Jump to content


Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Great to see some kind of proposal for the South Marginal Road site near E55th. But I really like the notion of more “”Quay 55” type projects north of the shoreway. It’s hard to believe that opportunities to rent or own on the lakefront so close to downtown have not been further developed. I really believe this is a case where once these kinds of developments are made available, there will be a dynamic market for them - provided that they are done right. One design aspect I don’t like about Knez’s initial proposal is how a whole row of townhomes looks directly into the side of a big apartment building. There’s got to be a way to tweak that neighborhood design, keeping density - cutting unnecessary so- called green space and giving as many units as possible an open view.
  2. This is just gonna be more fun with each new floor! Is there a timetable for when this tower will top out? Seems like it took a few weeks getting from the 2nd to the 3rd floor.,,
  3. The city needs more office, retail and residential development before another entertainment district, especially one that lives and dies 10- 12 days a year, depending on the Browns’ fortunes, and is virtually next door to another entertainment district. And as much as I dislike the architecture of the JC, if a redevelopment and repurposing of it is possible,, that might be better than a district that cannot be sustained and becomes another dead zone not far into the future. But we don’t know yet if the JC complex will end up being rebuilt or repaired, so one step at a time I guess.
  4. I hope he meant the old one! But even though most of us aren’t fans, there’s a big hole in the skyline without that brutal thing!
  5. That’s correct and it was silly - a slightly slimmer and taller BP building would have been an even cooler resident on public square. Just like in Philly, for years you couldn’t build higher than the top of William Penn’s hat...but then something called ”progress” happened and look at Philadelphia now...or Manhattan, where 432 Park Avenue, Central Park Tower and Hudson Yards have all overwhelmed the mighty Empure State- I hope the Terminal Tower (one of my favorite buildings in the country) is surpassed again in Cleveland’s future, but that could take decades....(unless Sherwin Williams has an epic tower in mind - please!)
  6. Interesting revisiting these renderings in the abandoned projects thread - anyone know how accurate they are? I thought the Ameritrust Tower was about 200 feet higher than Key but this looks double that discrepancy.
  7. Speaking of being confused, I’ve seen various references to Cleveland’s metropolitan population, with one article sourced in the Forum saying that it had fallen to the 3rd largest in the state, behind Columbus and Cincy, which alarmed me. However, when including Akron- Canton in the metro, Cleveland is as high as the 14th or 15th biggest in the country. (See thoughtco.com) What is most commonly considered the Cleveland Metropolitan area?
  8. I agree - there’s got to be a neighborhood to sustain the restaurants and businesses that depend on a daily business - not just a weekend or event business - till we have more population down there, businesses will keep coming and not lasting.
  9. Why would the FAA require the Harbor Verandas to downsize from 5 stories to 2 or 3 when the 162’ RRHOF Tower is side by side with it? I agree that this project was scaled down too substantially when considering the uniqueness of the location and the appeal of the lakefront views. Wasn’t this project originally 5 stories? It now looks even shorter than the revised 3 story version that had been published a couple years ago. Still, though modest, this is at least a step in the right direction for Downtown Cleveland’s waterfront. I think I’m in a majority that feel the downtown lakefront has been strangely undervalued and underdeveloped - but perhaps the quick success of these Verandas will prove that “if you build it - they will come.” I wonder what Clevland’s waterfront, without an airport on it, could look like some day later in this century?
  10. Amen to that. Maybe the right city government leadership would make a difference?
  11. Seeing Ezra Stark’s quote in Crains, I’m more optimistic that we might actually see an even better Nucleus plan than the “new” rendering we glimpsed on January 23. There were some aspects of that design I liked and others I did not. I appreciate that a city block would be filled by that bulkier, shorter version - but I’m hoping there’s a more inspiring rendition still to come, hopefully with a bit less bulk and a little more uniqueness and elevation. Those were elements we certainly had in the 2014 version.
  12. So funny how there’s a synchronicity to how people think sometimes. Just last night, after processing the down-sizing of Nucleus, I thought of how being a fan of downtown Cleveland construction could be like being a Cleveland sports fan. Growing up with years of sports futility- championship dreams leading at best, to heart- breaking near misses followed forever by cruel video replays. It reminded me of the excitement of bold, Manhattan-like skyscraper visions - Ameritrust, Progressive and now, Nucleus -skyline transformers that might’ve been -but for a series of unfortunate events - all now relegated to the “cancelled projects” file. I thought the comparison might resonate for others but after logging in, I found a very similar observation had just been made (All credit to Mildtraumatic.) Does anyone have a rendering of what Cleveland would’ve looked like with all 3 aforementioned towers in the current skyline? I know it’s pure fantasy - but it would be fun to see. And yeah, , a 1200 foot tower might be a bit much in our town - but it would be a nice aesthetic problem to actually have. I just don’t happen to think we’ll see that from SW- or anybody else in the next decade or more. Key Towers’ reign wil probably be a very long one.
  13. When you think about the chances that Nucleus, in its 54 story version, was ever going to get built - juxtaposed with the renewed possibility that we actually replace two ugly surface lots, in a key location, - of course, we’ll take this new project without much hesitation. But as others have said , when you consider how Stark had described this project -“an iconic Terminal Tower for the 21st century - world-class and skyline changing” (all phrases used by Stark) - this is a real disappointment . Understanding that the new images are not final renderings, in my opinion, these buildings are not compelling or even especially attractive. This project still probably contains enough square footage to produce a 50-some story tower at a significantly reduced price tag from Nucleus 2014. I get that many, perhaps most, Forum members would rather have two 20-25 story structures , but there’s powerful symbolism created by the rise of a new skyscraper that challenges a city’s tallest towers and becomes a metaphor for that city’s growth. Honestly, I would’ve preferred to live with one remaining surface lot (hopefully to be built upon in the near future) in exchange for one new, skyline-changing tower like what they’re building in Detroit.
  14. A very comprehensive report with a lot there to be processed - among other takeaways it underscores the low number of non rental downtown residences. I celebrate the growth in downtown population, but my concern, is that many apartment owners evolve towards ownership - and we just don’t have many attractive downtown options in that regard.. For growth trends to be sustainable downtown in the long-term, we need to create compelling opportunities for buyers, not just renters.
  • Create New...