^ Thanks, you just killed my buzz.

Gentlemen hold your horse,Remember Stark is right now located downtown and is preparing everything right outside his window. Perhaps he can push a building plan  or two in less than six months. Hell I bet his first building plan get through in less than 3 months.

 

I wouldn't make that bet if I were you.

 

 

I dont know perhaps I could be right. Three months is I know psuhing it,Ill push it five months,I know construction will start in the spring.

I dont know perhaps I could be right. Three months is I know psuhing it,Ill push it five months,I know construction will start in the spring.

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

I dont know perhaps I could be right. Three months is I know psuhing it,Ill push it five months,I know construction will start in the spring.

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

 

If you stop by the dollar store in TC you can get some new batteries for yourself.

Can I just say how d@mn happy I am that photos I took a year ago of some god-awful parking lots are now being used in the process of their development? :-)

 

"There are also a couple of other interesting tidbits in this image. Can you spot what they are?"

 

A structure on the District Park site; the 55 Public Square parking garage (SE corner of St. Clair and 3rd) is gone; a structure at the "hole" just west of the Renaissance... how's that for starters?

 

Holy cow. Any idea what he'll do with the cars of the people heading down to the WHD to party? Obvious you want to create a neighborhood, but so many people drive down there on the weekends, it's crazy.

He proposes 1 million to 2 million square feet of structured parking. It's in the third paragraph of my article.

Not as much residential as I had imagined.  In an earlier article, it was said that Phase I would contain 600 units.  Has this changed?

 

Anyway, it's exciting to see Stark is thinking so big, and to hear that his pre-leasing is going so well.

 

I'm still a little iffy on having the garages front the street, even on upper stories, instead of being wrapped.

Mayday, I think the 55 Public Square garage is still there.  It is shaped like a fat, inverted "L". 

 

What is with the new footprints that aren't in red?  Are those anticipated buildings that aren't going to be done by Stark or his partners?  And I'm actually a little surprised that so many blank spaces were left. (I know that sounds a little spoiled given all that he is proposing)  Are those lots he doesn't have/think he can get control of?

 

Sorry, I keep adding new observations:

 

Is the Viaduct moved?  It looks like he is proposing a building on the viaduct/Main St. ROW where it goes down the hill.

 

Is that a new riverbank along the East bank of the river?

"Mayday, I think the 55 Public Square garage is still there.  It is shaped like a fat, inverted "L".

 

Yep, you're right.

Is the Viaduct moved?  It looks like he is proposing a building on the viaduct/Main St. ROW where it goes down the hill.

 

I noticed the same thing.  It looks like the whole Shoreway has moved north.  Because, between w. 9th and w.6th, there isn't that much room north of Lakeside.

Those are the two I noticed. The Shoreway is moved and District Park is in the image. But originally it was shown in red. Stark said the building shouldn't be shown as part of his development, so I copied some brown color from another existing building in the image and pasted it within the boundary of the District Park building (it's a conceptual, non-specific shape -- sort of a "placeholder").

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

Is the Viaduct moved?  It looks like he is proposing a building on the viaduct/Main St. ROW where it goes down the hill.

 

I noticed the same thing.  It looks like the whole Shoreway has moved north.  Because, between w. 9th and w.6th, there isn't that much room north of Lakeside.

 

the shoreway is definately moved north in the top image.  i don't recall this being in any of the plans though.  is that realistic or even doable?

Sorry if this has been answered, but is that residential north of Lakeside? Is that district park that you guys mentioned?

No, District Park is on West 9th between the Bingham and National Terminal. The residential north of Lakeside would be new construction.

Am I reading that correctly?--He has commitments for 80% of the retail space?? Or is it that he hopes to have 80% by early next year?

same question as 3231

 

and by my counts, 1 million sq. ft. of residential (a nice round number) adds up to around 666.7 units, if the average size of a unit is 1,500 sq. ft.  So, 600+/-.  But that's all subject to change as this thing will be done over the course of several years and several planning iterations.

 

and the streets through Public Square have been bricked.  Would've been nice if that could've happened as part of the ECTP!  Or at least some colored concrete for pete's sake!

Jacobs is proposing a skyscraper on land he owns between Public Square and Stark’s development, Jacobs Group spokesman William Fullington recently said.

 

OK..NOW EVERYONE WANTS TO COME TO THE PARTY!

No, District Park is on West 9th between the Bingham and National Terminal. The residential north of Lakeside would be new construction.

 

Oooh, ok, thanks. Now I remember reading about District Park on UO, but did not even catch that on the map. You guys have some good eyes!

Jacobs is proposing a skyscraper on land he owns between Public Square and Stark’s development, Jacobs Group spokesman William Fullington recently said.

 

Time for a new thread?  :wink:

^Future headline:

 

"Forest City Decides To Invest $1 Billion In Hometown"

god that bottom image is really missing world class signage

What's the yellow in the middle of the Hoyt Block?

What's the yellow in the middle of the Hoyt Block?

 

Ummm, lots of retail?

Maybe Stark is thinking of routing the Shoreway over the garages he wants to build between the WHD and the Lakefront.

Where is the giant chess set?!

Thanks KJP for covering this project so closely as a journalist and then for sharing it directly with us.  This is pretty incredible stuff.

Where is the giant chess set?!

 

BANNED!

MUSKY YOU TEASE!

 

Am I blind or is the Titanic Bldg. gone?

Jamiec,

 

While I too laugh at the 'traffic' in the WHD on weekends-I remember the first time I saw it I was like, "wow, it's kinda busy!", We can talk about too much traffic down there when it starts backing up over the Detroit/Superior Bridge!  In all of my years, I've never seen congestion on that bridge! Ok well after the Cavs beat the Pistons in game 6 but that's it!

Jamiec,

 

While I too laugh at the 'traffic' in the WHD on weekends-I remember the first time I saw it I was like, "wow, it's kinda busy!", We can talk about too much traffic down there when it starts backing up over the Detroit/Superior Bridge!  In all of my years, I've never seen congestion on that bridge! Ok well after the Cavs beat the Pistons in game 6 but that's it!

 

Back in the day the flats actually, would back up onto the eastern side of the bridge.  Then traffic was prevented from making left hand turns at W 9, IIRC.

 

At one point they had a ban on cars entering the Flats after 8 PM on Friday, Saturday or Sunday because of congestion.  ahhhhhh-sigh

 

I like all the good news...its appears to come in waves every four to five months.  NOW GET SOME DIRT MOVING DOWN THERE!

 

PS: On a personal and selfish note to the God of Retail - I'm sending up a prayer for a flagship Barney's please, amen!

so it says he will submit plans by march......how long does it usually take for plans to be approved? id think it would take longer since this is a pretty big project. stark said before he wanted to complete phase 1 by 2009, which doesnt seem possible.

 

1197 sounds good for jacobs

1197 sounds good for jacobs   :?

^He's referencing the height that was proposed for the Ameritrust Center which was actually 1,198 feet.

Am I reading that correctly?--He has commitments for 80% of the retail space?? Or is it that he hopes to have 80% by early next year?

 

The latter.

 

What's the yellow in the middle of the Hoyt Block?

 

A big bunch o' retail. No specifics yet.

 

Thanks KJP for covering this project so closely as a journalist and then for sharing it directly with us.  This is pretty incredible stuff.

 

Thank you and yes it is. I'm sure when the PD gets around to covering it again, they'll say something like "a big project in a struggling city" and/or "will mean a lot to the fourth-poorest city in America." I mean, c'mon guys, drop the editorializing.

 

 

Am I blind or is the Titanic Bldg. gone?

 

No eye test is required for you. The day Stark moved into that building probably marked the beginning of the end for it.

I'm sure when the PD gets around to covering it again, they'll say something like "a big project in a struggling city" and/or "will mean a lot to the fourth-poorest city in America." I mean, c'mon guys, drop the editorializing.

 

Exactly, and thank you for sticking to the facts and kudos for a well researched and well written article.

Also looks like he's proposing a good-size office bldg at the NW corner of St Clair & W 3rd (Block E in the graphic).  Does he control that land?  Didn't remember that being part of the original plan...

Asher, Stark's partner, owns land at the NW corner of St. Clair and West 3rd. And yep, it was part of the original plan. See the right side of the graphic below, first posted on Page 3 of this thread....

 

 

And this one from Page 4 of this thread....

 

Thanks for the refresher... 44 pages is a lot to keep track of!  (and thanks for your continued reporting on this project, KJP!)

Thanks for the refresher... 44 pages is a lot to keep track of!  (and thanks for your continued reporting on this project, KJP!)

 

You're welcome. And you're right -- 44 pages is a lot for a project that hasn't even had a development plan submitted, let alone see a spade-full of dirt turned.

The real estate Stark is acquiring is at the corner of Superior and West Sixth. It hosts a 1960-built parking deck surrounding a check-cashing business in a small building dating from the 1830s. Both will be demolished.

 

I would love to see him adapt the 1830 building into a the new building instead of demolishing it.Hell htat building is so well made,that I would rather own it than any of these mc-masions that are build these days

Finally, something a little more concrete (literally so, ..soon I hope). 

 

A couple Qs:

 

- Why is Wolstein waiting til March to seek CPC approval when it's pretty clear, already, he has a tangible plan in mind?  Does CPC approve construction, as is noted in the article, or merely concepts, esp architectural and dimension.  Isn't there a construction, building standards or licencing bureau of the city that approves the actual construction?

-- Why, even when he does go to CPC in March, might he only seek plans for a few blocks and not the whole parcel within the initial block he controls (or is close to controlling).  I recognize he could have to wait for full control before he has plans for it, but then, that didn't seem to stop Wolstein..

 

-- And while I'm totally thrilled about the plans, doesn't it seem, perhaps, that the size and bulk of his buildings might be a tad domineering for the scale, walkable Warehouse District whose sense of historic architecture and pre-skyscraper genesis is central to its charm?  Remember, even though the hideous parking lot Stark is thankfully planning to eliminate with his much-needed development seems like a huge chasm, in context to what he's planning, its really a small area overall.

 

 

The real estate Stark is acquiring is at the corner of Superior and West Sixth. It hosts a 1960-built parking deck surrounding a check-cashing business in a small building dating from the 1830s. Both will be demolished.

 

I would love to see him adapt the 1830 building into a the new building instead of demolishing it.Hell htat building is so well made,that I would rather own it than any of these mc-masions that are build these days

 

Nice catch Edisou, I never knew that.  I don't see how such a building should be allowed to be torn down.  If built in 1830, I believe it would be the oldest in the WHD.  I had thought the little Hilliard office building on W. 9th (1840s, I believe) held the oldest title... apparently not.

clvlndr, do you mean Stark? 

The facade of the 1830s building that holds the check-cashing business was completely removed and replaced with a modernized facade (I believe in 1960 or so). The alteration is so significant that the building no longer retains its original, historical character. Tom Yablonsky at the Historic Warehouse District told me about a year ago that this significant alteration does not warrant it being protected from the wrecking ball.

 

- Why is [stark] waiting til March to seek CPC approval when it's pretty clear, already, he has a tangible plan in mind?  Does CPC approve construction, as is noted in the article, or merely concepts, esp architectural and dimension. 

 

CPC approves plans and concepts. Stark said he is waiting until he has a development plan ready for the first one or two blocks before he simultaneously submits a preliminary development plan for the larger area. My fault for not asking why.

 

Isn't there a construction, building standards or licencing bureau of the city that approves the actual construction?

 

Yes, the building department.

 

Why, even when he does go to CPC in March, might he only seek plans for a few blocks and not the whole parcel within the initial block he controls (or is close to controlling).  I recognize he could have to wait for full control before he has plans for it, but then, that didn't seem to stop Wolstein.

 

Good point.

 

And while I'm totally thrilled about the plans, doesn't it seem, perhaps, that the size and bulk of his buildings might be a tad domineering for the scale, walkable Warehouse District whose sense of historic architecture and pre-skyscraper genesis is central to its charm?  Remember, even though the hideous parking lot Stark is thankfully planning to eliminate with his much-needed development seems like a huge chasm, in context to what he's planning, its really a small area overall.

 

Even the Historic Warehouse District's masterplan allows for 20-story buildings along Superior and West 3rd. The masterplan then increasingly limits building heights the farther northwest into the WHD you go (I posted graphics from the masterplan earlier in this thread). There is a fairly large-scale building proposed at the corner of West 6th and St. Clair, however Stark proposes to have its sidewalk-fronting walls go up only about four floors or so, then feature a step back before the building rises further. The net effect is that, when you're walking next to the building, it will appear only four stories tall.

 

I suspect Stark is proposing such a large building because of the cost of the land on which it will be built. He said in the past that, given the relatively low rents downtown, the only way to make development economically viable on these high-priced parking lots is to offer lots of density. Its the price of our overdependency on cars here in Cleveland.

:-D  I'm just happy

The upper image with the shoreway shifted is probably a closeup of the original giant street grid plan that KJP posted again from page 4, and it usually included some form of the shoreway boulvevard conversion.

 

The two are different, however, but both imply changes to the shoreway.  The first shows a boulevard on more or less the Shoreway's current alignment.  The other angles the shoreway to the northeast somehow.

" don't see how such a building should be allowed to be torn down.  If built in 1830, I believe it would be the oldest in the WHD.  I had thought the little Hilliard office building on W. 9th (1840s, I believe) held the oldest title... apparently not."

 

 

Sorry, an old POS might be significant only because it's old, but it's still a POS. I'd be happy to take the first swing with a sledgehammer: