Hts121

I always understood the waterfront loop to mean the exisiting tracks that wrap around the site and head towards Browns' stadium.... am I wrong?...... is this a new development.

Truth be told, Stark probably has a decent chance with the two law firms, SSD and BH. Proximity to the courthouse is key here. Really, can you imagine all those lawyers walking up that hill to get to the courthouse from FEB. WHD is about as prime as it gets for any of Cleveland's big 6 law firms. The biggest firm over there now I think is Weltman in the Lakeside building. The main competition IMO for the firms is any skyscraper Jacobs might build. However, if those firms really want NEW digs, considering they are in skyscrapers now, they will choose to go with Stark. That would be 400,000+ sq. ft. for Stark to start with. If he still lands Eaton then he has more than enough commitment from office tenants to go ahead and do his "single phase" mega project. From what I understand, retail and residential interest is not what is going to hold up this project.

Thanks for the advice so far. I think the "head" will finally give in to the "neck" and he will have to drive once they buy..... she really wants to live in the CH area. Besides the point anyways... they will take their time in buying and weigh all considerations. I just don't know too much about the renting market in Cleveland proper other than what I read on here... which actually probably makes me more knowledgable than most on the subject. Since I initially posted this thread they were shown suites in Statler Arms, Reserve Square, The Chesterfield and 1900 Euclid Lofts. All really close to his work. Liked Reserve Square. Loved Euclid Lofts but availability was slim for what they wanted. Did not like The Chesterfield and did not like management at Statler Arms. I think that PLV is a great option for them. When exactly will the Corridor be fully operational? Don't snap at me either for not looking in that thread. Also, what are the names of some recommended places to live on East 4th? I suppose there cannot be too many given the street's size.

Not me.... I am already here..... but my sister and her husband are moving here from Milwaukee. My sister finally convinved that cheese-head that C-Town is the place to be... either that or he just gave in. Anyways, they have asked my advice on their living options, so I now ask for some guidance in giving them guidance. They ultimately want to buy but I suggested a lease somewhere so that they could get accustomed to the area and make a sound decision. Now, the question is where do they rent? All the help will be much appreciated. Here are their characteristics: -Both are young professionals (early 30s). -Neither of them are much for the party scene (bars, clubs, etc) -Currently reside in a dowtown Milwaukee highrise (near the lake) ("Yankee Hill" something or other) and are content there. -Love movies, boardgames, family, good time with good friends, etc. -Probably want to keep rent well under $2g's per month but can afford a nicer rental by our market standards. -My brother in law will be working in the Huntington Building and would LOVE to be able to walk to work. Very important to him. -However, public transportation would be acceptable.... if he could walk to the public transportation from where he lived. Basically, he wants to leave his car in the garage for the day while he is at work. Of course, I showed them Reserve Square and the Chesterfield, being they are within spitting distance of the building he will work in. I also showed them 1900 Euclid Avenue, the Bingham, Stonebridge, Waterstreet Apts, and Pinnacle. What is that apartment building on East 4th called? We also drove through UC and the triangle area. Not too familiar with the rentals down there.... any thoughts? I was thinking that he would like the Euclid Corridor once complete and, truthfully, they would probably enjoy UC (and being close to us) more than downtown. If you would be so kind, please let me know what you would recommend. What is a good UC rental apt.? What is the makeup of Reserve Square and Chesterfield tenants? What about the people in the Bingham?.... they will not like puke in the hallways/elevators at 2:30 am. Basically I am trying to find them the place with a decent amount of young professionals or other tenants who enjoy and need some respect from their neighbors in terms of noise, peace, etc. However, all that notwithstanding, they DO enjoy somewhat of an urban setting. Ultimately, they will end up living in the Overlook-Edgehill neighborhood or just east of Coventry between Mayfield and Cedar when they find a nice house to buy. Thanks in advance. The good news is that we have two more young professionals moving here by choice, not because they were transferred or otherwise compelled.

I lived in Greensboro and Charlotte.... did not see or smell one Skunk the entire time I was there (7 years). Maybe I was just lucky. Moved back to Cleveland and my dog got sprayed twice in the first month. BTW, if you are still in the dark ages of using tomato juice you really need to look into the homemade mix of dawn dish detergent - hydrogen peroxide - baking soda...... note: it has to be dawn for some reason. Same thing with Racoons.... never really saw them. When I moved back here, I learned really quickly to make sure my trash was secure. Not saying that they aren't there, but they are nowhere near as common from what I could tell. Perhaps the overall cleanliness of the Cities down there does not draw their interest as much as up here. Possums were all over the place down there though.

The Ninth District just pulled a Scalia.... outsmarting precedent to come the conclusion it wanted to. Even the dissenter seemed to want to agree but felt compelled to follow the interpretation of the law the Supreme Court has previously announced. Both Allen County and Summit County just wrote new law. This whole issue is going to come down to who is on the high bench in Columbus come next year. A conflicting court of appeals opinion is forthcoming. It would be absolutely unheard of if every single common pleas court found in favor of the unions/state and every single appeals court found in favor of the cities. Conflicting opinions will send this issue straight to the SC without all the red tape. The 8th District (Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals) will hear oral argument on 1/22 at 9 am for those of you who wish to observe.

Cleveland - Images (not previously listed) - Cuyahoga Valley (at dusk) - Old County Courthouse (front facade or the center lobby) - Garfield's tomb (views of and from) - The Blue Angel AND..... - an orange contruction barrell

I grew up here in Cleveland. I moved to NC for approx. 7 years. Moved back to Cleveland about 5 years ago. Difficult decision to make the move back but I am glad I did. Here is my list: Things I missed about Cleveland when I was gone (in order of importance) 1. Family (by far the most important) 2. Friends 3. MY sports teams 4. Liberal sway 5. Summer/Fall Things I did not miss about Cleveland when I was gone 1. Winter/Spring 2. Negativity 3. Grime 4. Faster pace 5. Salt 6. Skunks/Racoons Things I miss about NC 1. Winter/Spring 2. Complacency 3. Slower pace/laid back people 4. Natural beauty (beach/mountains/foliage) 5. Cleanliness (buildings, cars, sidewalks, everything) Things I do not miss about NC 1. Bible belt social conservatism 2. Artificialness (is that a word?) 3. Humidity 4. Accents (depending on how deep) 5. Eastern diamondbacks 6. Crazy nascar wannabe drivers Overall, NC will always have a special place in my heart but CLE is my home and it was calling me back. I admittedly still have thoughts of regret from time to time and some sense of nostalgia for the past, but overall I am happy with my decision.

I seriously hope that they are bluffing on this deadline. I mean... really... if you had your choice of having the medical mart in UC or not in Cleveland at all... what would be your decision? Of course I would like it downtown, but this project is too important to our local economy to be lost all together.

I like what was done with Johnny Malloy's on Coventry/Euclid Hts Blvd moreso than the Boneyard on Mayfield. Both are in former theatre spaces. However, I would like to see a comedy club go into that space. Very little stage depth is needed for such performances so it could work. Or... how about a restaraunt like nighttown that has small live performances during dining hours.

In a shocking turn of events, the 3rd District Court of Appeals (Allen County) has overturned the decision of their common pleas court and, basically, declared the state prohibition unconstitutional. The distinction to that court was a difference between conditions "of" employment and conditions "for" employment. The appeals court held that the former was open for state regulation under Art. II, Sec. 34 of the Ohio Constitution, while the later is not. The decision breaks new ground in the interpretation of this provision and should make the Ohio Municipal League very happy. The public employees' unions just shat themselves... collectively. For those of you opposed to the state law, this decision is a shimmer of light in the darkness. For those of you who hope to put your kids in a decent school system AND keep your pension... don't sweat it as you are still up 8-1 and the decision really is not based on any binding precedent but rather a break from the traditional understanding of legislative discretion that the other courts who have decided the issue have recognized. Like I said, the Ninth District (Summit) is expected to chime in soon. The Eighth District (Cuyahoga), as usual, is taking their sweet time to even set an oral argument. In all fairness, that Court is overworked. In the end, we will know who will win after the makeup of next year's supreme court is decided and all these other decisions will not matter one bit. It's all political down in C-Bus folks... even at 65 South Front Street.

The cities are down 0-7 in the trial courts. Every jurisdiction has found in favor of the State and/or Unions upholding the constitutionality of R.C. 9.481. The Ninth District Court of Appeals (Summit County) just held its oral argument last week and the first appellate decision should be issued shortly. Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals will probably decide in early 2008.

[shadow=red,left]I'd rather work in a downtown with ten ten-story buildings and all the potential retail on the ground floor (lunchtime variety, shops that would allow me to run some errands at lunch and before and after work, more people on the street doing the same) than in a 1000 story tower with only its own retail. [/shadow] Now that would be one enormous tower.... is Jacobs trying to outdo the new Dubai structure? :wink:

As I said at the start of this thread, I really hope that Jacobs considers two "Erieview" size towers instead of one big bang. OK, here is a request for all you computer know-it-alls - Could you take a couple skyline pictures of Cleveland (maybe one from each direction - N, S, E, W) and insert the Ameritrust monstrosity Musky posted at the beggining of this thread to scale. Maybe that will answer some of the aesthetic concerns posted earlier. I did a quick sketch (pencil and paper) and it seems like it doesn't fit and sort of makes our skyline look worse believe it or not. Also, and this is the killer for me, it dwarfs the TT into obscrurity. Then do the same thing with maybe a twin tower concept in its place with each tower rising 400 or so feet. It would be appreciated if anyone has the ability and time. I certainly don't have either.

With the ED, demolition and other movement towards this project, it really sounds to be a go... unlike Pesht which is becoming "iffy". The difference is, in its present state, the surface lots in the WHD have earning value.... FEB has none until Wolstein re-develops. The only thing that I wonder is whether a design has been approved. I have seen pictures, but each of them seem like different concepts. Scale has got to be an issue as well. Is Wolstein going to do this project in one big construction phase or will it be split up into several phases??

Ironically, if a skyscaper were to be built on the public square lot I believe that it would fill the gap in the skyline left by the demolition of the AT tower. Of course, the above would only apply to the view of Cleveland's skyline seen on the front page of this site (the best view in town IMO). I love skyscrapers and really feel that they add to the asthetics of any urban area.... from a distance albeit. They provide somewhat of a light which beckons you to the CBD. However, as far as the ground level asthetics, function, use, enjoyment, and pretty much any other factor you can consider.... the Pesht plans blow any proposed skyscraper out of the water. If Pesht fails I would rather have two buildings the height of Erieview (with better design of course) instead of an Ameritrust-like tower. Add on any hotel planned near the convention center and our skyline will look plenty impressive for a city our size. We have three buildings of 600 ft. plus already. We need to fill it up now. I also worry about some behemoth of a building smothering the terminal tower and making it look insignificant.

I heard (not first hand) that Eaton Corp. has backed out of the "new construction" talks. This apparently came about last week and (IMO) might have been what caused Stark's recent frustration if B&H and E&Y are closer in terms of finalizing negotiations with Jacobs.

Didn't think of that one... I agree that sites in UC should definitely be in the running. Perhaps where Case got a little overzealous with its expansion plans??? The site of the hospital that got torn down?? However, I think that CBD is best for Cleveland as a whole (UC has plenty of out-of-towners heading there already for health care, education, training and/or culture - hence, plenty of money) and that is the type of impact that the committee is seeking. I love the idea that Nance is in charge and have every bit of faith that he will guide the committee to do what is best for the City irrespective of private interests (i.e. Forest City). My vote would be on the west end of the Mall in place of the County admin building and anything else that stands in its way. It is a beautiful area with the green spaces, the old courthouse, City Hall and the Civil Center. It would be within walking distance of the WHD, FEB, East 4th, TC and, to an extent, the Theatre District. It would also be a hop, skip and jump from any lakefront plans that may come to fruition - i.e. in the area of the sure-to-be-goner naval center or the port.

Does anybody care to take a guess at the 13 sites that will be under consideration? Sure bets: -Behind TC -The mall -The port - to the west of CBS Possibilities? -Over the train tracks to the south of Science Center -Naval Center (possible to put this thing partially over water?) -Amtrek station at Ninth and Shoreway -Burke -Whiskey Island -Pesht (if plans fall through) -The parking lots area immediately to the SW of CBS and south of FEB -other side of river across from TC

Umm.... your welcome and thanks! :wave:

I must say that I have read this thread and many of you are debating an issue that has come and passed. You see, the policy side of this debate took place in C-Bus a couple years ago. The court battle has nothing to do with policy, i.e. the detrimental effects R.C. 9.481 will have on the Cities. The only issue that is up for debate now is whether the legislative action violated the home-rule section of the Ohio Constitution. Now, putting the whole policy debate aside, I can tell you that the Cities will lose unless they convince the Ohio Supreme Court to overturn its own precedent. The Supreme Court not following stare decisis (the bedrock of our judicial system) is a pipe dream for the Cities to hang on to. You see, back when the the Home Rule provision was included in the Constitution, the people also ratified a provision which overrides the home rule powers of local governments. That would be Art II, Sec 34 and it empowers the state legislature to enact laws for the general welfare of employees across the state. As long as the court finds that the prohibition on residency requirements is for the general welfare of those employees it benefits (municipal workers) then the law will stand. Now, there might be some collateral effect on the Cities and its residents, but that simply does not matter. When it comes to matters affecting the general welfare of employees - i.e. collective bargaining, minimum wage, hours and, now, residency requirements - the state legislature has discretion with which local ordinances cannot conflict. That is the way the law is. If you do not like it, I suggest you seek measures to amend our constitution. The Court battle is really about Civil Rule of Procedure 62 (or 61, I forget) which allows the Cities to obtain a stay on judgment of any order issued up until the Supreme Court rules. That way, they can temporarily keep the employees within the City (still debatable) and justify that measure on their ongoing court battle. Five courts of common pleas have ruled on the issues and, not suprisingly, have ruled in favor of the State and the Unions. The Cities really have no argument. So, you have to wonder whether the City is acting properly by going to such expense to fight this battle, which it will inevitably lose. As far as advice, if you are a city worker you SHOULD STAY PUT. Do not put the strain on your union or your own pocket in defending any action the City will bring. Personally, I think the unions should leave these guys out to dry if they do not follow such advice and make them pick up their own legal fees. Like I said, no policy arguments here (that time has passed)... I am simply clearing up the law and apparent confusion on what the courts are going to review b/c THE COURTS WILL REFUSE TO REVIEW ANY BOO-HOO LOOK AT WHAT THIS LAW HAS DONE AND/OR WILL DO TO MY CITY ARGUMENT.