Htsguy

@KJP....do you have any idea regarding status of the application/award process as of this time? I have some vague recollection that perhaps for some reason I cannot recall (maybe it is the end of the state's budget cycle but I am not sure about that) that some have to be awarded by June 30, 2021-but I could just be making this up. It has happen before.

As evidenced by the comments of the Ohio City design review rep at the Landmarks meeting. Height (even though taller builders are nearby and the developer cut off a floor) and parking were the first and most significant things brought up. By the way height is another code word for no multi family housing.

And completely opposite of what the City Planning Commission wants for Fulton (a mix of home types) to increase density in conjunction with infrastructure improvements the city has made and is going to make in the area (specifically Lorain Avenue). Matt Moss articulated the vision very well. He also made an excellent point about retail in the area and how most of the customers are/will be local residents. A lack of density is going to kill that retail so these NIMBYS are actually shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to such conveniences that most people in a urban area desire and the reason they are there in the first place rather than Streetsboro.

A poster above stated the building looked "cheap". That is a term that is often thrown around when you don't like a particular style or design. You might not like this design for one reason or another but in my mind Horton-Harper rarely does cheap. This building would have lifted up this particular intersection.

It appeared to me the City Planning staff was very much in favor of the building and density of this type on Fulton (especially a corner lot) in general but there is only so much they can do. I really like most of Horton and Harpers work. Too bad instead of this sleek and pedestrian friendly building with ground floor retail we get to keep the wart that is there now.

After today's Landmarks it looks like it is going to be zero apartments.

My question is when are they going to start moving on Canal Basin Park itself? Glaciers move faster.

Has Kerry McCormack expressed any opinion (support would even be nicer) to date? This question usually comes up at Landmarks.

Upfront, completely opposed to changing the name That said how about Cleveland Chapmans I also would not mind resurrecting the Barons name even though it is so identified with hockey. In the past some cities had the same team name for different sports. St Louis Cardinals comes to mind.

Hate to be a grouch, but maybe the bi-annual "why aren't developers going crazy building condos in the central business district since there is such a huge demand for them" discussion can move to a more appropriate thread so it doesn't bog down construction information in this thread.

I think this is pretty NEW. Start date information to date has been pretty vague (generally SOMETIME in March) What I find very interesting is the statement about Library Lofts. It indicates it will begin this summer. Last week the info/rumors on this forum was that it would not start until the spring of 2022. Wonder who's correct?

Not technically. The new four story version apparently received another negative reception for the neighborhood design review. It still has to go back to Landmarks, and then to City Design Review and Planning Commission (both for the first time I believe) but all those bodies give neighborhood opinions a lot of weight (especially Landmarks) so many people think it is dead as a result. Some people on the forum have suggested lobbying Councilman Kerry McCormack might be effective but I think getting Freddie Collier on board might be a more effective maneuver to change the negative tide. I am just wondering if the developer might not just throw in the towel at this point without going further. As suggested above, he has bent over backwards for the neighborhood.

Also. I don't think city design review is binding either (it can be ignored or over ruled by the planning commission) but it does carry a lot of weight. The bigger impediment is Landmarks. I think (but correct me if I am wrong) that their vote is binding. That board was very negative last go around, especially in regards to the height. I was hoping chopping off a floor might get them on board. Also, get the impression that neighborhood design review is given a lot of weight by Landmarks.

It has been my impression that in general he does not like to step on the toes of "neighborhood opinion".

Neighborhood Design Review or City Design Review?

no

So does this mean Library Lofts is not going to start for a year (spring 2022)? Somebody suggested above that they might just build the library shell at the bottom of the project and go from there with the library buildout coming latter. Or is the whole project just delayed for a year. This is taking forever to get off the ground. Somebody above also suggested there is a dispute (maybe that is too strong a word) regarding the building foundation and how cost is going to apportioned between the library and the apartment project.

Regarding Top of the Hill...what is going on at the point where the 10 story building is going? Is that some sort of steel/wood frame hybrid? It is hard for me to tell. I was under the impression you really cannot construct a wood frame building more than 6 stories or so.

No commercial space

Damn. I was hoping that had died a horrible death.

homes?

I am glad the developer did not walk away from this. I agree with you that he did not look like a happy camper at the end of the Landmark meeting (nor did the architect although he hid his emotions just a bit better). I also agree with you that the NIMBYS will still be up in arms for one reason or another.

RIP Joe. Fond memories from my childhood. I can still hear him screaming BINGO whenever Bobby Bingo Smith hit a jumper.

Great article Ken. Lots to digest but since so much is still up in the air just wanted to comment on two items. I am pretty sure design review is going to push back on the bridges, at least the one over West 3rd (which I have always assume was going to be part of the design from day one so no big surprise), especially if Freddi Collier is truly against it. The $64,000.00 question is whether the city is going to risk upsetting the apple cart and will push hard on this point. History shows it will not. Second. In my mind, and I am sure legally, Frankfort is a city street not an alley. I don't care how SHW and its architects feel. If code requires something other than dead space along the garage they better have a plan, although this may be another issue where the city might not want to push hard, especially if they do a nice job with the West 3rd street presence. I do understand to some point using Frankfort as a service street since these functions have to go somewhere. However a good architect should be able to incorporate service areas into the building and still not create a dead zone.

Yeah, strange. You would think given the nature of the building and the duel use that would have been step one in the planning process.