Htsguy

It seems more and more new modern stadiums and arenas have a 20-25 year shelf life which just blows my mine given other massive urban infrastructure needs which are just ignored. This does seem to be more of a sun belt phenomenon but it might spread to other areas of the country given the need to compete. The 78 does seem to be stuck development wise. I think the Sox owners do want to have more amenities surrounding the ballpark and I am guessing they feel doing it at the current South side location won't work. The thinking might be that surrounding amenities will only be patronized on 81 game days rather than year around given the neighborhood, and businesses won't be able to thrive. Less chance of that at the 78 since it is so close to other stable neighborhoods. I read an article a few days ago which suggested the Sox might also be looking to the suburbs and even other cities like Nashville. Typical ownership threats (or maybe just the standard speculation by the author of the article without any facts to back this up).

It was in Crains yesterday-online.

It has occurred to me perusing this and other threads lately that we are clearly desperate for some big development news. 😉

Well this does not bode well in regards to any information from SHW when it comes to plans for a second tower. I guess @KJP is going to have to play secret agent again this coming year.

What I really would like to see them do is bury the overhead wires but it does not look like it is included in this project. Obviously, as is usually the case, too expensive.

Hasn’t seemed to hamper the NRP project, which is only feet away. I can’t believe how fast that is going up. Also, as indicated in some pictures above, the riverfront project seems to have some walls up. At least that’s what it looks like to me.

This project has been crickets lately. Assume they are attempting to make major revisions to the design (at least I hope) given the reception it received last fall. However, things appear to be moving forward to some extent as legislation was presented this morning to Council's Municipal Services and Properties Committee to vacate a small sliver of public property on the Superior Viaduct for the hotel's canopy.

Every once in a while I will click onto to the twitter account of Laura Cyrocki, the lead Hessler crazy. Sometimes it can be quite amusing. One recent post, to paraphrase, complained of all these suburban people living in single family homes championing development in Cleveland saying it is not dense enough. Obviously trying to make a "colorful" point no matter how ill informed, as I would imagine that the vast majority of people living in single family homes in the suburbs don't give a flying f what is happening in Cleveland, especially whether there is enough density in the city. Also ignores what many actual Clevelanders desire, as well as the thoughts of urban experts nationwide.

"Democratic Mainstay" which I note is the largest percentage of people. This obviously means all my opinions are the most valid so please keep that in mind when responding to any of my posts. 😉

^WOW

I guess all this supposed pressure did not work in Buffalo.

Sorry Ken, don't know the answer but this reminded me of a question I had for you regarding another Midtown (or perhaps it is considered Hough) apartment project, that being Chester 82. In a recent blog post you indicated that Marous was working through some design compliance issues in order to secure its building permits. This seems like it is taking forever and I can't imagine what the design issues are given Marous is an experienced developer and the building received final approval from PC quite some time ago (as have, quite frankly, a number of apartment projects around town that have yet to break ground...but that is whole other topic). Could the real problem be the financing bogey man raising its ugly head again?

In this instance, at least from what I can surmise from Ken's reporting, the two biggest factors hampering Riverview was the "time line" issue (especially since even the basic key infrastructure enhancements have barely begun, with funding for much of this still up in the air) combined with the "perfect storm" of Progressive dumping a ton of nearby office space at the right time. I am guessing they negotiated a pretty favorable deal.

Lakewood's historical population is down about 20,000 from a high of about 70,000 in 1970. Unlike many cities in the region (East Cleveland is a perfect example) I don't believe this is largely due to "flight" or the decline of its housing infrastructure which has remained largely intact. I would guess a large part of the decline is that people now just don't have the large families that were common in the 50's and 60's, especially in a city like Lakewood that was significantly Catholic. This of course would not explain recent population loses as Shaker Hts., another inner ring suburb with less density, grew according to the last census after years of population lose.

Ken it you are estimating that this expansion could be construction for just north of $150,000,000.00 it is a no brainer. I imagine that is less than what it cost to build just the Dulles Airport station on the Silver Line extension. Somebody needs to take the bull by the horns and get the institutions to contribute.

This has always been my number one rapid expansion. The Heights are so close to UC but it seems as though public transportation to this key employment hub from the Heights and beyond is lacking (it exists but it seems so slow and cumbersome that people just prefer to drive). While I like the idea of the spur starting on Shaker Square and going north on N. Moreland and Kemper since it a bit denser and would hit the busiest point of the Larchmere shopping corridor, the Skating Club and many more apartment buildings, I am wondering if it might be cheaper to start the spur at the E. 116 st station. This is something that all UC institutions should be lobbying for as well as Shaker Hts, University Hts, Warrensville Hts and Beachwood as it would only make these communities more attractive to potential home owners.

^Wikipedia says 1978.

I believe it was created as part of the Art Modell renovation. That was probably the early 80s. Maybe late 70s

I hope @KJP is right and a Phase 2 is coming sooner rather than later. The base of the building on the west side looks uninspiring and just plain unfinished.

Gies being frugal. Say it ain't so Joe.😉

I was bored this morning while I was drinking my coffee and decided to google search the new Abbey Avenue Apartments developed by Geis. They are starting to market units and of course have a very slick website. The only "problem" that I can see with it is that under the heading "Prime Location. Exceptional living" it has a glowing narrative of Ohio City and Tremont, and right next to this description with a caption "Discover your Neighborhood" is a very pretty picture of the Columbus skyline. What do you want to bet the web designer lives in New York...or maybe Streetboro.

My reading of the news reports is that the owner doesn't actually have a tenant. Just trying to position the building with much needed renovation in order to make it marketable. The above was just aspirational on the part of @Barneyboy and it is a fantastic idea.

I am actually surprised that the Main Avenue Bridge gets even that amount of traffic. Like I posted above, traffic always seems abnormally light when ever I am on it.

All these years on the forum I never put two and two together. I know I often fanboy your firm's work on the forum. I hope it doesn't go to your head😉

I like the Main Avenue Bridge for the great views of the downtown skyline while traversing it. Even so, I would really prefer a tunnel as it would free up land and make surface street connections better. However, my guess is that will never happen for cost reasons.