Htsguy

Philadelphia is obviously a much much larger city than Cleveland and always has been so comparisons like this are some what suspect. Moreover, for years and years you could not build taller than city hall (548') so that would have naturally increased the number of 400' feet buildings in the city.

It is unfortunate we can like a post only once. I am giving this a super like

Another thought. Hate to keep moaning over the parking garages, but I definitely would prefer them to be on the Weston lot interior rather than a pedestal for the 20 story Weston building even if it would give it more height and prominence. Never have been a fan of pedestal garages. You see them all over Chicago and they seem to be done well only about 25% of the time. If a pedestal is necessary due to the size of the garages I hope it is some sort of configuration where it might only be 4-5 stories on the street and then flowing some how into a taller garage in the center of the block. Also would preferred that the first couple of floors are activated with offices, lobbies or retail rather than just the usual first floor.

I think the proposed building height on the Jacobs lot will mesh well with the Terminal Tower as borne out by the posted massing.

Again, no problem with the suggested heights and pleased a large majority of the Weston lot will also be developed and not left to a phase 2 (although there clearly will be some sort of phase 2 on the lot per the reporting). I am most concerned with how these massive parking garages will be addressed and whether they will be a wart on a potentially great campus. Fingers crossed for a hotel. BOTTOM LINE I JUST WANT TO SEE A DESIGN SO THAT WE CAN GO CRAZY WITH IT THIS DREARY WINTER.

27?

Viewing the rendering in @KJP blog post...I wish they could jazz up the building doorways in some manner. Right now they look like the entrance to a medical building in Beachwood.

Love it. They clearly want to market it as a grown ups bar.

Cannot read the article. Is that version three?

Two cents. Don't have a problem with two shorter buildings although I would like to see the Jacobs building more in the 30-33 story range. Like many posters, my bigger concern is the street level of the buildings rather than the height. I like the idea of something tallish on the Weston lot as my big fear was just a big old parking garage plopped in the center of the block connected to the Jacobs lot building with a bridge over West 3rd (you know, how things use to be built and unfortunately still are way too many times). Of course along with the taller Weston building I would like to see some companion development to create a street wall around the entire block in the 6-10 story range either immediately or in a future Phase (although I am also not a fan of Phases since it seems like phase 2 always take forever to happen). I would not object to a really tall building (750-900 feet) as long as a shorter building was still in the cards. Also, if that was the scenario, I would actually like to see the much taller building on the Weston lot rather than Public Square. Viewing some of the great massings of a really tall building for the project posted last week, I was having a problem with the way the building was interacting with the Terminal Tower, especially when viewed from the lakefront. I think my concern would be abated a bit if the taller building was more more to the west.

Does the P and G "campus" interact with the surrounding neighborhood? I always imagined it as a stand alone fortress downtown and the pics sort of bear that out. I wouldn't want that for SHW, especially with it location on Public Square.

Well I certainly don't think missing one or two posts makes you dumb. We have been following this legislation for more than three years in the Cleveland Nucleus thread since the attorneys for the developer were behind its submission. It has been like a soap opera. @KJP posted the good news and his blogpost in that thread and in general development threads for various cities since the legislation obviously affects projects throughout the state. What is ironic is that there is no guarantee that the tortured Nucleus project will earn a credit since the competition will be fierce.

This news was posted by @KJP in a number of different threads a few days ago with a long and detailed blogpost giving history and analyzing.

Don't want to spin this thread way off topic but funny story...was in a freshmen English class at Miami Univ. (probably before many of you were born) and we having a discussion about regional dialects and terms. The prof asked how many people were from Cleveland and about 8 of raised our hands. She then asked the class what a "tree lawn" was and all of us Clevelanders gave her and each other these funny looks, like she had asked us who George Washington was. The thing is the rest of the class didn't have a clue.

Wasn't that part of Pace's proposal? He is long gone.

While schematic approval was granted, East 90th Street apartments got a big "meh" at PC today. I think the commission would have had a lot more to say (negatively) but they were rushed due to the huge agenda. Developer kept throwing around words like "necessary cost cutting" and "work force housing" to justify the design. Apparently they nixed structured parking because of the cost and now there is a huge surface lot in the back with a really poorly thought out amenity patio (just looks cheap and thrown together) in front of the back entrance. Given the developers thought process I don't the design will change that much as it heads towards final approval. East 93rd Street Apartments looked a lot better although it also just had surface parking in the rear. Underground parking like you see on Van Aken in Shaker would work so much better (not to mention more secure for a neighborhood still in transition} but again I imagine now a days cost is an issue

Much better looking than much of the four and five story apartment buildings being proposed all over town.

I know this has been said often but it just cannot be stressed enough. The transformation of lower Euclid during the past 15 years has just been incredible.

Thanks for the article. It appears English is not the authors first language.

E. 90 St. apartments back on this Friday's City Planning Commission agenda for conceptual approval. I am interested to see whether the developer's latest renderings are just site massings rather than the actual design (which I could have done with crayon and I have no imagination or talent) and what the response is. Also note that E. 93 St. apartments are also on the agenda so I guess we will finally get to see the proposed design. I wish design review was also streamed so we could get an idea as to their thoughts before it get to the PC Looks like the side streets off of Chester are becoming the new hot development spot.

To nobody's great surprise except perhaps the appellants, the Ohio Supreme Court today declined to accept jurisdiction in the Dunham Tavern lawsuit. This is finally the end to this farce. What a waste of judicial resources.

@kjp...you indicated that demolition of these apartment buildings can go forward without planning commission approval. I really don't know what the demo process is in the city so I am a bit confused by your answer simply because when streaming planning commission meetings I note that they are always approving the demo of buildings, even dilapidated single family homes.

Any idea why application for conceptual approval did not go forward at most recent planning commission meeting even though it was on the agenda? Can demolition actually go forward without planning commission approval or a replacement approved?

Cannot believe this would happen here and it will probably be the developers rather than the city that would be most keen to have the bricks replaced given evidence so far of what a quality development this has turned into.

Also agree generally. In certain instances set backs are not a bad urban form and often are almost required (and I am a big street wall advocate). More specifically, I don't have a problem with the Bridgeworks plaza, I would just like to see a rendering with it on the church side rather than the bridge side and see how that works. It would give the church a bit of a European feel and the building would not loom over the church as much in my opinion. Also, I liked the original East 90th apartments design (actually I think it was the second design as the first was rejected out of hand as too tall and dense) with the setbacks even though it was roundly panned for the most part on this forum. I believed the setbacks and the greenery were appropriate in that environment, especially given all the single family homes nearby. It was still a dense plan. It some how reminded me of areas of Westwood in LA which are actually quite dense and walkable.