Posted March 3, 200718 yr As a response to 3231 in the "Cleveland relocation thread" I've scanned some apartments in my complex. I've tried to put the floor plans in the buildings I think they belong in. Although, I've lived here forever, I've seen most of the units, for competitve analysis, but there are so many I still haven't been in each type of unit. Some of the floor plans are really old so they didn't scan well. I scanned a few exterior shots from MSN as well. Here is a view south, with the rear of the Moreland courts buildings on the bottom of the screen. On the top left side of the picture is a view of Shaker Towers (www.shakertowers.com) and on the top right side of the picture, Shaker Courts, the Moreland Courts sister development. Shaker Towers was built in 1947 and is the tallest Condo on the square. The views of downtown in spring are amazing. Shaker Courts was built in the early 1940s and is just as majestic as moreland courts. In addition, we have three train stations within feet of our building. Shaker Square (not shown); Drexmore, partially shown on the upper right side of the top picture and Coventry, shown on the left side of the top picture. Below is the Drexmore train station, looking EAST. Drexmore is the first stop on the Blue Line, going East, after you pass shaker Square. Below is the Coventry station, with is original comfort station. Coventry is the first top on the Green line, after you pass Shaker Square. 3231, the building on the right is where the 4,000 & 4,500 Square Feet units are located. One side has 4k sq. ft. units the other has the 4.5k sq. ft. units. each unit is the entire length of the building. They have been selling at $830-890k. Someone recently bought a unit for $839k. We start with the a view of Shaker Blvd., between the NE Quadrant of Shaker Square and the middle of the complex. The floor plans below this picture are all in one of these buildings. This unit is about 1100 Square Feet, I think this in the building to the farthest to the right I don't remember the size of this unit, when my cousin viewed it but the inside had gorgeous details. I'm pretty sure this is located in the building infront of the circular driveway on the right of the picture above. This unit, is the unit selling for 87k, which I think is a steal! Also, located in the building infront of the circular driveway on the right of the picture above. Pictured, below is the middle of the complex going east to Coventry. The "Gallery Building" is the building with the two towers on either side. This unit, located in the West Tower, is about 3500 Sq. Ft and they are going for about $600k. This unit is the second walkway from the far right. Its about 1700 Sq. Ft. This building resembles Belgian Village. And last the a 4k sq ft unit in the Coventry buliding. The units are spectacular! Thanks for stopping by Shaker Square.....Well now it's time to say goodbye to you UrbanOhio-ans. I would to thank you folks for kindly dropping in You're all invited back again to this locality...To have a heaping helping of Shaker Squares hospitality. Y'all come back now, ya hear?! :wave: :wave: :wave:
March 3, 200718 yr The pics are courtesy of MSN. :wink: The floor plans are stuff I try to keep. I try to view apartments whenever someone tries to sell, so I know what the market is doing and so I know what my apartment is worth. Luckily there are only 6 or 8 of my particular unit. Some of the floor plans are like 15 years old, and most are what the original units look like. As you can see most units have "maids quarters" and "jack-n-jill" bathrooms which are so out of style. In the 1920, people who lived around here had maids and butlers. I wish I had a picture, but I know that when my cousin was looking we saw a few units that still had "servant" buttons. As soon as I find the duplex floor plan, I'll post it. To me those are the coolest apartments in the complex. My cousin bought one they are very bachelor pad cool. :mrgreen: If I can find my original floor plan I'll post it as well. Lawd knows my apartment doesn't look anything like it did when I bought it.
March 4, 200718 yr Cool. I love how the buildings are all connect and at the sametime, they each have an individual feel. That section of Shaker Square is ubber fabulous, and reminds me of Tudor City, Riverside Drive, Columbus Ave. near the museums or Forest Hills in New York. Now if only I could find an apartment with that much CLOSET space in NYC! Any inside pics? The prices are good as well. Of the floor plans you posted, if those were in NYC I would think they would all be well over $1.5 million. Cleveland has great and unique housing stock. Is it true that you can walk from Shaker Square to your apartment without having to go outside? There used to be a bar over there by NCB. I think it was called under the square or down under at the square. Is that still there?
March 4, 200718 yr Super cool! Thanks for taking the time to do that. So when are you moving to the square? I know you want to! :wink: Cool. I love how the buildings are all connect and at the sametime, they each have an individual feel. That section of Shaker Square is ubber fabulous, and reminds me of Tudor City, Riverside Drive, Columbus Ave. near the museums or Forest Hills in New York. Now if only I could find an apartment with that much CLOSET space in NYC! Any inside pics? The prices are good as well. Of the floor plans you posted, if those were in NYC I would think they would all be well over $1.5 million. Cleveland has great and unique housing stock. Is it true that you can walk from Shaker Square to your apartment without having to go outside? There used to be a bar over there by NCB. I think it was called under the square or down under at the square. Is that still there? I never thought Shaker Square was like Columbus Ave, but I guess some of those apartment building on 79 Street or Riverside drive could. Tudor City & Brooklyn Hts. closely resemble Shaker Square I just thought, Eastern Parkway between Grand Army Plaza and Washington or Classon could also resemble Shaker Square. The bar was "Steps under the Square". It was really nice. The space is there, but they don't have tuesday nights there anymore. I only have pictures of my apartment and my cousins. I don't want to post them unless somebody really wants to see them.
March 4, 200718 yr nice job with the kew gardens/forest hills, queens of ohio! I think its the other way around, Forest Hills is the Shaker Square of Queens! :-P Besides we don't have those God awful fire escapes taking away from the beauty of the buildings!
March 4, 200718 yr ^ well, god awful until the building goes up in flames, then god blessed. but you go mts!
March 4, 200718 yr Nice job, MTS; the Square's my home too, and I love it -- Love your closing B.Hilbillies 'song.' ... I'm convinced, MTS, you're certifiable. :lol:
March 4, 200718 yr ^ well, god awful until the building goes up in flames, then god blessed. but you go mts! hey hey hey!!! Don't be wishin' stuff like that on me...besides, I don't have enough marshmallows for the whole building - cause that would be one hell of a campfire! If you look at the very first pic and some of the floor plans, you'll see our secondary entries (fire escapes) are built into the courtyard portion of each building. Its not all tacky and taking away from the building Nice job, MTS; the Square's my home too, and I love it -- Love your closing B.Hilbillies 'song.' ... I'm convinced, MTS, you're certifiable. :lol: Certifiable at what, though? :wink: Yeah I know you live in Clevelands Best 'hood! 8-) Us Eastside folks need to bring up the ranks. These darn tootin' westsiders out number us although I know secretly, 3231 & mapboy, desire to be one of us! :-D
February 1, 200916 yr I forgot who was asking me about the duplex units in MC, but here is an interior picture. I would not want to be the person who has to clean those windows! Here is the exterior
February 2, 200916 yr This layout is beautiful. Props to the designers. If you're going to design a semi-sprawly suburb, design it right. Too many people today settle for mediocrity and citizens/developers waste money in the least productive ways.
February 2, 200916 yr I mean you're like Solon! No, I'm kidding. I like 1920s garden suburbs. When I say sprawl, It's relative to the inner city. I don't think the setbacks are bad. They still use land fairly responsibly and the community proved itself sustainable.
February 2, 200916 yr David, nothing in my neighborhood is considered sprawl. Nothing! I don't know how you could say that. The train station is directly in front of the building. You really must see the area in person because I think you have the wrong impression about the area.
February 2, 200916 yr ^UO Party at MTS's crib!!! That not apartment. lol but I bet if you ask nicely, they'll let you have a party there. lol
February 2, 200916 yr David, nothing in my neighborhood is considered sprawl. Nothing! I don't know how you could say that. The train station is directly in front of the building. You really must see the area in person because I think you have the wrong impression about the area. When it was first built, it was 'sprawl'. It's considered more urban now than it was at the time that it is built because the 'sprawl' has gotten worse since then.
February 2, 200916 yr David, nothing in my neighborhood is considered sprawl. Nothing! I don't know how you could say that. The train station is directly in front of the building. You really must see the area in person because I think you have the wrong impression about the area. When it was first built, it was 'sprawl'. It's considered more urban now than it was at the time that it is built because the 'sprawl' has gotten worse since then. Dude, SS has been TOD since day one!
February 2, 200916 yr You're boring me with your absurdities. Again, by today's standards it a great community. It has trains and the land use isn't bad. But it IS mostly residential. It's not an urban paradise or anything. It's a garden suburb and those are usually a good compromise for people who want close amenities but enjoy a little bit of space and peace. That doesn't change the fact that it's pre-war sprawl. It was just better planned sprawl. Great by today's standards never the less. All suburbs should be like that.
February 2, 200916 yr You're boring me with your absurdities. Again, by today's standards it a great community. It has trains and the land use isn't bad. But it IS mostly residential. It's not an urban paradise or anything. It's a garden suburb and those are usually a good compromise for people who want close amenities but enjoy a little bit of space and peace. That doesn't change the fact that it's pre-war sprawl. It was just better planned sprawl. Great by today's standards never the less. All suburbs should be like that. Pay attention as your boring me with your ignorance of our area. Again, by today's standards it a great community. It has trains and the land use isn't bad. But it IS mostly residential. Mostly residential? Shaker Square is a mixed use community. Look at any of the photo threads posted on this forum. It's not an urban paradise or anything. It's a garden suburb and those are usually a good compromise for people who want close amenities but enjoy a little bit of space and peace. Shaker Square is a neighborhood in Cleveland NOT a suburb of Cleveland The train was built before the buildings As you can clearly see, the train is up and running and half of my development is still under construction. This neighborhood was built as Transit Oriented Development! Period. Take a visit to our area before making in further incorrect assumption or confusing Shaker Square with Shaker Heights. David, I think he could kick your ass!!!! You're damn right about that!
February 2, 200916 yr Z zzZ zzZ zzZ zz I don't care about the distinction between SS and SH. I was already aware of that. I can lump the two together since they're connected and right next to each other. Apparently I'm not alone since you feel the need to correct people about once a week for that. You sound like the nerds who prattle on about Fairview being separate from Clifton Heights or any other area that technically isn't "Clifton"...what's the point? I can walk 5 blocks from the the business district in Clifton Heights to Fairview. Shaker Heights is a Garden suburb and that's what I meant by 'mostly residential'. Stop catching feelings.
February 2, 200916 yr Z zzZ zzZ zzZ zz I don't care about the distinction between SS and SH. I was already aware of that. I can lump the two together since they're connected and right next to each other. Apparently I'm not alone since you feel the need to correct people about once a week for that. You sound like the nerds who prattle on about Fairview being separate from Clifton Heights or any other area that technically isn't "Clifton"...what's the point? I can walk 5 blocks from the the business district in Clifton Heights to Fairview. Shaker Heights is a Garden suburb and that's what I meant by 'mostly residential'. Stop catching feelings. You cannot compare that area to mine. You need to visit and stop being a hater.
February 2, 200916 yr I wasn't hating. I complimented the damn aerial and that's what set it off. You just always wanna start something.
February 2, 200916 yr I wasn't hating. I complimented the damn aerial and that's what set it off. You just always wanna start something. My name is not Michael Jakson, OK! You have the wrong opinion about our neighborhood.
February 2, 200916 yr I wasn't hating. I complimented the damn aerial and that's what set it off. You just always wanna start something. My name is not Michael Jakson, OK! You have the wrong opinion about our neighborhood. mama se mama sa ma makusa This conversation is pointless. David has left the (pre-war) building.
February 2, 200916 yr I wasn't hating. I complimented the damn aerial and that's what set it off. You just always wanna start something. My name is not Michael Jakson, OK! You have the wrong opinion about our neighborhood. mama se mama sa ma makusa This conversation is pointless. David has left the (pre-war) building. Thank God. If you stayed any longer our property values might have been affected in a negative way.
February 2, 200916 yr I wasn't hating. I complimented the damn aerial and that's what set it off. You just always wanna start something. My name is not Michael Jakson, OK! You have the wrong opinion about our neighborhood. mama se mama sa ma makusa This conversation is pointless. David has left the (pre-war) building. Thank God. If you stayed any longer our property values might have been affected in a negative way. You really wanna take it there? I must have visited in '05.
February 2, 200916 yr Shaker Sqaure, in these pictures, reminds me a lot of many DC neighborhoods. Maybe Cleveland or Woodley Park with the big apartment buildings along CT Ave. and the large, yet still not sprawling houses on the side streets behind them (throw in some retail strips too). Is this fair?
February 3, 200916 yr interesting that an inspiration for shaker square's layout was amalienborg square in copenhagen (1750-60): ^ blended of course with the great american developer penchant for faux colonial/georgian :laugh:
February 3, 200916 yr ^Wow, I can't believe I've never come across that connection between Amalenborg Sq. and Shaker Sq- thanks for that. Though in Shaker Square's defense, its architecture is no more faux than Amalienborg's neoclassical.
February 3, 200916 yr ^Wow, I can't believe I've never come across that connection between Amalenborg Sq. and Shaker Sq- thanks for that. Though in Shaker Square's defense, its architecture is no more faux than Amalienborg's neoclassical. That information is on one or more of the SS websites. They make reference to it on the SS home tour.
February 3, 200916 yr true amalienborg square has it's influences as well. the other shaker square influence is obviously the earlier kansas city country club plaza, the first "shopping center." i believe ss is considered the second one.
February 3, 200916 yr true amalienborg square has it's influences as well. the other shaker square influence is obviously the earlier kansas city country club plaza, the first "shopping center." i believe ss is considered the second one. SS is No. 2 but the best! :P
February 3, 200916 yr Lake Forest's Market Square was also a little earlier than Shaker Square. Maybe even earlier than Country Club Plaza- I can't find any good history. Looks nice though: http://www.historicmarketsquare.com/page3.html
February 3, 200916 yr Lake Forest's Market Square was also a little earlier than Shaker Square. Maybe even earlier than Country Club Plaza- I can't find any good history. Looks nice though: http://www.historicmarketsquare.com/page3.html I've never heard that. I've always heard 1) CC 2) SS (SS first in Ohio).
February 3, 200916 yr i didnt see that lake forest one mentioned as an early shopping center either, it's a sleeper! but for columbus i did see casto's grandview avenue noted as another very early one (1928). edit -- wait here it is in the chicago tribune: January 13, 1913 Market Square in Lake Forest The nation's first shopping center is designed to be "sound, sanitary, and picturesque." http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-chicagodays-marketsquare-story,0,6535827.story Market Square, shown shortly after it was constructed in 1916, had the essential element of all shopping centers that would follow: it was planned, built, and operated as a unit. But it remained more an ideal than an example for later shopping centers. (Photo courtesy Harold G. Mason/ Lake Forest-Lake Bluff Historical Society)
Create an account or sign in to comment