Htsguy

I think people would just like it to be better (much better) rather than a Streetboro clone.

I have lots of hats. I will eat all of them the day the State of Ohio gives the city of Cleveland $200 million for the construction of a land bridge. I hope the city has other funding ideas.

It will settle. The developers were at the Board of Zoning Appeals getting their variances as you typed your post.

Watching the developers presentation on-line was so frustrating. I cannot tell you how underwhelming it was and the city officials basically shrugged their shoulders (actually there was quite a bit of praise given the circumstances) and I guess were resigned to the fact that this was the best they were going to get and did not want to piss off the developer fearing many more years of a vacant K-Mart and the ensuing blight.

Ugh. They slashed a floor to make the NIMBYS happy and this is the result.

I hate to beat a dead horse but doesn't zoning in this area allow for buildings 250 feet high (or is that closer to the river)? The reason I ask is that I was reading the Cleveland.com article reporting on the approval and it of course quoted commission members Anderson and Trott (who both voted no) saying the building is "too large" for its site (and this clearly means height because that is what they were grossing about at the meeting). This despite the fact that it is practically downtown. What I find frustrating is that this Board seems to ignore zoning if it doesn't fit its agenda and then moans that "sacred zoning" is being ignore as a tool to shoot down other projects they reject as too tall. Specifically members were all up in arms that Fulton House would have to seek a variance for its height and the project developer was blind to the areas zoning (as if they were trying to build a 20 story building).

If it ends up being an eminent domain action, as part of the process the court has to determine fair market value (usually through experts). In my mind fmv has pretty much been determined by George himself when he bought the property in an arms length transaction just a few years ago. As such he should not get more than he paid for it and hopefully he loses money after paying his lawyers.

Landmarks serves its purpose but its mission seems a bit bloated. I agree with @w28ththat they really are not great with big projects

I was really impressed by the developer's rep Justin Strizzi. Very well spoken and he did a great job of articulating the key issues and the history of the project. He adroitly knew what points should be stressed and effectively addressed them given his audience. Hope Bond has a lot more to offer in the future. I also like the first design better but I cannot say I hate the revised version. It is going to add a lot to Detroit and hopeful will be a catalysis for other projects, especially development of the used car lots. In 10 years Detroit from Lake to downtown could be one of the city's premiere streets.

Watching these Landmark meeting on-line the pass few months it seems as though the only thing Ms Anderson likes is ginger bread cottages. And that appears to be her expertise.

Design and demo passed. "Julie Trott" voted yes "reluctantly". She had no choice since there was overwhelming support at all levels. Present and former councilpersons, local design review and landmark, the club, the planning commission staff and even social media. She was faced with all this support and seemed to have a sour look on her face the entire meeting.

Just watching Landmarks. What is this thing Julie Trott has with height of buildings. It borders on the irrational. This does not bode well for the Gordon Square project which is up next unless others on the Board are not swayed by her. By the way. Demo application passed unanimously with the design passing 4-2 although they have to come back for this and that,

My gut feeling (pure speculation) is that the appropriate city departments are pretty much ignoring these buildings and have decided to forgo wasting scarce administrative resources knowing these buildings won't be around much longer.

^Any news re: Design Review and Zoning Appeals for the Van Aken apartment project?

It has been a while but if I recall Landmark was also very negative regarding the height (in fact I think it was one of the last comments from the chairwomen before moving on), Is that still going to be an issue or was height just Landmark throwing the kitchen sink at the project due to the "protesters" for whom the chairwomen said upfront she had much sympathy. Also, if I recall correctly the club principals were always anxious to work with the developers and said so much at the meeting. They seem to be the ones who were most realistic about the club, its history and the vast amounts of money it would take to fix up this very unremarkable building. It was expressed that they certainly did not have the funds to do so.

What I would like to see is NFL players (not the teams) boycott playing in GA (and especially TX if they similarly step on voting rights) and watch heads explode. May not work but it would be fun to watch.

Don't know exactly where these trees were without a photo but based on the description buildings (phase 2) are going up where they are located so no real opportunity to save them without just nixing the plan.

You are probably correct but it is strange that they would do this work now since that phase of the project is so far in the future and may not happen at all. Perhaps they want to cut down on traffic flowing onto E107th during construction of the first phase and/or they just want to do all the roadwork up front. Would be sad if Phase 2 for some reason is delayed for years and that plat of land remains barren without those huge trees.

Would this be for the staging area across the street from Phase 1?

Can't wait to find out what is happening behind the scene but don't worry. If that gorgeous club building is saved you know that all the concerned citizens protesting it's demolition will now empty their pocketbooks to correct the tens of thousands of dollars in code violations and structural deficiencies that have existed all these many years

why not? Weren't they eventually going into the new building?

My firm moved into new offices in the Erieview Tower contemporaneously with the opening of the Galleria. Its first five years or so it had a great tenant mix with few vacancies and good restaurants that were always packed. The food court was similarly packed at lunch. Contrary to the above, shoppers were mainly from the suburbs (as well as office workers especially at a time when people actually took lunch hours) and parking was not a problem as there was the huge underground garage with reserve spots for the mall, valet parking, the huge One Cleveland Center garage across the street and a fair amount of street parking. The lack of a anchor certainly did not help and downtown was definitely over retailed with two malls. Beginning in the 2000s downtown retail became problematic nationwide as has been discussed at length in this forum.

Actually wouldn't the evening be the time when parking would be the most scarce in a residential neighborhood that has little off street parking. KJP is right on point.

Somebody will be changing my diapers by the time that happens. Sounds like a Kassouf. I am even surprised the renovation is actually moving forward.

A certain condo project on the old New York Spaghetti House site (which has definitely been on mute lately) would help.