Htsguy

For some strange reason it seems that over the course of Cleveland's development history the west side (both the city and suburbs) has embraced the lake more than the east side.

^^Did I miss something? When did Peter Lawson Jones and Tim Hagan become part of a federal investigation?

^Sorry but you need to spend more than 15 minutes reading comments regarding posters feelings regarding the reason many feel negatively about the TC site. This debate has been going on for many months on this thread and the negatives are spelled out much better on previous page after page. The most recent comments are just a recaps. Personally, my biggest concern, as articulated very well by many posters in the past is that there is no room for a convention center behind TC and this is going to end up being an architectural disaster and a wart on the site and the city as a whole.

I have a few questions for all you forumers who are in the construction industry or at least knowledgable. It concerns the project timeline and the projected 2010 occupancy date. In my untrained mind this seems a bit ambitions for a project this size (even December 2010) given where they are at this point. And let's say many of the buildings will open then...would there not have to be very detailed architectural plans and specifications by now...if there are they are apparently holding the plans back for what every reason (am I wrong in believing the pictures we have seen to date are still conceptual...especially the E and Y Building). More specifically, infrastructure work has just begun. While they appear to be moving at a nice pace, this has to be major work including initial shoring (as discussed above) major excavation for sewers and water lines, other utility work and the rerouting of roadways, among other things. I would think this work along will take 8-9 months bringing us to next spring (2009) before construction on the buildings could or will begin (maybe I am just wrong and it won't take that long but I am using as a guide much of the utility work on the Euclid Corridor projects... even small stretches took months). That would leave about a year and a half to construct a number of buildings. I guess it could be done but again it seems ambitious to me. Thoughts? And again, lets say that 2010 will see a finished product. In my mind, if this is the case, somebody has to have in their hot little hands, at this point, detailed plans and specifications for the buildings as the various contractors have to begin preparing their estimates to bid on the work, not to mention beginning the process of ordering materials which will require lengthy lead times for fabrication (everthing from steel beams to elevator cabs). So where are they and why have they not been released (I am especially anxious to see what the E and Y Building will look like)? I am not really knowledgable about the process but don't they have to go through the planning commission?

^Why in the world would Joe Cipermann and Frank Jackson be specifically marketing 515 Euclid, a private enterprise, (even if they even had the time with everything on their plates) over any of the other thousands of private businesses, projects and enterprises in town. In fact the PD would probably begin an investigation of them if they did and the subpoenas would then fly.

I imagine "rent to own" (which you see all over the place now a days) is similar to (or exactly) the concept of a "land contract". Like MTS suggested, it is usually used in situation where the buyer does not have stellar credit (and cannot obtain a traditional loan from a bank so the seller is "sorta" financing the purchase) and or does not have money for a down payment. You build up equity as you rent but can walk away at anytime without any consequences (in other words you won't be liable for the balance of a huge loan) but you also lose the "equity" you are building up (although some people don't see it that way as they view it as just like renting where they are not building up equity in any event). The seller is making $$$ and in the long run may filling get rid of a property that in most instances was not very marketable. The law provides certain safeguards for the buyer (like title must finally transfer after a number of years even if the final purchase price has not been reached. At that point the transaction becomes more or less a traditional secured loan). Given the type of buyers the Avenue District attracts (well heeled), the traditional concept of rent to own or land contract (bad credit or no down payment) is not what is driving this although the mechanics would be similar. This appears to be a new marketing technique, giving a potential buyer the opportunity to see if he likes the building...if he does Zaremba sold another unit...if he doesn't...it is just like renting (which he was probably doing previously) and in the short term Zaremba is making some $$$ on units that may have just sat empty. I wonder if there is a limit on the number of units or a type of unit this applies to. Quite ofter other buyers don't like too many renters in a building for a variety of reasons.

^Why can't we criticize both. We will get lots of junk if we start justifying and approving poor design simply because there is worse (and a classic Giant Eagle set up is worse) out there.

Have to agree with pope...Whole Foods (even with this alledged hidden entrance) pretty much ignores Cedar...it could have been done much better (although I do like the architecture generally). In fact I was just there an hour ago grabbing lunch and I was thinking as I was marching back to my car what a horrible job Coral did intergrating the Whole Foods to the rest of the poorly planned center. The rear by the parking lot is obviously the main entrance...however...if you want to stroll over to the rest of the stores from that entrance you have to walk in the parking lot and driveways...no real sidewalk at that point...and the walk is also broken up by truck delivery entrances and the ramp to the roof top parking...you really have to be alert. I have said it in this post before...very little of Coral's work is "high quality". It makes me nervous to see what they are going to do across the street...It appears South Euclid had very little choice but to go with them. I hope they hold them to high design standards.

May Day's last pic brings back memories. Notice the two dollar price to park all day. I use to park in that lot in the mid 90's when I worked on W. 6th Street and it cost a buck to park all day (and you got your daily exercise trudging up the Main Street hill). The price really did not go up much over the years. I am sure the new parking garages will be a little higher.

When I was reading CH Jake's post I was thinking the same exact thing stated by StrapHanger in his follow up post. The Huron Rd plaza was basically highly toted at the time and then just became a wind swept ed disaster (very bleak...not alot of street life). Urban planners tried to correct the problem about 10-12 years ago by putting the street back in.

^Not to be negative (ok I guess I am being negative) but my grandchildrens weddings will "happen before 515" (and I don't have any kids).

^Well said.

Badge, question?...do you include yourself as one of those "constructively criticizing the city"...the reason I ask is that I have re read all 13 of your posts and little of your criticism (and most of your posts are critical) appear "constructive" but generally just negative and trite without adding much to the discussion...maybe that is why regular posters who offer much to this board (great insights and inside information we thrive on here) tend to get into arguments with you. You seem to be on this board to pick fights. The posts I enjoy are those that offer facts to support opinions (either negative or positive in terms of Cleveland) and which move the discussion forward is a semi erudite fashion...the name calling you seem to thrive on does not really add much to this board.

^Oh boy...you're in trouble now if your post (it is not clear) is advocating green space in front of the building rather than building right up to the sidewalk. :wink: Set backs (and for good reason most of the time) are not well received on this forum. That said, if I recall the "rendering" the green space was one of the quadrants of public square.

I believe the last pic is Danny Ferry's house (corner of South Park and Courtland). Hope I did not out him...although its not like anybody really would care to stalk him, especially any UOers.

^I am the one who mentioned it in the Upper Chester thread and another poster suggested that it might just be dirt storage from the Clinic allee project. I passed by again today and it looks more and more like he may have been correct. Huge pile of dirt rather than anything that looked like excavation.

Have to agree with the Coventry recs (try looking on Hampshire in particular) based on your criteria and where you are going to work. Good luck.

^^^Not to get off topic, I might have to agree with the above stated impression of downtown Pittsburgh. While well developed, it appears not to have much life after 5. This was stated by my host who is originally from Pittsburgh but lived next door to me in Cleveland Hts for a couple of years. He also said the retail scene downtown has declined substantially in the past 5 years although there are hopes it may pick up with some new projects

3231...from what I could observe (again this was my first time in this neighborhood) and from what I could gleam from my host, Squirrel Hill is much like Cleveland Hts (only older and of course smaller since it is only a neighborhood in the city of Pittsburgh itself). Combination of many well perserved large homes (actually many mansions) on shady streets, old apartments in good condition with lots of character, smaller houses and very nice retail district with lots of restaurants, shops and galleries. Seemed like many different age groups lived there from right out of school to families to older. Did not seem too racially diverse although I could be wrong and I believe mixed neighborshood were close at hand. Both SH and Shadyside seem to take advantage of being right next to the Pitt and Carneigh Mellon campuses so I imagine many profs live in the neighborhood. My host mentioned an adjoining neighborhood called Liberty which was more rundown but is suppose to be the next gentrified around. Did notice a lack of new construction (like many of the modern townhouses you see in Cleveland) but probably not much available in terms of lots to do it. I am sure many on this board are more familiar with SH and could comment more extensively.

Peabody...I was also in Pittsburgh last weekend, but generally in Squirrel Hill and Shadyside (first time) which also had a lot of street life. Loved both neighborhoods. My only question regarding your post is why do you think you will be "attacked" by forum members for making such benign statements and simply commenting favorably on another city's neighborhoods?

^Was water an issue when they built the Key Center underground garage (under the peace fountain)? I don't recall this but maybe it was and Jacobs just absorbed the costs to handle the situation without making a big deal about it.

^well I was waiting for 216's post....I could have probably written it myself base on his previous posts...he sure is a size junkie...I guess what I find "ridiculous" is that the height of a building any where in the city is an indictment against it...or for that matter that the citizens of the city have any control (or really say other that of the design committees and planning commission) in regards to how a private developer decides to spend his millions of dollars on his property...I said it before and I will say it again...it is "real easy" for certain people to spend other people's money. I certainly would like to see more renderings...my real concern right now (other than the fact that I would have preferred more of a mixed use for the site) is with the parking garage on the west side of the building...this is going to turn the east side of West Third into a pretty barren stretch of sidewalk form Superior to Lakeside.

My enthusiasm for the project has somewhat waned as I studied the graphic in more detail in today's PD. It seems to show either surface parking or parking garages on Superior. I would hope that if it is surface lots, this would only be "temporary" (although in Cleveland this can often mean 20 years). Still, why not build right up to Superior right now and leave the remain surface parking more "inland" (rather than on a major street). And if it is to be parking garages on Superior, I would hope the planning commission would nix this life sapping proposal in its infancy. I know this is still only conceptual right now but I certainly do not like those two elements.

^Yes Baker is still in the National City Bank Building.

^While both firms have large transactional practices, they also have huge litigation departments and practice extensively in both federal and state court in Cleveland (and really around the state and nation). In January the litigators appreciate being close to court.