jws

Another one: http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2017/05/24/the-fresh-brewed-tees-guy-is-running-for-mayor

If the only work you saw was pertaining to the sidewalk, it could just be Dominion working on the gas lines. They've been replacing them all over the West Side and I know Franklin was happening right now along with my street.

There was a comment from the councilman that this site potentially has someone lined up in some capacity, but it wasn't far enough along for more details. I'm fearful it'll just be suburban business park style as shown on the Madison corridor development plan. I heard something about that, but I was confused as to whether it was this site (Midland) or the cleaned/cleared site next to I-77. From what I'm hearing, it may be both. The industrial/warehousing sector is bursting at the seams right now. Hmm, any chance on earth that Cudell will push for an urban street-friendly portion along Madison? I know segments of Madison through the Cudell Improvement service area are pedestrian retail overlay districts. Not sure the specific coverage or if this extends into the DSCDO service area. In terms of the Midland site, I'm not sure how willing they will be to minimize the setbacks.

There was a comment from the councilman that this site potentially has someone lined up in some capacity, but it wasn't far enough along for more details. I'm fearful it'll just be suburban business park style as shown on the Madison corridor development plan.

Every time I've seen residents raise concerns with the terrible, low-density site plan the CDC just tells us how "excited the residents are." I understand that brownfield remediation is costly for residential uses, but there is no excuse that this isn't a denser commercial site.

I think the unfortunate reality is that pushing back against density will resonate with a lot of residents. The TOD aspect is lost on people (money hungry developer not providing enough parking!!!), when they're market-rate you get gentrification rants (greedy politicians and developers want to gentrify our neighborhoods!!!), and when they're affordable like Aspen Place you still get pushback (Why should we be coddling these people when these could be market rate!!!). The fact that the LI development is the exact thing that should be build adjacent to rapid stations is aggravatingly ignored by large swaths of residents. I'm at least somewhat worried that Johnson's rhetoric will move him along with relative success.

I'm pretty pleased with the overall plan. I was expecting to have to go to the meeting to yell "but what about sidewalks!?" and argue that they should leave space for paths, but then they went and actually planned it as useful green space so that was a pleasant surprise. It's a pretty sweet deal for the residents at the end of W101, because now they'll suddenly end up with a cul-de-sac that essentially ends in a park.

Decently aggressive work planned for Western Ave and North Marginal. North Marginal Rd. is being completely removed and all traffic will now be routed along Western. Bioswale gardens are being added in place of the removed road, while the sidewalks are being retained which I think will do a nice job at meking sure the green space is actually utilized as a neighborhood asset. The remaining streets are being resurfaced (shaded in blue) or rebuilt (shaded in orange). They're also scaling down the road to one lane and adding protected bike lanes. Sorry the quality of the pictures isn't ideal.

Maybe my experience was highly anectodal, but when I was at Terrestrial on Sunday it seemed like a massive chunk of patrons were residents of BP. Just, like, an endless stream of people wandering in with their dogs. Again, it was likely a bit anecdotal because there was also a decent chunk of parking available. It could at least be indicative of some type of culture shift, even if it's hyper-localized to BP and Edgewater Hill.

Even the majority of older housing has off-street parking.

I don't think these two concepts have to be mutually exclusive. I see no reason that large-scale medical buildings can't mimic some type of a superblock concept and front the street with minimal setbacks, providing a traditional urban streetscape and then having large courtyards/greenspace on the interiors. I would think that type of environment would still be far more private and relaxing. I wouldn't even fret if this campus were being expanded and developed with a more cohesive site plan and utilized linear parks or central greenspace that anchors multiple buildings. However, I really think this urban campus is being constructed piecemeal with a suburban development mentality with minimal regard for the impact of the "greenspace."

I think that is a inherently problematic mentality when the organization is part of an urban environment. It could still be visually distinct and still conform to a logical density for the environment. Regardless of the level of serenity intrinsic to a surface parking lot and unusable green space, I don't find anything particularly serene about this building. I'd argue that this wouldn't fly in a neighborhood where the Clinic would be forced to regard residents as stakeholders in their community. If requiring buildings to have minimal setbacks to preserve a dense streetscape results in a claustrophobic experience, it means the buildings are poorly designed (like this one), not the planning philosophy.

I actually really like these concepts. This type of container architecture can go pretty far and I think can make for an interesting space, so I don't really see this type of development as "less than." I'd actually love to see it duplicated on the West Side along stretches like Madison where there are some sprawling parking lots and substandard buildings that don't conform to an urban environment (Dollar General, Gryo George, etc).

Ja'Ovvoni Garrison has removed himself from the race. https://twitter.com/JaOForMayor/status/849702154608791552/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=JaOForMayor&utm_content=849702154608791552

If anyone wants to take a streetview tour, check out the West Park and West Walnut neighborhoods: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5992768,-75.4923424,3a,75y,163.39h,90.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO2lxLl2rfCk3qd6jkD2f-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5994869,-75.4933518,3a,60y,76.81h,88.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1si3OsF_fAdntAl6e8sh3p3A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5983863,-75.4883282,3a,60y,335.41h,92.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYy204dy_dYH2Da8_g2WgKA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5953123,-75.4910576,3a,75y,97.15h,89.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVqcXC0lXVeCsmkOzIr3K1w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Reactionary is a good description. Honestly, they hardly have any resources to allocate. I just have issue with how, when they do put in some effort, it's only for something in Edgewater; more specifically Clifton which they keep calling a commercial corridor even though it really isn't, at least in the sense they want it to be.

I'm interested to know about this community meeting. I very much plan to attend it. I really feel that a lot of what's holding back Cudell is the lack of concentrated development efforts from the CDC. They allocate almost all of their resources to Edgewater. That being said, tomorrow is a NOACA meeting regarding a TOD study for the West Boulevard station. Supposedly the abandoned apartment building across from the station is also about to be purchased soon.

Just to defend NEORSD a bit: - There could be some pretty specific regulations regarding minimum clearances between various site components to which the design had to adhere. Not actually sure of that, but it's plausible. - They probably need some space for vehicle access that is still protected from public access which likely accounts for most of the site's footprint. It looks like you can drive in through one gate and continue around the back perimeter of the site to exit through the other. Most of the space that isn't dedicated to this pass-through looks to be utilized. - Let's at least give them credit for building an architecturally accurate building. - They did at least create a setback from the bulkhead so that the public can still walk along the riverside. They could have just extended the fences up to the bulkhead and cut off all access.

I really hope this proposal retains most of its form and doesn't end up losing five floors and ending up with some cheaper type of cladding.

I think he's well-intentioned and has done really impressive work. I guess my ultimate decision would come down to which one can drum up some policies that can address issues across the entire socioeconomic spectrum in the city since the majority of residents probably don't rank artisanal tea shops and whatever ego-related thing resulted in MANCAN as top concerns. That probably comes across as more aggressive than I intend, as I do think the guy cares about the city. Veysey may very well have good ideas regarding equity and the like, but until more information comes to the surface I would still probably lean towards Chrostowski (assuming both would run).

I think it could be hugely beneficial to have someone in power with this type of rehabilitative-focused perspective.

Brandon Chrostowski of EDWINS Announces Run for Mayor http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2017/02/02/brandon-chrostowski-of-edwins-announces-run-for-mayor

I think the house on Randall is remaining - at least that's how I interpret the site plan. http://www.knez.net/neighborhoods/greenbrier-mews-7084 (pgs 8-9)

This is where the area's resistance to higher-density housing really comes back and bites the behind. There should already be a lot more people there but ugh, that would be too urban. I can't speak to others opposition to density, but my main problem with it is when new projects (not renovation) are poorly constructed. I don't think they will age well past the abatements. Exterior maintenance will be an issue in the coming decades. BP has a lot of tall residences that will be very difficult down the road. If somebody wants to make friends quick in 2025, it would behoove them to invest in a boom lift--they'd be the most popular person in Battery Park! Overall i believe density is good. Parking is a 20th Century issue and should not hinder a project. Cheap & untested materials however, should be a red flag. For sure. However, I know there was also resistance to the EDEN construction on Detroit from a lot of the McKinley Terrace townhouse owners on W 81. They used opposition to increased density as a reason to oppose the building variances, but I suppose that could have just been the justification they used because they couldn't say "we don't want homeless people here."

This has also been my experience with Cha. As for Graffiti, every time I'm there I see a decent sized crowd. I'm hopeful it sticks around because I think their patio is one of the best in the neighborhood. You'd think the BP establishments are doing well enough to sustain three (and four with Terrestrial Brewing). I'm curious how Vita Urbana is faring since it's a solid concept and of good quality, in my experience.