327

I'm disappointed and I suspect alternatives were never seriously considered. But I think the replacement will be much better than a vacant lot or a CVS. Perfect? Of course not, but this is hardly the worst teardown we've had recently. CSU tore down the (more ornate) Corlett building and replaced it with a big lawn fronting Euclid. CCF tore down the awesome OCPM tower for a surface lot. I do hope, as someone here suggested earlier, that they at least build this casino garage to allow for a tower to be added on top, a la 515. Strongly agree.

I'm just saying plenty of things happen that never get a lick of press attention. And with stories that are covered, ones I witnessed or heard witness accounts of, I've often found the press smoothing things over rather than sensationalilzing. That's not to say they never sensationalize, but I think they typically err in the other direction.

I agree, but in my experience it's not to near the same degree. In my experience it is... big time.

This would not be my primary metric in determining the signifcance of an event.

From that article, one gets the impression ODOT didn't think this through very well.

Luckily, we wouldn't be the first ones attempting this. I'm sure someone's developed an answer to the "awful fire chief" dilemma.

Having 24 hour bus service along Detroit is great for Downtown, and Lakewood, and everywhere in between. It's slow and they get sparse late at night, but the bottom line is you always have a way to get home. And that's awesome.

Not to freak you out or anything, but bullets that miss often find unintended hosts. I don't think it's possible to overdramatize 3 people getting shot on Public Square. That's a big deal. There should be at least one officer patrolling Public Square 24 hours a day. Cameras schmameras.

The last one had an evocative name like The Spikey Skull. That wasn't it, but something along those lines.

This is not the first violent club to set up shop in the basement of the 75 building recently.

Friends of mine have enjoyed living at Quay 55, but yeah, I've heard about those conflicts too. What kind of rental are you looking for? Quay 55 is somewhat unique as a rehab/conversion right on the lake. There are a few buildings in the warehouse dist downtown that aren't exactly "on" the lake but may be close enough for your purposes. Beyond that, there are several waterfront high rises in Lakewood and Euclid.

If you take Coventry a little bit south of Fairmount, you hit Shaker Blvd a block east of Shaker Square. A worthy diversion.

The loft bldg is at 12th and St. Clair. The townhomes are around 15th and Superior, quite a bit closer to this.

I never had a problem with it, unless I missed the last train and had to walk all the way up Fairhill from the Healthline. That sobered me up real good.

Word. And if you're somewhere along 271, it's not easy to get anywhere that's not also along 271.

I know, but I'm just saying that Gordon Square had much better "bones" than anything west of Lake Ave. It would take a near complete rebuild (which was not what was done at Gordon Square) to make this area nice. I think you're right about that, but I also think fixing up this stretch of Lake Ave would benefit Gordon Square more than anything we do to the Shoreway. Imagine being able to travel from the Rocky River to Gordon Square, all on surface streets, through nothing but premier neighborhood. Right now that part of Lake between Clifton and Detroit is the only not-nice segment of the journey, and it's a main entranceway to Gordon Square from the west. Even once the W73rd ramp is in, I'm guessing we don't want nightlife traffic routed down a residential sidestreet to get in and out of the neighborhood.

Ohio really needs to clean this up. I know there's an effort to but it needs to pick up steam. US 422 between Cleveland and Warren is the worst. It's a 4-lane divided federal highway set at 45, even though 2-lane county roads coming off it are at 55. Geauga County Sheriffs are all over that stretch and it's not because they're going after locals. That's the only direct route between the two metro areas and they know it.

I'm not opposed to high levels of police staffing, I just think it's absurd to concentrate the staffing on traffic detail. Ashtabula County says "everyone buy a gun, we can't protect you" while I-75 is crawling with cops who focus on minor infractions. Makes no sense at all.

California has reassigned some of its HP to help the PD in Stockton. Can Ohio do that? I'm not aware of any instances where it's happened. Most states simply have a state police force and don't limit it to traffic duty. Seems wasteful, especially since Ohio has so many cities (and rural counties) with major budget problems.

Another issue is that one car can haul your whole group while transit charges by the head. The bigger the group, the bigger the disincentive. Maybe RTA could set up some kind of "group night out" fare packages. And yeah the midnight shutdown makes our trains practically useless for those interested in downtown nightlife and events.

I've never understood why so many bungalows were built right on the lake. "Waterfront" and "starter home" is such an odd combination.

Mopping would be another possibilty, one that's cheaper than building a new station. The older stations wouldn't be so bad if not for the constant urine issues. I'm sure RTA thinks it's saving money by not having any bathrooms in them, not even at Tower City which is ridiculous, but how much ridership and funding is lost by associating RTA with the smell of piss? In that sense toilets might pay for themselves.

However one may feel about the views expressed here by Clevelander17, I think it's important to engage those views and understand them. I think he does a good job of demonstrating the reason we have all these little munis to begin with, which is the same reason so many area residents stand against regionalism today. It's a hurdle that must be overcome before regionalism can take off. We need to have an answer for these views, because they're popular and widespread.

I can't put a number on it but a considerable amount of s-f housing has been built in Cleveland recently, with city backing. Jackson considers this a major accomplishment. These new homes are at least partially responsible for the growth seen in pockets of Central and Fairfax in the 2010 census. And then there are all the larger ones in Hough, far more than can be seen from Chester alone. Feather in the cap of the late Fannie Lewis. Then we have the aforementioned UC incident, in which a councilman held up an apartment project on the (espoused) basis that he'd prefer to see more s-f homes built there instead. Regardless of... whatever McCleveland was referring to... the councilman was only able to do this because the zoning was s-f, forcing the developer to get a variance. I don't see how all this evidence could lead one to believe that the city has not been actively pursuing the construction of additional s-f homes. That's exactly what the city has been doing and it's no secret. That's why I cringe when city leaders say "we're all about TOD" or some such. Instead of addressing the market imbalance that pro-TOD policies could perhaps mitigate, the city has pretty much done the exact opposite and exacerbated the imbalance. You say I should focus on what the city CAN do. What the city CAN do is change the zoning code. What happens after that is speculation, of course. No argument there. But the immediate question is whether the pros of reforming the zoning code outweigh the cons. To me they do. Will doing so, in and of itself, cause Manhattan to sprout along Euclid Avenue? No. That's not what anyone (save you) is suggesting. I might even call that a straw man. All that I'm suggesting is that the city actually DO whatever it CAN do to facilitate, or at least avoid obstructing, the kind of multi-family transit-oriented redevlopment we're talking about. I don't get how "reforming the zoning code won't solve all our problems" justifies not doing it, if even one problem can be solved by doing it. Why not just go ahead and solve that problem? Then we have one less, and that's a good thing, right?

On that we agree. Ultimately the code should change to accomodate supply and demand, not vice versa. But the code should also reflect a coherent plan for the future. The article stated that m-f demand is going unmet in a market with an overabundance of s-f structures for which demand is comparatively low. This is not my own bungled musing... it's stated in the article as a basis for the report's recommendations. If you disagree with that premise, I can understand why you might disagree with the conclusion. Neither I nor the Center is suggesting that zoning reform will result in magic of any kind.