Hts121

It is a nice neighborhood, but for what you are paying for a 3 bdrm 1 bath bungalow in that neighborhood, you could get a 3 bdrm 2 bath colonial in South Euclid or Euclid. Of course, you'd have the "security" of a more homeogenous neighborhood in Lyndhurst (: Check out both of these neighborhoods before buying in Lyndhurst - http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.528403,-81.516194&spn=0.015421,0.027509&z=15 - the area in South Euclid between Belvior(west)/Anderson(north)/Professor(east)/Mayfield(south) http://www.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.57449,-81.510487&spn=0.01541,0.027509&z=15 - the area in Euclid between Euclid Ave(north)/Chardon(south-west)/Richmond(east). You will get probably 150% the square footage in either of those areas of what the same list price will get you in Lyndhurst without sacraficing safety or neighborhood amenities. That said, I will admit that Lyndhurst city services do seem better as far as the little things - that they supply the garbage cans to residents and they plow the sidewalks during winter are just a few off the top of my head.

I know next to nothing about Streetcars and am certainly in favor of Cincy's plan. That said, I did see a documentary the other night about Monorails and they sure were harping on the fact that there are some legitimate safety concerns with Streetcars. The documentary (i want to say it was on the Travel Channel) gave some pretty surprising statistics IMO... but, of course, it was advocating for the use of Monorails so TIFWIW

Is there anyway we can talk the developers into leaving the fire engine red accents off of Circle 118?

The last thing Cleveland needs is another 40-50 story skyscraper.... unless it is something symbolic a la the Space Needle in Seattle. Once we are all filled in, then we can talk about building up.

There really are no bad neighborhoods to avoid in Lyndhurst or University Heights. For Lyndhurst, if you enhance your search to west of Richmond going towards Green, you might find a little more bang for your buck.... especially if you cross the border over into South Euclid (Professor Rd. I believe). Lots of kids back in that neighborhood and a nice park. For Cleveland Heights, I tell people to stay away from the pockets that border East Cleveland but the rest of the City is perfectly safe. But don't automatically exclude the Forest Hills neighborhood which would be an exception to that rule. Just steer clear of anything north of Mayfield if it is west of Lee and anything in the area going north on Noble once you pass Yellowstone. All that said, if you are serious about just wanting a "starter" home, why not look at Euclid? Ridiculously low property taxes (somewhat higher income taxes) and you will get the most bang for your buck. If you buy towards the Lake around E 260, you might even make some money on resale if a certain proposed Lakefront renovation in that area gets going - http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/11/euclid_residents_can_comment_o.html

^It sounds like it is a half-and-half deal. It will go on the "north end" of Mall C and overhang the dropoff down to the tracks. There is a decent amount of space north of the Mall and South of the Tracks. In some older renderings, a very large terrace was envisioned for that area.

When I first got the G1, I thought I wasn't going to keep it because it was too big and heavy. It weighs the same as the iPhone but is a little thicker (probably because of the keyboard). I have gotten used to the weight and it does not bother me anymore especially if I am wearing a coat with an inside pocket it can slide into.... but when I go out and have nothing but jeans and a shirt on, I will take my SIM card and put it in my Samsung which is much smaller.

If the new building echoes the size, form and footprint of the older buildings too closely, the effect could be monotonous and dull. If it departs from the other buildings too radically, the effect could be jarring. The situation calls for a landmark worthy of the spotlight but also capable of playing a graceful role as part of a larger ensemble. My thoughts/concerns exactly Mr. Litt. I am not going to dig my feet in here and will wait for rendering, but I just can't envision how a modern, glassy structure at the north end of Mall C could possibly mesh with the other civic buildings that will surround it. I still do have a stong gut feeling that this is a negotiation tactic and MMPI and the property owners at 113 St. Clair are just trying to get the other side to flinch. In hindsight, the biggest mistake so far was officially announcing the Mall site for the CC/MM without first reaching a deal with the property owners. By announcing first, MMPI and the County lost a lot of leverage. The property owners now know that there property will be surrounded by the hustle and bustle of a CC and, if nothing else, their parcel will be worth something to another developer for use as a hotel or other use associated with a CC. They should have been forced to sign off when they faced the prospect of no new development on adjacent properties.

Between these two teams (Cle and Orl), it comes down to who shoots the 3 better. In the playoffs last year, the Magic torched us from behind the 3 point line. The Cavs were on fire last night from behind the arc (10-14) and the final score doesn't tell the story because the Magic were never really in this one. Orlando got handled last night... given they were on the 2nd night of a back-to-back and without two key players (Cavs were down one key player). And while Shaq was far from spectacular last night, neither was Dwight Howard. Last year, we had no one that could guard that guy and he ate us up on the inside. Different story last night and it shows in the results.

^It will be built up to "street level"

Yeah, Jillian's usually has all the big fights. You might also check out the Boneyard on Mayfield Rd in Lyndhurst.

Try this one - http://www.mtv.com/lyrics/lewis_huey/heart_of_rock_and_roll/5206071/lyrics.jhtml

The Curse of Rocky Colavito: A Loving Look at a 33-Year Slump - book by Terry Pluto (two sequels were printed as well).

When I hit on the link posted by EVD, I get a 2001 radio interview that Obama did.... not the thesis hoax. What I posted was verbatim from the transcript which surprise, surprise (after I listened to the whole interview) was reproduced selectively by WND. Listen to the whole interview and it only hammers home the point I made above. Bottom line - Either WND is full of idiots or they think of their readers as idiots... there is no other explanation.

I get your point, but I think the key here is that the finger dock already exists and cuts down on the distance needed to be built. I have to believe, with a design such as the one being proposed that an additional 50-100 feet would exponentially increase cost. And, yes, there is the Mather to consider too... and the fact that we just built the indoor walkway from GLSC to the Mather (ribbon cutting I believe was last week).

IIRC, it wouldn't make sense for the lowered portion to be under St. Clair as I believe the Exhibition Hall does not extend under St. Clair. As I recall, the exhibition space is under Malls B and C and there would be a lowered portion of the ceiling under Lakeside. The area under Mall A has some other use, no?

Thanks for serving up this meatball WND, via our very own EVD! Perfect example of how easy these partisan websites sell their propaganda to the public and the public buying it hook, line and sinker. I won't even check for accuracy or selective reproduction of the text because what was served up is plenty good to prove my point. Let's assume that this was a real interview (and it might be - this is different from the thesis hoax of a couple weeks ago where Rush looked like an utter fool) and the quoted text was Obama's actual language. Now, let's analyze it piece by piece: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK He is saying here that there were both victories and failures in the civil rights movement. The victory was to invest rights in minorities that did not previously have them - e.g., blacks could now eat their lunch at Woolworth on the same condition as everyone else - you must pay for it. That is all that is said. Nothing more. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf. What this means is that the Supreme Court stayed within the confines of its constitutional authority in its rulings on civil rights. It was not a radical court as some have claimed. There were some essential constraints that were placed on the court by the founding fathers and the Warren Court stayed within those parameters. In essense, the constitution says what the government can't do and what it must do, not much else. And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. What he means here is that the Court was NOT empowered to bring about "redistributive change." Any such measure would have to be by other means, but the civil rights movement focused too much on winning the battles in court and lost focus on the grassroots power of the movement that could have brought the community together in a coalition of powers. It gets somewhat more difficult to understand what exactly he means here, but it appears he would have supported organizing among the people to form coalitions and apply political pressure to bring about change - i.e. voting blocks, lobbyists, etc. Regardless, he is definitely not suggesting that any such goal could have been accomplished through the Supreme Court. So, nowhere in the text which I am sure WND very selectively chose to reproduce does Obama "rip the constitution", nor does he "fault the Supreme Court" EVD.... my friend.... you've been propaganized.... AGAIN by those big bold letters. Try your own espoused strategy sometime and actually read and critically analyze what is written.... unless you like the taste of your own foot.

Magnifique!

Pretty good actually. Lots of construction going on. New student center on the way. Same with Education building. Just broke ground on new dorms. Still talk of adding a football team, but then where would OSU get all of its talent? ;) Thanks for asking. Feel better now? Getting back to Bearcat football, UC is having an unbelievable season. A statue needs to be erected in Kelly's honor before you lose him to a bigger program. I hope they make it to a BCS, but not the NC game.

The numbers I have heard are that Gilbert will spend $600 million on the Cleveland casino and $450 million on the Cincy casino. Penn National, which holds the licenses for the other two, will split $600 million in construction costs between Toledo and C-Bus. These were all campaign promises, if you will, so take it FWIW. McCleveland is correct that the amendment requires an minimal investment of $250 per casino so that is where you might be getting the $1 billion figure from ($250 mill x 4 for those of you who actually look at "the diff" on the scoreboard at the Q).

EDIT: I think the idea of moving the County and demolishing the HQ's would throw the timeline off to a point that it is viewed as a last resort. JMHO.

After watching the video, the funniest thing to me was that among these tea party goers - I mean defenders of the constitution - only one of them (an elderly woman) seated behind Boehner even seemed to notice the gaffe.

I found my way here a few years back while lurking on MayDay's "Cleveland Project Rundown" page on SSP. At that time, Cleveland projects were being announced with some frequency and MayDay was keeping that page alive by conversing with a single poster who was hitting him with the whole "20 questions" routine. The Pope apparently got annoyed and starting throwing barbs at the poster for asking too many idiotic questions when he could just go to UrbanOhio and get the answers. Here's the ironic thing in my mind though.... I always loved skyscrapers and even wanted to design them when I was a kid. I remember how excited I was as a teen watching the Society Center get built with hopes that the Ameritrust Tower would follow. But this site has completely turned me off to the idea of supertalls.

Working in Wooster, I would restrict your search to the areas west of downtown. Based on the info you provided, I would agree on West Park and Lakewood as good fits.... but, if you can afford it, I would definitely check out Rocky River.

Whoopsie-daisy... John Boehner reads the Constitution. Or the Declaration of Independence. Or something. WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Those pesky founding fathers. Some days it's hard to keep their statements straight. John Boehner, the Republican congressman from southwestern Ohio who also happens to be the House minority leader, addressed a gathering of Republican and Republican-leaning citizens Thursday on Capitol Hill. They were fired up, fighting for the rights guaranteed by America's patriots. So it was only appropriate that when Boehner joined the tea party, he waved a copy of "the Constitution" and read from it. Except his words were from the Declaration of Independence. FULL STORY: http://www.cleveland.com/politics/index.ssf/2009/11/john_boehner_reads_the_constit.html