Htsguy

^^This is a key point. I hope it is hammered home before the various boards when seeking approval.

My impression is that council is anxious to get this done and is supportive but as we all know we are probably looking at two years of meetings and and community input sessions because that is how it works in CH. Even people who are probably supportive will want to put their two cents in as evidenced by an email by Paul Volpe read at the last council meeting. I am all for community engagement but CH carries it too far and it needs to be more structured. My favorite part of the whole process is watching city officials do their best to stop their eyes from rolling when the real crazies start spouting out.

@YABO713since you live so close to the project you should actively reach out to the usual suspects and voice your support (councilperson, CDC, the bag lady on the corner) to counter the eventual NIMBYS. You have your marching orders. By the way I love? that certain people are questioning parking when they are proposing 100 indoor parking spaces in a building which is as well on a major transit corridor.

Great article. I am going to skip watching the Landmarks meeting when this is presented because I know that that group will make my head explode with their insights.

We need daily pictures of this demolition. Happy times.

^^What do you mean spiraling down. From day one the designs we have discussed have been speculation and our own fantasies often based on misinformation. It is not like Nucleus where we saw a rendering and concept right from the get go that was constantly revised and downscaled.

I am less concern about lack of any retail given the fact those a huge swath of the Weston lot will be left to other developers according to Ken. My biggest concern with the potential design is still the parking garage. However, for all of you that are concerned about blank walls and the like, retail or not, I would check out some of Pickard Chilton's designs. They are clearly a top notch firm and know what they are doing. They recently posted a building on Instagram for Akamai Technologies on Kendall Square in Cambridge which I really like. Bottom line, we really are only speculating at this point and probably won't know what we are getting for almost a year so, while it is fun to discuss and we should, for me it is really hard too criticize something I cannot see and has only been vaguely described by anonymous sources. In any event I can tell it is going to be a long summer on this thread.

Reading the posted article I kinda chuckled because one of the reasons given by the community activists against the previously proposed McDonalds at the site was that it was not pedestrian friendly. If I recall correctly there was a lot of hand wringing at Planning Commission when Metro was seeking final approval of the clinic's design (which was approved) and how it did not contribute to the goal of a pedestrian friendly Lorain Avenue.

public can get tickets

Agree 100%. Hate to beat a dead horse but the ground level design is way more important than height. We are talking about 2 huge blocks in the center of the city.

oh boy. Defendant number 2. More deep pockets. And even more attorney fees to spread around. Life is good.😉 Actually, my guts says that if AT&T actually did fall through it was for another reason.

I agree that sounds strange for the reason you give. Could they have possibly screwed up handicap parking in the garage in some manner? If weirdly true a lawsuit against the architect may be in the offering (typical lawyer think here...first thing we jump on). I would imagine ADA compliance is Architecture 101.

^I saw that today as well. I especially liked the street level design (not depicted in the above pic)/

Actually how about a mock up an actual manufacturing facility showing the production of products from being to end and employees from research and development working in a lab setting and giving presentations on possible future products...just to name a few possibilities.

Love the design. This is the kind of product I would like to see on those 100 infill lots in Hough we were discussing a few days ago (where the Westlake home builder is going in).

Thanks for the pic. I agree and I was afraid this was going to be the result from day one. There is too much "thank you for building in our city" going on.

@KJP...is this one of the midtown developments you have been hinting about the past year or so but could not give details about yet?

I imagine something like that would never get pass design review....at least I hope so. By the way...head spinning....keep it up KJP.

that means you want a four story tudor building on Public Square

^I was popping in and out of the Landmark meeting so I am not actually sure, but I don't think the demolition presentation went forward even though it was on the agenda, but I don't know why.

I can confirm what you describe is happening. A buddy of mine has been involved in this process since about 2012. He buys houses for very cheap (often bank owned properties) in mostly more modest inner ring suburbs like Maple Hts and South Euclid, does a bare bones renovation (15,000 to 25,000), tires to get a tenant in and then sells to out of town (and often out of country-Israelis are big clients) investors for about 70,000. These investors have property managers here in town who do the bare minimum. The investors are looking for 11-12% returns and hope for more. These investors have scores of homes and are always hungry for more. The competition for houses by the flippers like my buddy is intense, especially since it is important that they don't over pay upfront. In my mind the problem with all this (other than huge swaths of neighborhoods are now owned by out of town entities rather than owner/occupiers) is that the chances are low additional capital improvements will be made by these types of investors in the future and the properties will slowly deteriorate. Greater Cleveland appears to be a good model for this scheme due to that fact housing prices are so low and growth is stagnant, especially in blue collar inner ring suburbs. This model would of course not work in a market like LA.

Beat me to it. I was just typing a post when yours popped up. Biggest surprise...Flarherty and Collins has any interesting in this development given the torture they went through in putting together Top of the Hill. Good for them. Can't wait for the community meetings where I am sure the crazies will continue to attack them regarding Top of Hill even though it is now under construction (actually, especially now that it is under construction). I am guessing that the city at this early stage (although it is hard to classify this project as "early stage" given its history) is leaning towards F&C-as suggested in the article- because it is not in phases as well as the fact that the other proposal is from Panzica. The one thing I don't like about the F & C proposal is leaving Lee- Meadowbrook green space, although I guess that solves a lot of the problems with utilities on the site.

1% better

According to news reports liquidation sales could begin this month and last eight to twelve weeks.

Could not read the article but I got nervous this morning when I read the headline with the term "Westlake builder". Given the above posts I can see my trepidation was justified. Is this something design review and the Planning Commission can turn around in a hurry (does it have to go to Landmark? Those picky snots could turn things around in a heart beat)? Will they decide to forgo criticism given the potential investment in a neighborhood that sorely needs it?