327

Exactly. Shaker Square is super nice, just the way it is, probably the best example of urban planning in Cleveland. I've never driven up the Blvd into the square and thought "this is so wrong." But that's what I think every time I'm on Buckeye. So why tear up Shaker Square first? It's like we're obligated to start another giant landscaping boondoggle as soon as we finish the last one. Fixing up storefronts instead would not turn us all into communists. It's a better idea than wasting another fortune on jackhammers, hog manure and dead little trees. Most of these forestry plans are just grass and concrete, as usual. No it will not feel like wilderness. Not even a little. So why does the plan focus on creating a sense of wilderness? We're talking about Shaker freaking Square! The city itself has gone off topic.

The current landscaping is fine. It certainly isn't $400,000 worth of wrong. And it is absolutely insane to pursue an "immersion in nature" strategy for any dense urban neighborhood like Shaker Square. Also insane is the term "dense urban gardens," which conflates city planning with floral arrangement. The best way to help Shaker Square would be to spend that $400,000 fixing up dilapidated buildings nearby.

The greenspace they're talking about is the useless kind, treelawns and setbacks and pocket parks. Holdovers from outdated planning logic. Too small to resemble nature or offer any kind of escape, but big enough to create a maintenance hassle that never ends.

Ohio's social policies are antiquated and it treats its cities poorly. Coastal tech companies are known to prefer otherwise. Cleveland does what it can to compensate, but the governance problems really hold it back IMO. Would you make a billion dollar deal with Armond Budish right now? Feds just took his computer.

"The planned density seems somewhat relentless. Consider reducing the number of units..." People keep telling me the market insists on low-density development for Cleveland. And there's nothing anyone can do to affect the godlike will of the market! But both of those ideas are consistently proven false-- the market keeps proposing higher density and local government keeps shooting it down.

Didn't we just go through this, maybe a decade back? We did. Local government is just filthy here. This above all is why we can't get anything done.

Hate to say it, but I assume Amazon would go back to their earlier short list rather than looking beyond it. We didn't make that cut. And unless I missed something, we still don't know what kind of pitch was made on our behalf.

Yeah I'm not sure why she's declaring a victory. Cleveland would love to have that Amazon office. Must be nice, being too good for it.

That submit date applies to the small cell apps and that's only part of the project. They still haven't issued all the fiber permits. And issuing 15 permits doesn't solve the problem of needing 20. By and large, you need to get past the permitting phase before you start moving equipment around. If one item can't get permits, it might blow the whole plan. And the city should be aware of that by now.

What an absurd response. Granting nearly all the permits is like selling a car with nearly four wheels. Either you have the permits or you don't.

What if it's not stupid? As you point out, people seem to think it's worth discussing. I feel dangerously off-topic so that's it for me.

They're not even trying to fill it, they're trying to offload it for $1.3 million as a retail condo. Without a tenant. "We have zero desire to manage this... it's not worth the effort... but perhaps you feel differently. The Avenue District."

I've been involved with this first hand, and no, AT&T is not lying about how hard Cleveland is to deal with. We all know that poor neighborhoods are poorly served. That's not much of a counterpoint when these people are trying to install better service and they're getting jerked around. And it's like this every time. I wish more entities would step forward like AT&T to let Cleveland's people know how bad the business climate is here-- and why. If they're treating Ma Bell like this, imagine what it's like for smaller players with no pull.

Those suburbs represent what Cleveland used to look like. A lot of Cleveland has been torn down and the larger structures went first. That was dumb. Prior to that, it had Lakewood-plus density throughout most of its land mass. No not like OTR but not that far off, especially the corresponding area just east of downtown.

From a supply and demand perspective, yes you do. As prices drop, there is a point on the profit curve at which other land uses begin to make more sense. Tax rates on surface parking can move that point along the curve. This is not about controlling the behavior of the general public. It never should be. I agree we should invest in transit, but we can't expect different consumer behavior until after we've done that. Raising the parking tax should not be about punishing citizens for driving-- most of them have no choice-- it should be about punishing landowners for failing to develop anything, for taking easy profits at the community's expense.

Adding other options should make surface lots less lucrative.

If Cleveland were intact this would be no contest. I'm impressed by how well it still does in these stats, after destroying all that multi-story building stock.

Radius measurements don't work when comparing ports with inland cities. Density of a built environment is determined by policy choices, not by physical geography.

Feminism is popular among privileged western white people. It doesn't get much play beyond that group and there are plenty within that group-- of both genders-- who reject it completely. Even the womens' march participants themselves have noted how little diversity there is among them. The last thing they need is racial conflict on their agenda.

It's not seen as a dying way of life everywhere and 60 jobs is not a ceiling here. It makes no sense to build a complex like the one in Lorain and not use it. Even if it's nothing but robots paying income tax to the city that's better than letting a giant factory fall apart. Those things don't grow on trees.

We should be elated to get a parking tower on a current surface lot. And it comes with a whole new city block? I'll take three more, thank you.

You list two very compelling attributes, and the political popularity stems from how desirable these jobs are.

Still worth pursuing because they pay better than Amazon. Some time back we had a discussion here about the Nashville economy, and for months afterward I kept getting ads like "Tennessee: The place for your factory." That should tell us something.

Either have windows or don't.

Lighter is not better in the snow. Those 70s boats might have had trouble going straight but at least they could go. And the ground effects we have these days are a problem when it gets really deep like this. Today I'm seeing a lot of trucks getting stuck. Cars aren't even trying.