Htsguy

Is an Auto Zone store going there? I drove by last week and thought I saw a sign indicating that but it was just a quick peek and I may be wrong.

I would imagine that if it was a building project on that prime piece of real estate we would have known about it already and would have been discussing it for months. I am guessing that it is just a re-building of the surface lot for one reason or another.

^Don't they only have a year then they lose the option?

It really would be a drop in the bucket because never in a million years would they or could they devote all 10 mil of the estimated casino revenue to such a project. There would be a taxpayer revolt, nor would other city and county officials be pleased. There is already a debate going on whether county casino revenue should be devoted to the City of Cleveland alone (downtown in particular) or spread out to other inner ring cities (which of course will delute its impact). Some Council members have all ready expressed displeasure with Fitzgerald for suggesting the "one big project downtown approach". Plus, even if all the $$$ is devoted downtown I don't see them giving it all to the mall or companion greening projects. As such a drop in the bucket.

Amazing that they would cover that up with what they did. What were they thinking in the 60s?

^love the idea....do you have time to work on the tax levy campaign :wink:

This is the first I am hearing that the design of the buildings (whether you like them or not) are a result of any significant cost considerations. As I understand it the value engineering was done in the beginning by making the buildings smaller (less stories) and doing it in phasing. Like them or not the buildings do not look cheap.

^while this would be helpful (if many vested interests can be convinced) it would of course be a drop in the bucket. This venture needs a huge private campaign similar to the United Way. Don't know who has the resources, time or will to do this. Also would of course be difficult since everyone (as always) have been asking the usual "wells" for $$$ and they are only so deep (plus corporations have been cutting back significantly in terms of this kind of giving).

^^I don't know...I think this is all leverage and propaganda on RTA's part. Due to the closing of Ontario they are losing maybe 3 loading areas that currently contain very small shelters. Why the need to build a "large sheltered" waiting area on PS, when one does not exist now, simply due to the closing of Ontario. I could see the closing resulting in routing issues, but not the need to turned PS into more of an RTA transit station than it is now (again, especially if they are actually vigoursly pursuing the transit station on the next block). After all, the idea behind closing Ontario is to make PS more appealing not less.

^Actually, I would believe there were deed restrictions when the land was conveyed to Zaremba. However, I would imagine the city is waiving (although I don't really know for sure) any such restrictions to further this very complex settlement. Many of the parties are giving up a lot to get this deal done so I would guess if there were restrictions they would be waived to sell the lots free and clear to obtain the max amount in the auction in order to pay as much of the debt owed as possible. Again all speculation on my part. Let's just hope somebody like Mr. Kassouff is not raising his hand at the auction.

Not crazy about the auctioning of the parking lots as part of the deal. Depending on who buys them, this could lead to another 20 years of surface lots. This fear is alluded to at the end of the article. At least when the city took them back from Jacobs they had some leverage to see that they were developed. Now that they will be sold free and clear of any city development restrictions I have a big concern. Hopefully, as suggested in the article, the interested parties will work to see that the purchasers will want to work on further development, but we have all seen this scenario (the negative one) played out before.

Not sure I understand why the closing of Ontario would require this type of major construction on PS (especially it they are still planning the transist station a block away). Can somebody explain?

^Agree...and I think the will is FINALLY there....now if we can only find the $$$ (after convincing RTA the really hard part).

^No my comment was directed to Mendo.

^^^If you have been lurking on this board for a while before signing up I am sure you know that your view, as expressed above, is going to be in the minority on the board. Your expressing them is great as this is what the forum is all about. However, you going to have to be a little more persuasive in expressing your "auto centric" views if you want to win over any of the tough nuts that populate UO.

^Of all the reasons for or against closing streets through Public Square, getting in and out of town would be about 100 on my list.

^The law office was not in or by CSU but purportedly on PS (in the Terminal Tower). I don't recall seeing the buildings under construction in those scenes and would have thought those would have been studio shots but maybe they did film in a real Cleveland office. I think we are going to get slammed soon for being so off topic. We can all blame W.28th. But it is a great movie.

^disagree...and these people are pretty smart...they know how to take seasonal fluctuations into account when doing such studies.

^There is a shot of the side entrance of St. Vincents as well of course the old Stadium during the day (I think they filmed during a Vikings game) and at night at the end of the movie with the Stadium empty. Also set up shots of the Terminal Tower (where the lawyers offices supposedly were).

Really cannot add much to this discussion as, being from up north, I really don't know the area that well (although I have at least been in the general vicinity in the past) or the history of building the ball park on the site (as well as no real knowledge of other developments proposed there) except for some "cocktail party" chat with friends from Cincy when the ballpark was first proposed years ago. That said I was much amazed by gem of a quote above. Clearly the poster does not have a clue what Prospect, Huron or East 4th Streets were like pre Jacobs Field (in the 1980's or early 90's) and what the construction of Jacobs Field and The Gund (still cannot call them Progressive Field or Quicken Loans Area) did to the area. Basically blocks of abandoned or semi abandoned buildings (first floors in use but upper floors vacant) and streets you would not want to walk down. Not the case from the late 90's onward.

Michigan is a great school and all but "picturesque" is not how I would describe the campus other than the law quad which is magnificent. In my opinion it is one of the least picturesque of all the Big Ten campuses (along with Minnesota). If I recall correctly the undergrad library is even nicknamed UGLI. Michigan State has it beat by far for good looks as do many other Big Ten schools. Ann Arbor is great and does have a hip but small town feel despite the fact it is over 100,000 people. Very walkable, lots of restaurants, bars and galleries in town. Always felt safe pretty much every where.

^Yeah because the city has not rolled over or nothing on every issue to date with Mr. Gilbert.

^Its the thread with lots of dust on it.

^does that mean other investors with an equity interest?

It is so easy and cheap to create pretty pictures.