhoods have guidelines like "style guides?" I'm not talking about actual zoning requirements, but more like form books where developers can look and see "this is generally the kind of look we are hoping for in this neighborhood." I would think that, without imposing any actual costs on developers or even requiring them to do anything, a neighborhood could improve the cohesiveness and quality of its new builds by giving architects a little nudge in the right direction. Is this something any neighborhoods do?

I'm not a big fan of the design but I like it more because of the similarity to Electric Gardens. If Tremont gets a couple more like this, then you at least have a cohesive style developing, which makes the buildings fit and creates a unique look.

It's not about the state, it's about proximity. Intel engineers will want to inspect facilities where suppliers are producing parts, and may need to make relatively frequent trips back and forth depending on what is being made. Service companies will probably do some of the more specialized equipment maintenance, and their employees would have to actually physically go to Intel to do repair work. Raw material suppliers have to actually ship materials to the site. These and many other activities require people or things to physically go to Intel's production location. That's why Cleveland stands to benefit a lot more than Austin. Intel can call up a Cleveland based service company at 10 AM and expect a service person onsite that day. If the service company was based in Austin, everything would have to be schedule a week in advance and would require a plane ride. Obviously some suppliers have to be from far away--certain minerals only come from certain parts of the world, and some types of specialists only exist in New York or silicon valley. Given my knowledge of how supplier relationships developed around Honda (I used to work for a contractor that does shipping for Honda), I would expect the majority of spinoff businesses to develop within a 45-minute driving radius of Intel, with a decent number but less than half falling in a 1-3 hour driving radius, and very few being more than three hours away. So I would anticipate some spinoff development as far as Toledo or Pittsburgh. Beyond that, the locations of suppliers will be determined by factors known only to Intel or silicon specialists.

https://www.ideastream.org/news/cleveland-health-centers-are-working-overtime-to-screen-a-large-influx-of-afghan-refugees Local aid organization says they expect over 1200 refugees this year.

Here’s a pitch! How about PHS builds Act II wherever they can most cost effectively—thereby setting them up nicely for Act III. 😉

Couple observations on Euclid: 1. The Signet project went up faasst. 2. How long has this construction equipment been here at Euclid and E 55?

To cut to the chase, the navy obviously has thought through these issues. They’re not gonna be halfway through building the shipyard and go “Oh s$&!t this lake is way too shallow!”

Seriously though, the average depth of Lake Erie is only 60 feet and Virginia-class attack submarines are more than 30 feet in diameter, not counting the mast. I think it’s a legitimate question whether they’re too tall.