Jump to content

Htsguy

Jeddah Tower 3,281'

Everything posted by Htsguy

  1. ^This is clearly a bummer, but glad they caught the problems now rather than after all the pavement was replaced. While it will delay this portion of the re-construction (and I am sure the land owners in this section are not happy about the delay), it clearly will not stall the overall start date for the Silver Line.
  2. ^Thanks for some thoughtful insights MyTwoSense. Much more enjoyable reading than those posts that simply mock comments made by others on the forum.
  3. Before commenting on the new information divulged in the article, a quick rant. Can't Steve Litt begin any written piece without cutting down Cleveland in one way or another. It really starts to get old after a while. Maybe he should take a creative writing class and learn some new hooks. In this particular piece I found the following comment particularly sophomoric: "Need I mention that Cleveland passed up the opportunity to build a Gehry designed skyscraper headquarters for Progressive Corp. on the lakefront in the 1980's". What the hell is he implying? It is as if people where marching in the street against the design when he says "Cleveland". Any by the way wasn't it a private corporation that decided to forego building. He makes it sound like it was some sort of taxpayer funded project. If I recall "Cleveland" (it's residents) would have given an arm and a leg to see that that building was built, but Progressive (and Litt's BUDDY Peter Lewis) determine that the Progressive workforce preferred the suburbs (at least that was one of the major reasons given)....more likely cooler heads decided it was cheaper to build mundane buildings in the suburbs than spend the $$$ for the signature building. In any event it was not the people of Cleveland or its institutions that over see design and construction that put the brakes on that project. I guess that I should be grateful that Litt did not start the piece, "In Cleveland, the poorest city in the nation" which is one of the favorite hooks for PD writers (even if the article is about the latest in fashion footwear for women). ANYWAY...I am disappointed in some of the information contained in the article. That is utility work will not begin (at the earliest) until the fall of this year and that construction will not begin until fall of 2008 (which means 2009). I thought the project was much further along, even with the court proceedings. I am pleased to see that Wolstein is looking at having a number of different architectural firms design for the project. This can only add interest and make the area appear as if it developed over time rather than all at once. I really can't see Stern being a major player if Wolstein is serious when he says he is not interested in cute period architecture. Of course love the idea of a tall signature building. Unfortunately, it appears that we won't have any real idea of what the plan is going to be for at least a year.
  4. Htsguy replied to a post in a topic in Abandoned Projects
    Does anyone know what (if anything) is going on with the alledged Baker and Hostetler search for new digs. Last discussion of this I recall was on the Flats East Bank (Wolstein project) thread. I am sure they would need 8 or 9 floors and would be an ideal tenant to assist a developer in obtaining financing for a new building where ever it might be.
  5. Hi Major and Welcome to Cleveland. As suggested above you might want to let us know where you are coming from so we can obtain a better idea of what you like. Also, as noted, the Avalon Lofts are not on Shaker Square, which is about 1 1/2 mile away, but in Shaker Hts. in the Van Aken -Lee neighborhood. Both Shaker Hts and Cleveland Hts are safe areas (you really seem to emphasize this in your post as you mention it a number to times...it got to be somewhat curious). You will face petty larceny and the like but very little in the way of violent crimes. You can walk the streets of both cities in the dead of night with comfort. Will I am not a west sider I am pretty confident the Gold Coast is very safe as well. Hard to judge appreciation as many factors go into it. You should be advised however that housing appreciation in Cleveland in general is lower than many parts of the nation so don't expect to make a killing. My advice to you is that you should focus on other factors when considering where you want to live for 6 years and invest you $$$ in other vehicles if that is a big issue with you. On the plus side you get much more bang for your buck in Cleveland. I live in a relatively new townhouse development in Cleveland Hts (about five years old...by the way...going back to the appreciate issue...a couple of buyers who bought them new recently sold and in three years the market appreciation was about 5% for both units) and one of my neighbors just sold her house due to a transfer to Chicago. She said to duplicate her well appointed three story Cleveland Hts towhouse in the Lincoln Park neighborhood of Chicago was going to cost her double what paid for her house here The Gold Coast is great if being by the lake is important to you. However, I really don't think many of the units in the high rises right on the lake are that special and are beginning to show their age (they were built in the mid 60s...I am not a real estate expert but I doubt the appreciation on those units are that great, especially since there are so many of them and they are pretty generic). As far as travel is concern, while part of your trip would be on the freeway, you would still have to take surface streets to get to the Clinic. I imagine the trip will take at a minimum 20-25 minutes from the Gold Coast depending how far down the line you are. You seem to have a preference for newer construction so I think Avalon Station is a good choice as your ride to the Clinic would only be about 10 minutes and you would be right on the rapid line for trips downtown. You also might want to check at a new condo development which is going up in the heart of the Cedar Lee neighborhood of Cleveland Hts (it use to be called Domain on Lee...don't know if that is still the case) although occupancy will not be possible for more than a couple of years. Don't know much about Blue Stone but it does look nice and the construction appears to be quality. Again safety is not an issue there.
  6. Htsguy replied to a post in a topic in City Discussion
    I live in Cleveland Hts. and have a 50% abatement for ten years. I am under the impression that the abatements vary project to project in the Heights, and some do not even have them.
  7. Recent postings are somewhat interesting to me. I recall back in mid September (along with another poster) inquiring whether the September 29, 2006 ground breaking at the site of the 10 story building at the corner of St. Clair and and East 12th was going to be simply a ceremonial ground breaking or whether work was actually going to start (I think I gave the Euclid Corridor as an example which had its groundbreaking and then it took a year for actual construction to begin). KJP followed up on my post assuring that work (per his conversations with people at Zaremba) would begin a couple of weeks after the groundbreaking and that they were "ready to go". Well it is now 6 1/2 months since the ceremony and no evidence (other than world class signage) that digging will begin any time soon. While some may agrue the work has progressed at the townhomes site (although I would take issue with that but at least there is some activity) the building at intersection of St. Clair and 12th is clearly the signature piece which will contain the retail and which is such an important part of the project. I guess my original instincts were right. What I cannot understand is how people who put deposits on units can be held in limbo for so long.
  8. Does the power line actually cross the parking lot? If not I cannot understand why they cannot just start digging a hole in the ground?
  9. ^Good points. I tend to agree with them. While not a fan of the Breuer tower and with no deep passion regarding its demolition (especially in comparison to others on the Board), I am concerned about what is going in its place. So far, the original concept did not excite me and recently we have seen little in the way of what may actually be built. I would hope that the new building can incorporate the elements discussed by "X", especially on Euclid.
  10. Since I only have the Probate Court docket to gone on I can only speculate. The continuance orders do not provide any specificity. Good guesses can be made based on motions filed by the parties and the stage of the proceedings. It is not unusual for a case to be continued at least once before it goes to trial and often their are multiple continuance. I would venture that 90% of all Common Pleas cases that actually go to trial have had the trial date continued at least once for a whole host of reasons. I would also guess that at least 40% have two or more trial continuances. Some judges are very liberal in this regard but a few just won't put up with it unless it serves their purposes. From my review of the docket it looks like the earlier continuances were due to the fact that the parties had not had a chance to complete discovery (this is a common reason in any litigation). It looks as though the parties took more than 40 depositions which takes a significant amount of time, especially when you have a number of attorneys involved. It is often hard to coordinate schedules (after all this is not their only case). It would appear that the more recent continuances had more to do with court having to rule on discovery motions (parties allegedly not providing the required discovery as allowed by the rules so motions are filed), the court wanting to consider the motions for summary judgment and the fact that it looks as thought the court was pressing settlement (unsuccessfully). Again this is all pure speculation on my part. I cannot read the the various motions and brief on line (unlike Summit County). However, I believe I am offering some pretty educated guesses. At this point settlement looks like wish full thinking. Given property owners like George and Kassouf and certain hard headed attorneys representing the property owners, this thing is going to trial (which is conducted in two phases...the first before the judge...if he rules a taking is appropriate then the second phase...valuation...is before a jury). My view is that the property owners think it is in their best interest to drag this out even if they lose at trial. I believe an appeal is almost a certainty given events to date. Given the foregoing I hope Wolstein is able to being implementation of the project so he can build around the other property owners. I hope this is in Wolstein's plans although I don't know if it is possible since I really don't know where the hold out properties are located and whether it is feasible to begin doing SOMETHING with out the holdout properties. If not, it may be another two years before ground is broken. Anybody have any ideas or information on this point?
  11. As noted above the 1st part of the e.d. hearing (after being continued at least 4-5 times) goes forward on May 7, 2007.
  12. Yes, the remaining property holders. Also, a partial motion for summary judgment filed by the Port Authority (relating to the issue of inability to reach an agreement...must be an element which needs to be proven in a taking action) was also denied.
  13. Maybe RTA can wave a magic wand so it can complete a complicated 7 mile reconstruction project in a blink of an eye.
  14. The Probate Court docket reflects that all the motions for summary judgment have been denied.
  15. Interesting. When Arhaus first open in 1986 there was absolutely no residential component yet they apparently did good business in the Flats. Today there probably 2,000 people living within walking distance and the store has no traffic. You would think with all the people coming and going in all the apartment buildings at their doorstep a furniture store would be the most likely retail tenant in the Flats. Wonder what this says about the possibility of retail in Wolstein's project. I have always thought this was going to be the most problematic aspect for a variety of reasons I won't bore you with, but others on this thread seem to feel it is not a concern. Any thoughts?
  16. Probate Court docket reflects that land appropriation hearing has been rescheduled for May 7, 2007. Hopefully it will finally go forward on this date.
  17. Are there really 500 dorm rooms in Fenn Tower? That sounds like alot.
  18. ^^It my impression that County employees and government employees in generally are probably some of the largest per capita users of public transportation of all downtown employees.
  19. ^^If the above comments accurately reflect what Stark said, that is a lot of "talk" from somebody that really, in the scheme of things, has not done that much himself.
  20. Does anybody have some "inside information" regarding the settlement discussions that were suppose to take place on Friday at Judge Corrigan's insistence. Based on the PD article describing the arguments on the summary judgment motions, the negotiations would seem to be a waste of time as it looks as though all the parties are pretty well dug in and not budging. Also I note from the docket that the Port filed a motion to compel the production of documents on Friday which is not a good sign that discussions are going to bear fruit. I just wish the court would set a new hearing date as soon as possible.
  21. ^2 property holders filed motions for summary judgment and the Port (Wolstein) filed a partial motion for summary judgment regarding the "issue of inability to agree pursuant to ORC 163.04"
  22. Just great. The appropriation preliminary hearing scheduled for March 26, 2007 has been rescheduled AGAIN (I think this is something like the 4th time) according to the court docket. It appears oral arguments on the motion for summary judgment were held today. I hope this means that the parties are entering into serious settlement discussions as suggested above but I am not counting on it.
  23. Let's keep in mind that the "powerful" Wolstein is taking a huge risk in the Flats and is putting his money where his mouth unlike many other large developers in town (Forest City to name one). It is true he is receiving government subsidies for infrastructure and the like (what developer now a days does not receive such perks) and lots of cooperation from the bureaucracy, but the odds are very good that he could lose much of his investment on this project. It would be lot easier for him to take his millions and develop some virgin land in Medina County or even more likely some fast growing county in the Sun Belt. Hell if I were him I would just find some safe investment fund and go play golf. I wouldn't bore you with all the potential pitfalls of this project (which a smart businessman can foresee) but the retail component is probably the biggest risk. I don't think government officials are working with Wolstein because of his "power" but because they are just thankful somebody is finally interested in correcting the mess that the East Bank of the Flats has become. And for Wolstein, why go through this aggravation. Because I truly believe he wants to do something positive for his home town. For all his dad's arrogance, the family is know for this as many of our institutions will attest (from Cleveland State to the simply ball field next door to my house in Cleveland Hts.) Now lets just start building and argue about the architecture.
  24. Any property owner who simply argues that he is fighting ed due to the fact that he has not been offered enough money or Wolstein and/or the port is not negotiating in good faith lacks a lot of credibility in my mind. If this was the ONLY issue why fight ed (the first step of the process where the court determines whether there are grounds for a taking in the first place). Save everybody alot of time and money (including your own...attorney fees must be going through the roof), let everybody hire their experts and go to the valuation stage as quickly as possible. If you are SO right with your numbers then you will make a lot of money quickly. It is clear the owners have ulterior motives. Probably want to keep their property so that if the development goes forward they can either demand a huge price due to the "changed and enhanced neighborhood" or simply run their business without putting much money into their properties and take advantage of the gleaming facility next door. Like many of the posters, and for the reasons given above, I have little sympathy for these guys (especially Kassouf) and hoped they get hosed.
  25. I wish the article would have identified which landowner recently settled as mentioned above.