Mwd711

As someone who lives in what was Mandel's House district, I find him to be one of the phoniest politicians I've ever witnessed. Before he was elected to Columbus, he ran on a bi-partisan moderate, change Columbus platform. Then he got there and voted with the Repubs. 98% of the time. On top of that, he accomplished nothing. He only had one bill signed into law and introduced a handful in total. If jobs are so important to Mr. Mandel, why did he not introduce any bills to create them in Columbus? Why did he never compromise on anything and show bi-partisanship? And for that matter, why is it he never runs on his record as a State Rep? Maybe its because his record is awful. The only reason Mandel won as treasurer and is somewhat popular in the Cuyahoga burbs is his last name. Give him a more generic name and he'd have a much harder time of winning anything with his record. For the record, I see much fewer Mandel signs in my neighborhood than I have in the past. Perhaps people around here have finally looked at his empty record and see that his rhetoric doesn't match his past.

C-Dawg, all your points are spot on. As someone who grew up in Metro Detroit, Ohio's wasted waterfront is my biggest disappointment since I moved to Cleveland. I grew up with marinas, parks and restaurants lining the water. The Detroit burb I grew up in probably has more marinas and waterfront restaurants than all of Cuyahoga County has. It truly baffles me. I've asked the question why its like this in Ohio and I've heard the same stuff about the lake being shallow, etc. but that excuse doesn't work with me. If Ohio focused on re-imagining its waterfront, I think you'd see a changed Northern Ohio. Its a shame such few people realize this and just make excuses as to why it can't happen. When Geneva on the Lake is one of NEO's most attractive tourist friendly waterfront towns, you have serious issues. No offense to Geneva, but it shows how much Ohio lacks in that area. I can't speak for Buffalo but I lived in Erie, PA for a few years and still go back there several times a year. Surprisingly, Erie attracts a good number of tourists. Its a in a strategic location as people stop their on their way to Niagara. Additionally, the area is very popular for Canadians. The bad part is most tourists don't end up downtown. They end up at Presque Isle/Waldameer, Upper Peach (shopping, Splash Lagoon, Family First Sports Park) or the wine country (also popular for fishing). Downtown Erie's waterfront (Dobbins Landing) has made some strides. There's a nice maritime museum, an observation tower and a new Sheraton with an attached convention center. There's a very large marina along with a mini golf course. Its very popular for fishing. There's been several mixed use proposals down there, but nothing concrete yet. They also built a library, bus terminal and a cruise ship terminal. There's a water taxi that connects Dobbins to Presque Isle and there's a biking trail that starts at Presque Isle then runs through Frontier Park, Liberty Park, downtown and finally connects to the wine country. Unfortunately, downtown Erie is somewhat disconnected from the water. There's only one way there and it involves traversing a steep hill. That said, there are several marinas, beaches and parks that line the water in the Erie area and the state recently added a new state park nearby. Only one part of the waterfront is really wasted and that's the industrial area on Erie's east side.

I would say its not rich enough, or more specifically the surrounding neighborhoods aren't. While Edgewater itself has a decent income level, Cudell, Detroit Shoreway, etc. don't have one. They have greatly improved as neighborhoods but they aren't ready for full blown upscale retail. Edgewater's zip code median income is under $30,000. Granted, that includes some less desirable areas but pretty much every retailer uses at least a 3-5 mile radius to judge an area's income level. Edgewater doesn't do well by using that metric. Lakewood isn't exactly an upscale city either. Its really a mix of various demographics. Downtown Lakewood has shopping, but I don't think any of it is really upscale. Having all those apartments in the area doesn't help from a purely income perspective. It helps drag down the numbers a bit and hurts its retail cred a little compared to cities like a Rocky River.

In Manakiki's case, the Metroparks bought it from the city of Cleveland for a dollar. The city got it from a donation. I'd imagine the Metroparks saw it as a savvy move since it is adjacent to a reservation, although you make a good point in that Lake County has their own parks system. A bigger question for me is why are the Metroparks in the golf business to begin with? Its something I've found odd since I moved to the area and perhaps someone can give me a history lesson on it. If you look at pure acreage, many of the reservations offer more golf than they do green space. Golf courses are awful for the environment and expensive to maintain. Theres all kinds of run-off from them and Acacia certainly fits that bill since its in the Euclid Creek watershed. Its my understanding the Metroparks haven't made a profit on golf since the beginning of the last decade. Why subsidize a declining sport? Is it worth it or should they allow the land to return to a more natural state? Just to finish off on golf courses being converted into residential, part of the former Locust Grove in Mayfield Heights is being looked at for luxury apartments by Zaremba. That land has been abandoned for well over a decade now since the prior project developer went broke.

I agree with this to a point. Virtually all of the Michigan cities mentioned in this thread have experienced heavy amounts of urban sprawl. Traverse City has completely changed over the past 20 years, losing all of their downtown department stores to a mall built on an old farm. Yet, TC still thrives. Even as the region sprawls rapidly, Traverse City is still vibrant and its downtown is a hot spot. The only resort/lakefront city in MI that hasn't experienced heavy sprawl is Saugatuck. Outside of that, all of the resort based towns on the lakes have sprawl and have managed to stay relevant. The only real exceptions I can think of are Muskegon and Benton Harbor but most of their issues are socioeconomic and aren't related to sprawl at all. Muskegon only got a mall a few years ago and that was well after everything had already left. It serves Grand Haven as much as it does Muskegon but GH is still prospering. Holland's mall is virtually empty (the big box strip centers are still thriving) while its downtown is completely filled. Port Huron has also suffered some but even their downtown is pretty lively compared to what you see in most of Ohio's lakefront cities.

The long term plan is to turn those lots into buildings that will border the "Green Spine." In defense of Norman Foster, the renderings I've seen for the spine look nothing like this. They are filled with benches, trees and pathways with glass buildings bordering it. The only thing I can surmise is that the Clinic plans to use the lawn for special events like they use the Crile one for the Farmers Market, etc.

^ You have your auto parts stores confused. Advance is in South Euclid. The nearest AutoZones are in East Cleveland and in Mayfield Heights. I know Fran Mentch among others are unhappy with the abatements. Some are suggesting keeping the land green space. Another argument is that Bluestone, Courtyards and Severance Place aren't fully sold. I certainly understand their point about abatements and such but I think this a different animal than those projects. They aren't in a lively business district. I considered buying in those three developments but the walkability problems, overlooking Walmart, etc. drove me away from them. I'm guessing others feel the same way and that's hurting them a little. Being right on Lee with all that action would seem to be much more desirable than being out on Mayfield Road. Not to mention, this helps build up the CL district. That empty lot really hurts the urban feel of the neighborhood.

^I'm pretty familiar with NBI. (For the record, the LWCF isn't the same thing as the Conservation Fund that's buying Acacia. LWCF is a government program, CF is a private non-profit CF bought NBI and the state used the LWCF grant and their own monies to buy it from them. Ohio paid CF $17 million for NBI.) The difference is that was a pristine island. Acacia isn't. And that's my point. From searching around for info about the Conservation Fund, the only golf course they've ever purchased was in Gettysburg so it could be added to the battlefield. They don't have a history of buying golf courses and re-purposing them into parks. It seems to me most of their purchases are in semi-rural areas protecting development, not buying in areas that are already fully developed. Acacia seems to be different than almost every project of theirs that I could find info on. My other question focuses on the Metroparks. Would they even want to do this? It seems to me their focus is on connecting the Emerald Necklace to the lakeshore, not on buying slivers of random space. Do they have the money to take it over, convert it and operate it? If they don't want it, what happens to the property? I think those are fair questions. People want the mayor and city to be transparent but I believe the CF has that responsibility as well. So far, they haven't said anything publicly. They don't have to but I think the residents and property owners have the right to know.

^ Under the Chagrin Highlands master plan, those rules on retail (Harvard Park is in Warrensville) and general zoning apply to the entire development. I don't believe Jacobs can change that. Not unless all five affected municipalities approve and good luck getting that to happen. I think it's pretty much written in stone unless Cleveland, etc change their stances. Getting back on topic, I'm still confused as to what Conservation Fund plans to do with Acacia. One reason I'm not anti-development on this is that the land is already developed. The trees are mostly gone and who knows what pesticides and chemicals the club has used over the years. This is not ready made park land. It's not a pristine wooded nature filled property. That was the Blossom Estate. The fund should've stepped in there as that truly was a preserve. Acacia? Not so much. Sure, a park can be a big green field but that's not what people think of when it comes to a park. They think of the Metroparks. How can the Conservation Fund pull that off?

Maybe.... which is why I was limiting the thought to only a "direct" tax benefit. That said, parks benefit the most the people who can walk to them. Not many Lyndhurst residents are within comfortable walking distance of Acacia. Very true. Although most people drive to the Metroparks. If the park is attractive enough, it becomes a destination. That's also why I'd build a rec center there and perhaps even the new library.

You too! What is the other rumor? Don't tease rumors and not tell them! Anyone know how many acres that adjacent land owner has and what he paid for them with the intent to build homes? I assume you're talking about Mr. Aveni. That was a very controversial sale since he was a member of the club and a director. He ended up being involved in a bitter lawsuit that he claimed hurt his development. He tried to force the club to pay him $10 million in damages but lost in court. Aveni bought the land (17 acres) for $4 million. He recently re-started the development and is once again, building new homes there.

But will it even be a park? The Conservation Fund has not laid out its plans which it why I haven't decided if I fully support them buying it or not. If they leave it as a golf course, the only residents who will gain from that will be in Three Village, Acacia Estates and Meadow Wood. Those who live across Mayfield, etc., gain little from that. A golf course is not much of an amenity these days (especially when there's a half dozen courses just minutes from Lyndhurst) and I don't see it as luring new home buyers to the city. If the Conservation Group does turn it into a park, that could be a huge selling point and amenity for the city. Throw in a new YMCA or rec center (which the city could use desperately, they could even put the new SE-L library branch there) and some hiking trails and you have a real gem for the local residents. I would love to see that happen and I think it could be a real draw and help make the city more attractive. You're certainly right that residents fear their services declining. I really wasn't that high on Lyndhurst when moving here (picked it for convenience, more than anything), but after living here, I've found that the services really are top notch. A terrific park would help ease the lack of new tax dollars. A golf course just doesn't really help out at all.

The only surviving independent part of TRW is the Automotive division. Its always been located in Michigan. The rest was folded into Northrop Gruman and into their offices. Northrop sold off the Automotive Division to a private equity firm who later spun it off. Going back to LV, not only did it change developers it also lost a couple of its original anchors before there was a shovel in the ground. I think this greatly imapacted their leasing strategy and hurt them when it came to luring apparel retailers. That's how it fell back on furniture and furnishings retailers, which is still LV's strength today. The original anchor was high end department store Jacobson's. It was to be a two story store. Sadly, Jake's went bankrupt before it could come to fruition. This led to Anthropologie pulling out of LV. Of course, they ended up going to Eton instead. I think the vibe and style of LV would've been completely different if Jake's had opened up or had been replaced by another upscale department store. Instead, it had to rely on an upscale Home Depot offshoot. My fear is that some of the missing retailers will end up part of a major development in the Twinsburg or Hudson areas. The money has spread down there. I think its only a matter of time before someone builds something upscale there to complement First & Main. Glimcher already tried to do it just as the economy crashed. It might take decades, but I think something big will be built down there in time. I'd rather see it on the Acacia land since that area is already heavily developed.

What happened was that TRW changed developers. The original development group was out of Chicago. It was to be much more urban oriented, much like heightsfan talks about - a la Easton and Crocker. For whatever reason, TRW kicked them out and sold it to First Interstate. This came AFTER Lyndhurst voters approved the zoning change. So, in actuality, Lyndhurst residents did not approve Legacy Village as its built today. They and the city expected something different. It was to be much more urban in nature with mixed use buildings. First Interstate had zero experience in upscale or urban development and it shows in their poor design. Today, the only free land at Legacy (unless you count the acres of parking) is slated for a boutique sized hotel that's been delayed for years. My hope was the Acacia land could be Legacy, done the correct way. True, that's a lot of assumptions and hope but I'd like to think the city learned its lesson from that. So the zoning change referendum came BEFORE First Interstate became involved in the project? Interesting, I never knew that. Regardless, just about everything that was promised to residents for Legacy Village has come up short. What part of the land is the boutique planned for? I'm guessing the western portion close to Cedar Road? The whole referendum was botched. TRW claimed they would stay if LV was approved. They left anyhow and then donated the building to the Clinic which left a hole in tax dollars since the Clinic is tax exempt. The hotel (supposedly a high end brand but it was never named) was proposed off of Cedar adjacent to the estate. They even looked at using historic tax credits to renovate the old estate buildings and make them part of the hotel. It was to include an underground parking structure. It never left the planning commission stages after the economy crashed. Last I heard, they will try to revive it once demand grows in the hotel market.

What happened was that TRW changed developers. The original development group was out of Chicago. It was to be much more urban oriented, much like heightsfan talks about - a la Easton and Crocker. For whatever reason, TRW kicked them out and sold it to First Interstate. This came AFTER Lyndhurst voters approved the zoning change. So, in actuality, Lyndhurst residents did not approve Legacy Village as its built today. They and the city expected something different. It was to be much more urban in nature with mixed use buildings. First Interstate had zero experience in upscale or urban development and it shows in their poor design. Today, the only free land at Legacy (unless you count the acres of parking) is slated for a boutique sized hotel that's been delayed for years. My hope was the Acacia land could be Legacy, done the correct way. True, that's a lot of assumptions and hope but I'd like to think the city learned its lesson from that.

Yes, I consider Container Store upscale. Look at where they tend to locate. Near upscale and trendy retailers. That's the market that they like to be near. I'm sure there are exceptions but in my experience, they are always located in upscale neighborhoods. You're correct that there's a handful of vacancies nearby bur Id add some caveats to that. The LaPlace space is weirdly configured (it's not a big open space) and the former Joseph Beth has that mezzanine in the way. For most retailers, that's a deterrent. There's no point in re-hashing the mess that's University Square. Either way, thats not exactly upscale anyways which is my point. Container Store is just one example of a major brand that's avoided Cleveland. I'm not sure how anyone could say Cleveland doesn't lack upscale brands. We do. Now, it's certainly debatable as to why that is. I think part of it is there's a serious lack of upscale retail development here. For a market our size, we lack in that department. My belief is that an Acacia development would help fill that void. I'm not against making it into a park, but I don't think the region gains much by keeping it a golf course.

I fully agree with this. I live in this neighborhood but I'd prefer to see it developed over staying a golf course. I agree that the region is over-retailed but only in the lower and mid markets. Upscale? Not at all. Does anybody honestly think The Container Store wants to locate next to Walmart or Gordon Food Service? From their other locations, I find that wishful thinking. This region lacks upscale retail opportunities. I think that's why we lack so many retailers. The upscale centers are nearly full with little room to expand. The Acacia land could help solve that. The next question is what will Conservation do with it? I have a feeling it will stay a GC which adds little to the area. I don't think they have the financials to convert it to a full blown park. Not to mention, I fear the land has environmental issues. If its a all purpose park, I think it does add to the region. I'm just a skeptic they will and can pull it off. Especially since they let Oakwood go which to me, needed to be consvered much more.

The Neiman Marcus in downtown Minneapolis is closing. That leaves it with a Macy's, Target and Off 5th Saks Fifth Avenue Outlet. Might also be an Burlington or something similar but none of the articles mentioned any besides the three I listed.

^ I think it depends on what ends up going there. Since its related to the MM, I'd imagine that they have a goal to get lots of continuous medical education events in there. Those will draw regionally (only the larger ones usually draw from around the country), and the bulk of attendees will drive in. Of course, if they aren't close enough to drive in and go home in one day, they will stay in a hotel. The obvious is to stay at the Marriott and walk across the street. Doesn't seem like too much of an issue to me unless you're a local and they know where to park anyhow.

Straphanger, that's true. But I don't think people live in Shadyside because of Macy's being downtown. That's my overall point. They live in Shadyside because its a great neighborhood. Just like people have moved into Tremont, etc, because they are becoming great neighborhoods. The fact that Dillard's left downtown has not stopped these neighborhoods from improving and people from moving in. As more people move in, the retail will improve.

327, you make some valid points, but having a Dillard's in TC didn't seem to help the neighborhoods near downtown. I would argue those places (Ohio City, Cudell, etc.) are doing much better now than they did when Dillard's was still open for business. I don't think one department store makes much of a difference. Pittsburgh threw subsidy after subsidy at stores and it never got much in return. Just in the past year, it lost two more high profile downtown retailers (Saks & Staples). I don't think Bakery Square/E. Liberty (Target & Whole Foods) or the Southside Works developments were contingent on Macy's being across the river, especially since that store has been absolutely butchered. If anything, those places are competition and part of the reason that downtown Pitt has lost its retail mojo. I'm not sure there's much reason for a person to go downtown to shop when those other places are cleaner and offer better shopping. Shadyside, etc. are solid neighborhoods and that's why stores are located there. Are they solid because of proximity to Downtown? Perhaps, but I'm not sure a department store is the number one reason for it. Obviously, having a department store is a plus but many people feel like traditional department stores are passé and out of style. I think that shows in how many have gone under, not just in the cities, but in suburbs too.

I dont see their impact. How is Macys in Downtown Pittsburgh helping? The area surrounding it isnt in the best shape and the store itself isnt that nice. Also, as I said earlier, Downtown Pittsburgh isn't filled will great retailers. It doesnt appear that their Macys is having any great impact on their downtown. Pittsburgh as a whole isn't trashed and abandoned like Cleveland. The impact of a fully functional downtown is seen throughout the city. Changes what it means to live there... determines what you can and can't do without leaving town... affects the value of every home. Distance to everyday shopping is a pretty common decision factor in evaluating places to live. If you're considering moving 5 miles closer to your downtown, are you moving 5 miles further from everyday shopping, or are you not? Night and day difference. The most vibrant parts of the Burgh (at least in my opinion) aren't near Macy's. In general, that neighborhood is pretty dingy. I'll go to Shadyside over the clock any day of the week to do my shopping there. Shadyside doesn't have a department store, but I think most people consider it more attractive and trendier than downtown. Just look at the difference in the stores that are in Shadyside and compare it to the Golden triangle area. Its no contest. Just to finish off on subsidies, sometimes its worth it, sometimes it isn't. I pointed out MacArthur Center because what's happened there is somewhat similar to what's happened at Tower City. MC is losing tenants left and right. Its losing its cache as a destination and as an upscale mall. All the subsidies in the world aren't helping it as long as the shoppers avoid it. Hard to say if that $90 mil was worth it when it starts to empty out only a few years later. Clearly, the market can't support it for various reasons. TC was heavily subsidized to get built in the first place. I'm not sure why you say Cleveland didn't make an effort to subsidize retail. TC was their attempt at it. Like in Norfolk, the good times didn't last. In my Googling, I found <a href="http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2000/04/23/loc_nordstrom_price_tag.html">this interesting article from 2000.</a> It talks about how Cincy offered $50 mil to lure Nordstrom. It also mentions that as of then, Saks and Fountain Place had received well over $100 million in various subsides and loans. I'm sure that number has only grown as time has gone on. I also found that back in 1998, <a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4450772.html"> Macy's wanted $55 mil </a> to build a store on State St. in Chicago. The city rejected it. Makes you wonder what would've happened to Field's if that went through.

Both Cincy stores are subsidized according to <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/business/downtown-boston-store-bucks-nationwide-trend-f73el2t-135840243.html">this article.</a> It also mentions subsidies in Pittsburgh, Indy and Milwaukee. <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/10/26/daily39.html?page=all">I also found this about the St. Louis Macy's.</a> Apparently, they were working on getting a TIF for it but I can't find it was approved or not. <a href="http://www.twincities.com/stpaul/ci_20427035/st-paul-macys-store-close-sundays-staff-up"> There's also this story about the St. Paul Macy's cutting hours. </a> It mentions that the store received a $6 million loan in 2001 back when it was a Dayton's. Norfolk's Macarthur Center was heavily subsidized by the city. The city paid $33 million to build the Nordstrom there <a href="http://www.norfolkdevelopment.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=133&Itemid=183"> for a grand contribution of $90 mil. </a> Ironically, Macarthur Center is now struggling and losing many tenants, even though its still fairly new. I would venture to say that almost every department store that has an urban mall attached to it has probably gotten subsidies of some kind to help support it or develop the neighborhood.

That's very true. The thing is its usually the downtown store that moved out to the mall, leaving a void in the CBD. That's especially true in smaller markets.

I think off price stores are up for debate. The thing is when people think of downtown department stores, they think of full line relatively upscale stores. Off price department stores are usually much smaller and don't usually fit what people envision as a downtown store or even a department store in some cases. That said, I'm not sure there's too many downtowns that only have an off-price store without a traditional store too. It seems like you need that anchor to draw people and stores and the traditional ones do just that.