Map Boy

Well spoken, smackem! I like the classification of the Waterfront Line as a "boutique line." It sounds classy, but not very functional... As to new development along the Lakefront, we have our waterfront plan set out, but it's just a framework for development. The actualy projects won't come until we make a move on the future of the Innerbelt and the Shoreway. These public decisions and investments will push zoning changes, property acquisition and eventually, development. This is probably a long ways off, but most definitely something that the City, State and RTA should be thinking about as far as long-term planning for projects and funding.

From what I've seen, their projects fit their context quite well. The ones with the attached garages are in neighborhoods that have less density, less access to amenities and would more likely attract families with children. With children, car(s) become more of a necessity...or so I've heard. Wimwar, maybe you can tell me about this in a few months? Many of their sites look to have either rear parking or none at all. One example is Boulevard Townhomes, where the site is in the heart of a vibrant commercial district and walking to the grocery is a feasible option. The parking here is tucked in the back...nice! I'm not into the Franklin Townhomes model, where the garage is up front, but that's probably due to a lack of space in the rear of the site. Not sure, but probably a fair assumption.

Clvlndr, if ever my comments come across as "sassy," please remember that I'm not into "emoticoning," so you may be missing a sarcastic wink here and there. I agree...we're all sparking discussion that would otherwise not be had. And I will just add that I agree with your assessment of the Lakefront extension as a priority, not only because of its potential to spur development along the Shoreway, but also because it is true that the Near West Side is pretty well served by the Red Line. Therefore, the streetcar line that I spoke of is less of a priority as far as a development driver. However, there is no physical plan set in motion, as yet, on the Lakefront. There is a population to serve in the Near West Side, where there really isn't one to speak of along the eastern Shoreway. I'm all for pushing this thing forward with all of my energy once all the studies are done and contracts are going out. This could be a while, though. The other thing about the streetcar is that it could serve that new population sprouting up along Superior and Payne, just east of Downtown. I'm going to look into how Portland's was funded and see how much of it was private developer-driven...I'm curious. And I am ever-anxious for the Cuyahoga Valley Park to reach Downtown Cleveland and the lake. The addition of the train is an excellent bonus! Anyone have any estimated dates on progress north from Independence?

Just checked out the Tesco website...they're involved in a few projects that we've been discussing on here, but also quite a few that I've never heard about! Be sure to check out the whole site: http://www.tescobuilders.com/newhomes.html Here's a graphic from the Mueller Condos:

Great news! I saw the abbreviated article in Crain's this morning and was hoping somebody would hook us up! I'm wondering if I know these buildings...since I did my little walking tour less than a month ago, I might recognize them if somebody was to post pictures...hmmm??? I'm remembering one particular building on Prospect on the south side of the street that had an old tavern in it...could this be the one?

I don't know if a lot of that "anti-streetcar" rant was directed at me, but either way, I'm going to stand my ground! And clarify things a bit from my end... And let me start by saying that I'm thrilled at the opportunity to have this discussion with people who care about our city...regardless of what we agree and disagree on...we're putting it on the table and that's an important step. Big ups to us! Ok, the "streetcar" that I spoke of would not be a conversion as you suggested Clvlndr. This would be an entirely new segment with connections (transfers) to the existing lines, but would not in any way replace them. There are several reasons why I feel that streetcars would be feasible and preferrable in parts of Downtown Cleveland and travelling out into the former streetcar built neighborhoods of Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway. First of all, the cost is far less. Streetcars can share right-of-ways with automobiles and preclude the cost of purchasing land for construction and operation. Second, they are more flexible in their capacity and capacity building. We're not expecting to pack these things like the old days, but we could see some major transit use and TOD increases along their lines...namely on the eastern end of Downtown and out into Detroit Shoreway and south into Clark and Tremont. I cite the Portland model because they have successfully built both high-capacity light rail (MAX) and lower-capacity streetcars through their center city. Also, the City of Portland's population recently surpassed Cleveland in the 2000 census, growing to nearly 530,000. Either way, the regions are very similar in size. The major difference is that the Center City Portland area contains well over 20,000 residents, in addition to businesses and institutions. I believe that the investments in light rail and streetcar lines have driven this growth since the 1980s and it will continue to grow as the public commitment to these projects entices private development. There are obviously some remarkable differences in the development models between the two cities as well. Namely, Oregon's Urban Growth Boundaries, which have pushed development back into the core cities in the region. However, population growth in Portland is outpacing job growth, causing their unemployment rate to balloon. Now, the trains: the MAX required the acquisition of land through the Downtown area and out into the 'burbs, both of which it did quite effectively, but at a high price. It's lines have exceeded ridership projections and recent expansions have come in under budget. The Portland Streetcar has exceeded ridership projections as well and has already seen a major expansion only 3 years into operation. The streetcar shares a right-of-way with automobiles and didn't even require the streets to be shut down during construction. Their waiting areas are similar in size to a major bus stop, but have better rider information and gather income from advertising along the route. The major differences between the two are the size of the cars, their speed, and the routes they take. It would be very difficult to wind the MAX down these small streets and navigate the transition from center-to-center in Downtown Portland. However, the small, flexible streetcar is designed to do just that. The Max is designed to hit a few major stations in the Center City and then take to the interstate routes for high-speed connections to suburban hubs and the airport. One other thing to note is that most of Portland's Downtown streets are one-way and with the exception of Burnside, there are no major avenues (Superiors or Euclids or St. Clairs) to be found. The Portland Streetcar opened while I was living in Downtown Portland in 2001. All along its route, new shops were opening, facades were being renovated and there were a number of gigantic housing and retail developments popping up along its route where land had sat idle for years prior. They have been able to use this as a tool for development, much in the way that I would like to see Cleveland use the BRT and potential additions such as a Downtown streetcar and expansions in the light rail along the Lakefront. I agree with you there clvlndr...our greatest potential for a BIG IDEA lies in the potential expansion of the Waterfront line in conjunction with the rezoning and redesign of the Lakefront and Shoreway. This is a no-brainer...so let's not screw it up!

I'd be happy with anything that puts another couple passenger cars on some tracks! And who's this mayor of Silver Lake??? We can get rid of him/her, right? If this was considered a rail link to better the airline industry, wouldn't the Fed get behind it more than an average mass transit project?

I love what I'm hearing. The commuter rail to Akron/Canton is dynamite...and I fly into the airport there just as often as Cleveland because the price is often better. This type of thing would help both Cleveland and Canton/Akron from a business marketing standpoint...really connecting the region. TOD is the most practical and necessary step right now, I'm in full agreement on that. But I'm most psyched about the potential to tie rail lines into the Shoreway project, east and west. And if not during the initial construction phases, at least planning for the addition of rail later, once people have started to move in. Though I believe building it first could drive the type of development we'd all like to see along the new Lakefront neighborhoods.

I agree with MayDay that the Rose Building in Cleveland makes my list...as does the 1889 Society for Savings Building on Public Square. (thanks to MayDay @ www.clevelandskyscrapers.com for the images!)

let's be fair now, I wouldn't put DK on a list of Cleveland villains...

I will quote my previous reply in response to some recent posts: Another thing that came up at the casino panel at CSU earlier this month was that when Indiana voters approved the gambling initiative and casino construction ensued, it was focused primarily on the state's borders, away from Indiana residents...close to Ohio residents. Now that's a strategy! And it's an interesting twist on NIMBY (not in my backyard) proponents, where Indiana voters may say, "we don't want that junk near our residents, but we'd sure like the money that it'll bring in!" So, they built it in their backyard (technically), but in reality it's a hell of a lot closer to loads of Ohio residents who had no say in the matter. So, Indiana can just ignore the possibility that there are any negatives because they're only felt by out-of-staters. Kinda messed up if you ask me! (I know this is an oversimplification and will accept corrections or clarifications!)

that video is ridiculous... or maybe i'm just so out of touch with what attracts undergrads these days...

anyone seen any renderings/drawings of this addition???

As I was tinkering with the following map, I began to wonder what the possibilities are for one or all of the East Side rapid lines to be realigned between Tower City and East 55th. We have three light rail lines that reach Downtown from the East Side alone and only one stop between Public Square and E. 55th and it's in a totally worthless spot...when we're considering the realignment, reconstruction of the Inner Belt bridge, can we PLEASE explore the option of realigning at least one of the lines up through the existing rail yard near the central post office and Tri-C Metro (the area highlighted in minty blue)...down Broadway or Woodland or something where there are actually PEOPLE and potential redevelopment sites??? Additionally, if we do end up bumping the bridge south a little bit, this realignment could serve any new development that opens up. Anyone think this is at all possible??? Please note that the following map does not contain all stations on the rail lines or BRT and simply suggests ideas for potential route additions/changes. I'm no expert...just a dreamer! (sorry if it's hard to read...)

Wow! This is like a freakin candy store for me! I love this type of transit imagineering! Now, I'm going to need everyone to submit visuals with their proposals...I need maps! I'll just briefly comment on a few things that have already been said...namely, the short list of items that the RTA should be attending to. First off, shouldn't the RTA and the City and the County already have transit oriented development offices/programs? If we've justified spending around $200 million on the Silver Line alone and are throwing millions at other projects like moving or updating Red Line stations, don't you think that the TOD office should accompany this money? (rhetorical...I know you all agree) Take Seattle for example...they've passed two major rail initiatives that are currently in various stages of planning and development. They have a fabulous website dedicated to "station area planning" (Check it out at http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/transportation/ppmp_sap_home.htm) and the public entities in the region may be able to capture a great deal of the land value growth around the major infrastructure projects that they are executing. Everyone's talking about it, from non profits like Eco City Cleveland to the RTA to private developers to suburbs like Shaker Heights. It just makes so much sense! Next, the Waterfront Line loop through Downtown does have its allure, but I'd only be 100% behind it if it had the potential to foster future rail growth by possibly creating a new southerly route down Broadway or some such alignment. I think we could do better to promote our loop buses...and yes, they should be free! Until these have reached some measure of critical mass, I don't think we can justify a loop extension of the Waterfront Line simply for the purpose of connecting back to the existing lines as the head east. I would, however, get behind the extension of eastern and western lakefront lines, or lines down major avenues like Detroit or Lakeside as they head along the Lakefront that will be redeveloped over the decades to come. If we extend them as land is acquired for development, we can fund them with revenues from these developments. I believe very strongly in this as a necessary component of the Lakefront plan. I am also strongly in support of several alignments of new streetcar lines, similar to those created in Portland, Oregon. Portland's new "old" streetcar line serves a smaller ridership base than its light rail, but has served as a development incentive and instigator along several segments of its route. It was anchored by major population and retail hubs and institutions upon construction, but has seen major growth along its route and continues to extend further into underdeveloped areas. I see this serving routes such as the Superior/St. Clair Avenue growth corridors heading east through CSU and into Midtown and west across the Detroit-Superior Bridge to serve West 25th and Detroit Avenue. It could split off at West 25th, with one line continuing west into Detroit Shoreway, eventually connecting with the Red Line and with future Lakefront light rail extensions (or taking their place) and proceeding into Lakewood. The West 25th Street line could connect with Clark Avenue via a diversion through Tremont. The fact that a critical mass of residents probably doesn't exist at present along the line (the two Tremont buses were nearly empty every time I took them from Tremont to W. 25th or Downtown) could hinder the proposal, but current works-in-progress like housing along West 25th could push it at least that far for now, leaving room for growth at later dates. This is all very exciting, whether or not anyone with money or political sway is behind these ideas. It takes dreamers with confidence to get transit projects like these moving...so to speak.

by the way, great visuals as usual MayDay

First of all, we should make the Scranton Peninsula its own thread, though it probably already has several... And second, yes, the development of this land is something that ABSOLUTELY MUST happen! If there were ever a case for eminent domain, wouldn't this be it??? Look at all the land and bridge connections to our fastest growing inner-city neighborhoods! And think about the type of neighborhood that could spring up here...something unique to the entire country...Cleveland's geographically signature neighborhood...surrounded by a winding river and historic bridges...a quick walk from EVERYTHING!!! Cities have used eminent domain to knock down buildings and acquire property that people actually live in...this site contains a bunch of storage facilities and barren land! This is maddening! There is a problem with the public using eminent domain to turn the property over to a private developer (scaravelli), but we've talked on other threads about the threat of eminent domain pushing current owners to either sell or develop themselves. I know there are people working on this, but what's restraining them from pushing it forward??? Aside from not wanting to piss of Forest City, that is... I can apply the previous paragraph to any number of infuriating development gaps in Cleveland (WHD parking lots, Davenport Bluffs, E. 12th Street lots, and on), but this one is right at the top of the list.

Thank you for clearing that up KJP...I feel like I've been saying this over and over again throughout this thread and that it just hasn't registered! This is NOT going to be a public housing project in the traditional/stigmatized sense. The affordable units will be mixed throughout and will look JUST LIKE the market rate units. And when the price is between $126k and $400k, we're talking a nice variety with some high-end stuff in there! Phase II will concentrate even more heavily on he market-rate, to my understanding. And think of the park overlooking the valley and downtown and the new retail that will connect the Detroit end of West 25th to the Lorain end...

An update in the March 20th PD by architecture critic Steven Litt that is characterized by the following quote: check it out at http://www.cleveland.com/artsandevents/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/1111228291177590.xml

The only timeline I know about is the one concerning actual HOPE VI funding. That is $8.5 million from the government that has to be used by 2006 (beginning or end, I don't know). As for a construction timeline or the more realistic question of whether or not they intend to use the money...I've tried to get in touch with the Ohio City Near West Development Corporation and have gotten zero response. I even tried to get buddy-buddy with them, being a CDC worker myself! No dice...

I'm really happy to see this discussion has reached the press and is being discussed on a serious level. It was a common subject of conversation during my two days on campus in CSU's College of Urban Affairs and I think this is the only way that I would support the building of a new convention center. It has to be done right and it has to serve a greater purpose than just visitors and our local corporate interests. If the public of Cuyahoga County is going to pay for it, they should see some benefits...and we know this won't come in the form of direct revenues from the center. So, why not address some of Downtown Cleveland's basic needs??? And make it affordable for residents to use. How many of our publicly funded megaprojects are exclusive of the general public because of their price? The cost of a day at Jacobs Field? The Rock Hall? Cleveland Browns Stadium? I think this is an important discussion and the decision on a convention center should be postponed as long as necessary to get it right. We're going to have to live with this thing and its cost for the foreseeable future! As for the Scranton Peninsula...I'm not the expert by any means, but I think we're all in favor of seeing it put to productive use. It's a key link between the East and West side and it could serve as the single largest development project in Cleveland's history and it should be done right. Plus, it is critical to the completion of the Cuyahoga Valley Towpath Trail. Just viewing the site on an aerial photo tells the outsider a lot...it is large, central, underutilized, and represents a HUGE gap between several very key neighborhoods in our fair city.

holy crap! what a stupid move! dan gilbert's not going to make a lot of friends in cleveland with b.s. like this... but who am i, I don't live there, i just follow from afar...and wear my lebron james fanclub wristband every day.

believe me, i've imagined it...

ooooh! I love inclines! Really, though, there's nothing cutting off this bend of greenery from the river, where on the other side we've got lots of property issues. Also, access doesn't look to be too complicated. From what I've seen in other cities, riverfront parks can be highly successful, especially if they're connected by pedestrian and bike paths to residential areas. In this case, that would be the West Bank of the Flats and Ohio City. Imagine this piece connecting someday to an accessible Whiskey Island by a greenway through the West Bank. And if the Tow Path Trail ever makes it all the way up here, whoo boy!

Back on the subject of this project... While back in Cleve-o a couple weeks ago, I took the Red-Line from W. 25th and got a pretty good view of the east side of this site from the bridge over the Cuyahoga. I was surprised at how nice the slope looks already. I'm sure there are improvements needed to make it an accessible city park, but there are already some nice trees and such there and the views must be amazing. The kicker is that they might have to do some major structural work in order to support the large development at the top of the bluff, so that might knock some of this out. That would be unfortunate, but still worth it in my eyes. Anyways, iteresting to see with a new perspective...