Hts121

If I understand the specs correctly, it appears that the northwestern most 2 buildings are not going to be part of the original project and will only be developed if the demand is high enough?? What will be done with that land in the meantime..... I smell surface lots :x

"I think the more we studied the great waterfront urban districts in the world, the more we came to believe that for this project to help redefine the future of the city, it needed to have a real critical mass," Adam Fishman of Fairmount Properties said in an interview earlier this week. :clap:

More like shock waves. It would be as devastating as a collapse of the health care industry up here in Cleveland.

Charlotte is great... so don't get me wrong. Cleanest city I have ever lived and the houses and building are very well upkept - very little stress from weather helps in that regard. The residents are very upbeat about their City and IMHO that is the most important component to a booming metro. However, Charlotte is basically Beachwood with a skyline - think a giant version of Chagrin Blvd and legacy village. The Coventry area is more urban than any Charlotte neighborhood. And yes, the suburbs - Matthews, Huntersville, Fort Mill (SC), Concord - are really the best option for those who don't make 6 figures and want to buy. Ever increasing traffic coming from those areas is a big problem. The light rail system only runs from the north. Finally, as I posted in the other Charlotte thread, the locals in the know ARE worried about the banking crisis and the devastating effect it would have on their City because they really do not have another leg to stand on.

My dad bought a 4 bedroom house in the Dilworth neighborhood in 1997 (Dilworth Road West) for $300,000 and it is now worth a cool million. The location is ideal (5 min drive from downtown) and it is clean as they come while still maintaining some sense of being in a city. The houses will remind you of Southern Cle Hts and Northern Shaker (just not as big) with a southern twist (big porches, etc.). Every time someone new buys, they tend to sink another million in rehab/additions. Several houses on my dad's street have been gutted completely and new room built on. The landscaping is very natural with huge oak trees lining the streets with tons of ivy and other ground cover all around. Just in case anyone was wondering, those black bands around the trees are to prevent some kind of bug that damages them from climbing the trunks. As beautiful as they are, these oaks can be dangerous due to their age - a gigantic limb from one of the oaks on my dad's tree lawn fell and took out two dogwoods and a good portion of the brick wall that surrounds his front yard. The oaks grow different down there with 3-4 main limbs that are the size of most other trees as opposed to up here where they branch off into much smaller limbs. Dilworth also has a nice blend of houses ranging from moderately large to very small bungalows and duplexes. Immediately adjacent is Myer's Park which is uber uppity (Duke mansion, etc.) but very aesthetically pleasing. All that said, my opinion is that Charlotte is not built to be as big as some project it will become. Traffic is already horendous and water supply is an issue. Plus, Charlotte's recent boom was based on its success in the field of banking.... uh-oh.

Peabody99, there are two sides to that argument. Trust me, A LOT of the hate for the City that comes from City workers is because they are required to live there and feel trapped. Residency requirements also seriously dwindle the talent pool from which the cities can hire, arguably adversely affected the City services that are rendered to the citizens. Keep in mind that, regardless of any state law, the City can offer as incentives to encourage residency such as tax abatements or perhaps even extra points on civil service exams. The only thing that the state law prohibits is making residency a condition of "continued" employment. JDD, you could look at it another way as far as your concerns in the Court taking so long. Allen County (3rd District) wrote a very long and intellectually complex opinion to strike down the state law. The 8th Dist might be taking the time to properly counter the conclusions drawn in that opinion. If they were going to come to the same conclusion, it would not take them this long to write the decision. Of course, the most likely cause of delay is the overload of cases the 8th Dist has on their lap.

I don't have a concise list but it is alot, something like 113 political subdivisions.... that would include counties, cities, villages and townships. The Cities that are outwardly thumbing their nose at the state law are: Cleveland Toledo Youngstown Dayton Warren Akron Cincinatti Lima Cuyahoga Appeals court should be weighing in any day now. For city workers who want to move, the fact that the Court has taken this long to issue an opinion might be bad news for you. A simple written decision could easily find in favor of the unions. But a lengthy and complex analysis is needed to skirt past prior precedent.

To prevent flip-flopping, I will admit that I am torn between the two sites. I see the mall site as "potentially" much better for clevelanders but also could be a big flop. It all depends on the development it spurns. I see the TC site as better for coventioners and a safer bet for long term success. The ultimate goal is to attract people to attend these conventions so they dump their $ off in downtown businesses while here. I don't get the whole argument about the WHD being "blocked" by the Justice Center. It is not like that building is a giant road block that cannot be cross. It only makes up one city block and the WHD is just on the other side. That's what NYer's call "spitting distance".

Let me start out by saying that I am in favor of the mall site. I look at it this way: If the CC and MM are put on the mall they would be surrounded by: a. to the North - the lake, RRHOF, GLSC, NCH, and CBS b. to the East - E 9th Street, Avenue District c. to the West - WHD, FEB, FWB d. to the South - Public Square, TC, East 4th Street The TC site does not have the same kind of centrality and is more isolated. Plus, I hate the idea of trying to "shoe horn" a fancy new CC into the site on the river. I agree that the more underground the CC can go, the better..... build hotels and shops on top of and around it. Now, if it was GUARANTEED that the TC site would inspire development across the river, then my tune might change.

I thought it was the County's position that a new CC is not worth the expense if there is no MM attached.

..... and is contemplating legal action against K&D in the "future"????? j/k :wink: Now, don't get me wrong about the overall idea of the plans.... putting some residential and hotel rooms on this critical corner of the CBD while still promoting the office growth. I just hated the idea of combining the AT tower and the Rotunda. I also did not like the idea of knocking down 1010 Euclid. I find it hard to believe that 1010 can't be rehabbed into lofts or something of that nature. That building, especially its facade, just screams old school Cleveland and old school Euclid Avenue. As silly as I am sure it will sound to many on here, I would be more upset with losing 1010 than the AT Tower.... well actually, that would be the case on the caveat that the AT Tower would be replaced with something of comparable size (not exact) to maintain skyline density.

The 1st Amendment wouldn't guarantee you keep your job, just that you don't go to jail. Keeping your opinions to yourself is often a wise choice when the workplace is involved. ^In a way, I'm glad to hear this. I was worried K&D might be stretching themselves thin. I just hope someone else has plans for this building. Maybe Eli Mann can tie it to the CAC, or is he not involved with that anymore? Who said anything about jail :?.... I inferred that he/she was getting at a defamation claim in a tongue in cheek sort of way - and the 1st Amend. does come into play there..... trust me. True though about keeping your job, but he/she said "legal reasons" not "employment reasons". As for E/9 and Euclid, I am hoping for something more than what K&D was planning actually. In K&D's plans there seemed to be some lack of fluidity in the vision and I hated the design of the new office building that was to be erected (I realize they said that it was not the actual building... but geesh). The County actually might be wise to sit on it (the property) for a couple years to - (a) let the lending crisis ease up; and (b) let Euclid Corridor show its worth to potential investors.

Easy solution.... just prephrase anything you write with "My opinion is...." A little thing called the 1st Amend will insulate whatever you say after that. Sorry Mayday.... my original post that started it out was "on topic" IMO.... did not mean to sidetrack.

And those concerns are? "Quality" of their construction. You know the old saying - "they don't build them like they used to".... those types of concerns. Like I said, they are not MY specific concerns. I have actually never been in or in any way inspected anything done by K&D .... just posting what I have HEARD from others whose opinions in the area of construction that I respect.

I have a feeling that this deal will get closed notwithstanding any procedural defects. However, I have heard a lot of concerns about K&D's construction practices that makes giving them E 9 and Euclid somewhat troublesome. Don't get me wrong, I love that K&D is so aggressive in redeveloping the CBD, but there are legitimate concerns about the quality of what they build.

That article is the first I have heard of the idea to connect I-490 with UC via a Boulevard. Sounds like a good idea. Also sounds like an idea that will never even make it to the drawing board, let alone construction. Such a move would seem to ease traffic congestion from the west and, to a degree, the north (coming up through the park).

Yes... that would be it. So I guess Zaremba is going to put in a temporary greenspace until the north wing can be built? That makes me real skeptical (and I am a glass half full kinda guy) that the rendering usually associated with this project will not be built, but rather a scaled down version. However, given there are no windows on the north side of 1211, I guess all hope is not lost.

There is some ground work already on the site pegged for the north wing of this development. Underground parking perhaps? I just got a drive-by look at it.

I, for one, like the Gotham-esque look of the CBD. I have been to many "new' downtown's in other cities and find that they have far less character and less of an urban feel than we have between the 9's. That said, I would not mind at all some color in FEB, Stonebridge, Avenue District, etc. I like the look of playhouse square, with the exception of those screens which I have not made up my mind about. I also like using colors as highlights like what was done at the airport. I just don't like entire facades being too loud in terms of color. I may get jumped on for this one, but notwithstanding all of the above I do like the green neon theme that Dallas has employed in its skyline. Back on topic, I drove by the Avenue District a couple times this week and it is nice to see that they have the groundwork well underway for the north wing of the building. I am really happy with the steady progress on this project.

Thanks for the clarification KJP.... I am trying to catch up on all this stuff.... always was interested just never knew there was such an informative source as urbanohio. I, for one, think that Pesht and FEB can coexist and even feed off one another. It really would be one big neighborhood that could grow even more over the next couple decades with the port moving. IMHO, it is the perfect location for a true "neighborhood" in the CBD (and yes... I do consider FEB to be in the CBD... sorry Bob).

I was under the impression that Lighthouse Landing was supposed to line the other (north) side of Front Street. If anything I thought that the proposed site for the Eaton "campus" was going to throw a monkey wrench. It is hard to tell by the drawings KJP has posted above.... but the north of Front Street concept is clearly contemplated by the rendering MayDay provided here - http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=97396 Edit - come to think about it, it appears that these are not the same projects.

20 story tower on that lot sounds intriguing to me. It will be interesting to see how it will be designed with the shoreway bridge immediately abutting where it is going to go up. I also like putting some height on the hill going up to the warehouse district..... I did not realize the FEB would be going east of W 10th. Should be real popular with law firms considering its proximity to the courthouse.

I'll wait for the plans/renderings to come out before I pass any judgment. All that "campus" says to me is that it will be more than one building. Tyler Village is a "campus" and I think that its layout (regardless of the age of the buildings) fits an urban setting. For comparison's sake, the proposed site for eaton is only 2/3 the size of Tyler Village. Due to demand, I assume that any Eaton campus will not be quite as dense as Tyler and I imagine that Eaton wants a campus setting for the greenspace that can be offered. Now I realize I am not in the majority on this board, but I am happy to have greenspace downtown. Several major cities around the world incorporate greenspace quite well into urban settings (e.g. Singapore). Chicago also has plenty of "green" on its lakefront. Plus, once the port moves, there will be open real estate to develop between any Eaton Campus and the lake.... it is not like the "campus" will abut the lake. All this said, I may change my tune once the renderings come out.

My understanding is that the new project will not absorb the entirety of what we all know as the FEB. It does not go south of the west shoreway bridge.

I see something like Hotel 71 in Chicago for the AT Tower.