Htsguy

^what he said. Would that place fly in Cleveland?

Boy...if it was a media circus with Tebow when he was in Denver can you imagine what it is going to be like in NYC? He won't be able to fart without it being all over the internet.

^Agree.

Does anybody know if they still have plans to bury the power lines along Chester in front of the development?

You're right Michelle...I missed the dismissal entry on the docket as it was followed by a number of entries describing attempts at service of the complaint and summons. I would imagine there was not any real damage done to the building as a result of the accident and/or Macron really does not have the $$$ to finance such litigation (especially given that numerous expensive experts would have to be retained).

With the smallish windows on the buildings fronting Chester shown above, I am not getting a retail or commercial vibe. I take it the proposed retail is suppose to go in the eventual middle building which will be east of the one shown?

While checking the court docket in connection with the Stanley Block shareholders dispute, I noticed another recent lawsuit (filed in January 2012, shortly after the garage collapse) wherein the owner of the building (Macron Investments) is suing Whiting-Turner (I am assuming the general contractor or construction manager) and Rock Ohio. It is clear from one of the docket entries that this involves the collapse and possible damage to the Stanley Block. However, the same docket entry suggests this might have simply been a precautionary lawsuit and that it is not clear that any damage was done to the Stanley Block. The entry indicates that plaintiff's engineer was to accompany defendant's engineer on an inspection and report back to the court. The litigation is obviously in its early stages and may very well be dismissed eventually (although the magic words "possible insurance coverage" intrigues me). While pure speculation, wouldn't it be a kick in the pants if the garage collapse resulted in the payment of an insurance claim to Macron which could form the small beginning of some sort of renovation budget (although this is probably just a dream, it is fun to imagine how things like this might work out).

^Like your positive attitude KJP. I just hope that 95% of the 700,000 are not a sleep given the time the trains pass through Cleveland.

^^It doesn't say anything about residential which is the point. The poster was giving important highlights of the project from an "insider". I found it interesting that this insider said nothing about residential even though he was describing what things would look like in 2013. It could be that he was keeping things under wraps (I hope so), but Mr. Sommers did go into a fair amount of detail according to the poster (going as far as to suggest average office rents, costs of construction and issues regarding TODS). One would have thought residential would have come up in such a discussion.

^So it does not sound as though beginning the residential portion (as suggested up thread) is going to happen any time soon.

So what are they allegedly building? I know they announced a bunch of projects for the future but I was not aware that anything was that close to groundbreaking.

^Yeah, good luck with that one.

^Article indicates that the Kimpton will be opening this year....Hmmm?

^please God i hope this thread does not turn into one of those lets compare Cleveland to Indy discussions for 3 pages. They do that about every three months in one or more of the Cincy threads and it gets old fast. Standard Cincy poster comments....Indy nice but often sterile downtown that is very active because of conventions...go 2 miles out and the rest of the city is really bland and hardly urban.

^Absolutely fantastic...but I agree with above posts...I am sure even in Pittsburgh there is some surface parking lot this great building could go on and still save the urban fabric. But very jealous...this just looks stunning.

^From reading various new reports, it appears that not only were there procedural errors, but there were also substantive errors (violation of canon law). It was suggested that as a result, even starting the whole process over again by the bishop (as if there were only procedural problems) might be fruitless.

^yes..thank you

^I ran across a good PD article from 2004 when I googled "Coral Shaker Square" which details many of their plans when they "recused" the square. I agree they did stabilize the square after the failed national chain ambitions of the previous owner but for what ever reason did not follow through with much noted in the article. I do have a vague memory of somebody wanting to build residential on the parking lot behind the former Booksellers but cannot recall if that was in Coral's plans or the previous owner. I also believe other new construction was proposed around the square. I like the idea that they are partnered with Panzica as I really do respect the company.

^Actual Coral did have some grand plans for Shaker Square when they bought it back in 2004 (well before the recession) and did not follow through on the majority of them...new condo construction and a parking garage. Also did not follow through on the redevelopment of downtown Solon after getting the whole city hyped up about it (although the recession had much to do with this). And Ceder Center...blah.

^While I don't know if the traffic issue is that much off topic (if you want to see off topic go visit the Cincy Street car thread...no wonder it is like a billion pages long) but it is kinda dull. More interested in any thoughts about likelyhood of financing and how these two developers over the next year are going to solicit tenants and deal with multiple entities (City of Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, UH, UCI, CIA, RTA, the Little Italy powers) to coordinate and get this done.

The parking garage on the other side of Mayfield is one of the big things I don't like (along with the skywalk but I don't want this thread to get bogged down in a skywalk discussion). When KJP indicated a few days ago that the proposal also included the development of the lot across the street I was imagining more retail or housing, not a parking garage going up to the sidewalk. Also thought there would be more of a retail component to the project. Again, seems like much of this is very iffy....lots still has to fall into place with multiple entities, not to mention that the financing aspect is still very much up in the air. Looks like a fair amount of work has to be done in the next year by Coral and Panzica just to get to the the starting blocks (and I don't have a lot of confidence in Coral which likes to dream big and most of the time does not follow through). Well, nothing good is easy.

After reading the just posted article on cleveland.com about Lot 45, a little less enthusiastic (with the conceptual design so far) and the fact that it is much more speculative at this point than I thought.

^Looks like Cleveland is not the only city in the US plagued by surface lots downtown.

This only makes 100% sense and it would be great to have the great banking room back in use for county customer service. The article indicated that the Huntington Building does not have direct enclosed indoor parking which is not true. From the basement arcade you travel through the underground tunnel (under Chester) and acess the Huntington Garage. No need to go outside and you pass by a few shops on your way in (this might even make some of the empty store fronts in the little arcade more marketable)

^how ofter will the street car run? If you have to wait ten minutes (say you just miss the last one) for it and can walk it in that amount of time or less would you do so...especially given the limited time one has for lunch?