zippo

Does Stark have control of any of the surface lots west of West 6th street?

I agree with KJP. TC is the obvious place to build the convention center. Most likely, it would strengthen the retail aspect of tower center, and hopefully change the mix of stores. Maybe they’ll build another hotel, but beyond that, I think we are not going to see much spin off. However, it should help the hotels, and maybe add another one, which are very important to the future of the city. As much as we might dislike the management of Tower City, malls located in downtowns are a dying breed, and it would be a severe blow to the city to lose it or see it decline further. Sam Miller is a tough to deal with, and he alone could scuttle any deal with the county/medical mart. I doubt in today’s climate, he can shake down the city for $40million in” air rights” to build a convention center. Regardless, it’s still troubling to see the existing convention center sitting idle. The proposal put forth to build it underground, and extended it are intriguing, but I think putting 450 million in a basement is not going to sit well with the voters and the politicos unless they ca ndo it for well under that number. In a twisted form of logic, maybe the area under the mall could serve as underground parking lot, and lower the value of existing surface lots, making the economics of them more suitable to build on. What about moving the crawford auto museum to the mall site?

It will be interesting to see if Stark has anything solid to report. I would think if he did, he would be calling a news conference, like the one he was suppose to have in June. I think he's sincere, but in today's market conditions, I wonder if a project of this type and magnitude is still possible. He's going to have to put some serious money on the table to have the banks back this project.

Thanks MyTwoSense. Where's the modify button?

......as I was saying, before I hit the post button, very very nice. I believe over the next five years, there are going to be great things going on up and down that street.

drove down part of the Euclid cooridor around CSU.

I don't. I just know from past experience with drives I've been on, that weather is a killer. There's a reason, why the commissioners decided to raise the tax when they did. People have other diversions generally, and don't focus on issues at this time of the year.

I think these guys are out of the game. They effectively lost last Sunday because of the weather. If signature end's tomorrow, game over.

Any word on whether Stark is announcing anything on Pesht

I too work in the city and in a beautiful restored building. However, from a first hand experience, I can't tell you how hard it is to remake an old building work economically for modern uses. It's not for everybody, and there are many costly unknowns. There are exceptions, but obviously cities wouldn't be contracting if businesses and jobs were moving in. It just a fact. I never said I was for suburbs, but they evolved for a reason, and in this case I would hate to see the county government offices decide to move to the burbs, or to an area outside of the CBD because they couldn't make it work downtown. I think the county want's to stimulate that section of Euclid ave. It may or may not work, but it's worth a try. Obviously, if I was pro-suburb I wouldn't be reading this board now would I.

The only major employers left in the CBD are banks, and government offices. Major businesses do not locate in a downtown anymore. It’s more expensive for their employees, and dealing with the city and the many constituencies is a pain because it’s almost impossible to get anything done. Beyond the federal building nothing has been built in the CBD in maybe ten years. Forcing the county into a building it doesn’t want is a non starter. Were stuck with the commissioner’s decision. If the planning commission denies the county the right to demo the building, the county will probably stay where it is until it sells the building, assuming someone would want the thing. My guess is in the end, they will leave for a less controversial, more cost effective solution in the suburbs. Then we can look at an another empty building lining Euclid ave. for another twenty years.

Let's face it, the Breuer tower is a second rate design at best. In the best of times (The inspiring 70’s) it has loomed like a foreboding monument to the Stalinist school of architecture. This is not a signature building of any sorts. Don't you think it would be more productive to spend the time and energy focusing on a putting up a structure of the highest design on a key intersection in the city of Cleveland, rather than trying to salvage something that is inefficient, and unworkable in the minds of the county? I would not take lightly the county's threat to dump the building and possibly build in the suburbs. Another twenty years of a vacant building on a key intersection is not progress in my mind.