urbanlife

i think the problem is that the FEB plans call for a complete reconfiguring of the street grid and rebuilding of supporting infrastructure. so, although i agree that these building appear to be worth saving, in the overall scheme of FEB, that building could not exist within the new street grid supporting the boardwalk, etc. not saying i agree with the decision, but the port, city, wolstein, etc. are all on board with the reconfigured streets. it is also why the project can't start in small pieces until all of the land is aquired. it's not like euclid ave where they are just replacing utilities in the same ditch.

don't know specifically. the garage is pretty crazy with the 701 lakeside garage llc (or something similar) owning the garage portion subject to a TON of easements and long term leases. - RTA has the entire basement level and some of the first level - hat factory/hoyt block has first floor space - bradley building / cloak factory have long term leases on 2d floor - pinnacle building has floor 3 through wherever the garage stops. i know people in the pinnacle trying to rent an extra space for $150, but i think the bradley building offers parking for $120 a month on the 2d floor.

it really depends on exactly where you live. if you are on top of a bar, it can be loud. if your windows face w.6 (specifically, the bedroom window), it can be loud. if you have old windows (which many buildings do), you have to use some clear caulk or something and seal the air gaps around the wood frames. this can make a huge difference in sound, for only a couple of dollars. but, i think that w.6 is also somewhat calmer than it was a few years ago, although the club/bar/restaurant mix is also different. i live in this area and have rarely heard anything, save for a few friday or saturday nights after or before a big game or event.

it looked like the v lounge was open again a few weeks ago. did anyone else see this? v lounge was/is a great space, but had such an inconsistent schedule (closed for private parties or no reason at all), that i could never count on it being open the nights i wanted to go in.

there used to be a couple of fast food storefronts downtown - wendys, arbys and mcdonalds, for example, but i'm sure there were others. my understanding was that the operating cost was too high for basically a lunch crowd, and that they needed a full time security person to move along the homeless or troublemakers at other times of the day. in the foodcourt setting, the security costs are shared/included, along with restrooms, maintenance, etc. i agree that it's a missing piece that would (or should) add activity to the street. i also think that the big cleveland headquartered companies need to make a street presence in downtown - a sherwin williams innovation center/flagship store open to the public, an american greetings flagship store or kiosks at tourist areas where you could send an electronic card, perhaps a return of stouffers/nestle to downtown with a restaurant or culinary innovation center. does anyone have any idea on what terms forest city is leasing the TC spaces - base rent per square foot, % of sales? i was shocked to see panera closed.

most of the ODOT staffers/managers are not political appointees. even though strickland can change the overall direction and priorities by appointing a new director who controls the $$, many of the day-to-day actors are the same, and i think this is part of the problem - they haven't changed their focus on what ODOT should be doing.

this building is very nice. i've been in the building numerous times in both the apartments and the commercial spaces. i don't think the apartments are very loud (some of the commercial spaces directly over blind pig can be loud at night, but, most of the commercial space is empty at that time). i guess it depends on who your neighbors are though, as the floors are all wood. the building management seemed pretty competent and responsive, and even made suggested improvements to apartments before moving in. the parking is also pretty convenient in the same deck as the pinnacle/cloak on lakeside.

Here is one of the ordinances: 507.13 Clearing Sidewalks of Snow and Debris Every owner, occupant or person having charge of any tenement, building, lot or land fronting on any avenue, street, alley or other public highway of the City, shall clear the whole sidewalk in front of the tenement, building, lot or land, of snow and ice, before 9:00 a.m. of each day; provided, that if the sidewalk in front of the tenement, building, lot or land is not flagged or paved, a pathway thereon shall be cleared of ice and snow to the width of at least five feet. If from any cause it is impossible to remove all the snow and ice which may adhere to such sidewalk, then every such owner, occupant or person having charge shall cover the snow or ice as shall so remain with such coating of ashes, sand or other substance as may be necessary to render travel safe and convenient. Every owner, occupant or person having charge of any tenement, building, lot or land fronting upon any avenue, street, alley or other public highway of the City, shall keep the entire width of the sidewalk, from curb to lot line, free and clear of all earth, sand, brick, stone, rubbish, dead trees and dead branches of trees, or other material which from any cause whatever has accumulated or may accumulate upon the sidewalk above the established grade of the same, and shall also cut and remove from the sidewalk between the lot and curb line, all weeds, grass and vegetable growths that are more than four inches in height. If the owner of any building, lot or land fails to comply with the provisions of this section, then the Director of Public Service may remove the snow, ice, earth, sand, brick, stone, rubbish, dead trees or dead branches of trees, or other material, weeds, grass and vegetable growths, from the sidewalk in front of the premises of such owner, and may charge the expense thereof to such owner. If upon being notified, he fails to pay the City the amount of such expense, then the amount may be certified by the proper City officer to the County Auditor, and the same shall act as a lien upon the property of such owner, and shall be collected as provided for in the case of special assessments. *** since RTA has temporary construction easements in this area, it seems that they are actually controlling this section of street, and may therefore be responsible to provide a 5 foot cleared walkway or providing sand or ashes for 5 feet of sidewalk.

there are city ordinances that require building owners to clear sidewalk and public areas in front of their buildings in the CBD. i've never seen this enforced (like many other things that are against the law or required), but perhaps some attention to city council, with appropriate pics, would get the ball moving as well from an enforcement perspective. we need more downtown business owners and residents to take an "ownership" attitude, follow the laws, do the right thing, etc. Taking the easy way out and saying "its not my problem" or "its always been done this way", isn't going to get our downtown neighborhood to the level that we expect and deserve.

it seems that if the city / community / developers thought this area was important (which it is, imo), they would be looking for federal funds to help stabilize the hill to support some kind of development. this type of federal support would allow the river wall to be built in this area (where none currently exists), shore up a road used for commercial traffic, and make an area close to everything available for some kind of development, instead of being left as a fenced in, overgrown wasteland.

another example is el camino real or middlefield road/central expresswaythat runs through silicon valley in california. it is 35 to 45mph, is at least 7 lanes at each intersection (not including a large landscaped median), follows rail tracks (for caltrain), has multiple intersections, and carries a LOT of traffic without much disruption. google has some good street views of this area: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=palo+alto&ie=UTF8&ll=37.403028,-122.107244&spn=0.013807,0.024633&z=15&om=0&layer=c&cbll=37.404608,-122.101017 cleveland (and ohio as a whole) needs to get on board with smarter traffic management systems - ie, smart traffic lights (don't hold a pedestrian cross sign for 45 seconds when no one is crossing, ability to determine if there is 1, 2, or 10 cars waiting to turn or cross and set timing appropriately) edit: added link

' but i think that johnnys is a partner as well. i don't know what percent.

i understand that it is shown in the FEB plans. my question was the timing of the actual building. i wonder if the waterfront loop site is farther along/already ready. we've heard before that the first buildings of FEB will be commercial. also, i've seen discussion of a building at this location regardless of what happens with FEB. with pesht, so far, everything seems to be pointing to "all or nothing" with respect to individual buildings. i wonder if some of the big tenants don't want that uncertainty (if it exists).

iirc, the original hours of WSM complemented the old Central Market, which was open on the other days. unfortunately, after the central market disappeared, no major changes were made to the WSM days of operation. it seems that they have to balance the vendors interests as well. i'm not sure that many of them would want to be open more days or hours. even with the existing extended hours, many of the stands seem to close around 3 (or at an unpredictable schedule), so if you really want something you have to be there before 1, at least on a weekday.

i wonder if there is a timing difference between the 2 sites. could the waterfront loop building be built sooner? maybe it doesn't require the commitment from the other pesht tenants for the project to move forward?

yes, but it will most likely require at least 1 transfer. most of the transit from lakewood will terminate in downtown, or just east of downtown (but not as far east as the clinic). depending on your location in lakewood, you could also ride the red line train which will take you all the way to university circle where you could then take the clinic shuttle bus, ride a bike, or perhaps walk (although the clinic is a decent distance from the train station). what area or street in lakewood have you decided on? You can try and use the RTA trip planner to see what is available. it doesn't always work 100% depending on your routes though, and sometimes doesn't provide the most logical routing: http://tripplanner.gcrta.org/

everytime i've been there for dinner on a thurs, fri or saturday, the place has been packed. i don't really know about the lunch crowds though.

from riding in other cities / countries, this seems like a very aggressive way to view a transfer. i've used to old transfer system to go from downtown to the west side market and back within 1 hour, for 1 ride. if i now have to pay 3.50 for this same trip, i'm likely to just drive and park for free (or maybe take the 66x there and the 20, 22 or 35 back to work within this new system). was there widespread use of this feature or did someone think they could wring a few extra dollars out of the passes? it seems like this has a negative effect of making the transit system less friendly/convenient/cost effective.

this is the improvement from the ECP transit construction, prioritized lights, and less stations. i thought that RTA was going to publish a new #6 timetable for this route to reflect the improved speed, but it looks like they are sticking with the published schedule for now.

clvlndr, my opinion is based more on the residential component involved in this project and other downtown projects. i live downtown, and i use the RTA almost every day. however, i don't think i could or would live downtown if i couldn't have at least 1 car in my household. whether for business, shopping, entertainment - it just isn't easy at certain times of the day (and sometimes never) to get the solon, akron, strongsville, medina, westlake, etc. let alone the other side of downtown for that matter as McCleveland mentioned. and, depending on what type of business you are involved in, saying "the bus doesn't run there" isn't considered a good excuse for not making a meeting. also, i'm meeting more and more people who are "forced" to take jobs in the suburbs, b/c that is where a lot of job growth has been over the last couple of decades, but choose to live downtown. they expect to keep their car as the transit options either don't serve these less dense areas or the areas are only served a few times a day.

during the day the current county owned parking garage is often full - with the tower, rotunda, 1010, lower euclid, etc. all empty. i'd think that by adding a hotel, commercial/retail space, hundreds of housing units, that there will be demand for some additional parking that is not supported by the current garage. another poster really hit the point on the head: cleveland does not have the substantial transit systems that exist in other regions. outside of daylight hours during the workweek, many areas are innaccessible on transit. imo, we can continue to encourage walkable neighborhoods, and develop in ways that encourage people to do more walking and transit use than driving, but in cleveland, for the near future, people who have a choice, will likely continue to choose to at least have access to a car.

I thought that RTA was also going to acquire 60' articulated buses (not the ECP buses with multiple doors, etc., but just extended nabi type buses) to increase capacity on heavily used routes. Is this not happening in 2008 or has this plan been scrapped? I don't see any mention of it in the email/web posting.

the problem locally, at least downtown, is the city ordinance that allows for outdoor patios. the fences, tables and chairs must be removed by nov 1 and can't return until april 1 (iirc), and each year the restaurant/bar owner must apply and pay for a permit to occupy the ROW. thie obviously doesn't stop rooftops or other established patio areas from continuing to stay open.

i just did a quick check on the cuyahoga county recorders site, and there are a number of easements / deeds between g&z and mrn. i believe that this document is the pertinent one: http://recorder.cuyahogacounty.us/DisplayImg.cfm?docid=12133235&cab=B2003&dra=DEED&fol=20031120.006&doc=200311190965&Afn=200311190965&Pg=10 you may have to download it and go through all 10 pages to actually see the descriptions of the basement and first floor areas.

i thought that was the compromise between G&Z Real Estate LLC (Gus Georgalis - of pinnacle fame - and Nick Zarnas) and MRN. MRN wanted to take this building by eminent domain and create apartments, and G&Z wanted to buy it and make it condos. my understanding was the final agreement allowed 14 condos on the upper floors, developed by G&Z, in exchange for MRN retaining ownership/leasehold of the first and basement levels for future retail. it was pretty murky when it all went down in 2002, so the details could be a bit off, but I think MRN controls the first floor (which would also explain why the newer windows and wood treatments look exactly like flannerys and corner alley).