imjustinjk

Ugh, an increase of 50 parking spaces? And a reduction of 20 units?

They adorned the scaffolding with Christmas lights, haha.

The tone of the article/interview/petition isn’t “there’s already enough of these”. It was “we don’t want a dollar store here bc it’ll ruin the character of the street”. I’m not for it per se, but it was fairly nimby esque. I don’t disagree that there are a lot of these in the area, but if theyre succeeding it might be because the market can handle it ~and there are a lot of very poor people in the area who use/need them~. I’m not saying a dollar store absolutely needs to go here, but the people opposing this couldn't be anymore coded. Planners and developers have to meet the needs of both those who drive in and frequent the upscale retail/restaurants as well as the low income residents immediately adjacent (not just here, but elsewhere). But I digress. I’m off topic. “He also does not feel that a dollar store would be a "good fit" and would like to sit down with the developer to look at other ideas.” “Griffin said that new development on the property should tie in to the overall theme and context of Larchmere as an "antique district," with restaurants, shops and boutiques...”

Yes, you're right. I think that the building could be renovated with windows/doors facing Larchmere and a newer building built next to it. The single story scale isn't necessarily inappropriate (you see this elsewhere on similar streets). Then you would have tucked parking in the back with plenty of spaces. Or demo the whole thing for a larger mixed-use development - I just don't see a lot of development like this over here yet? The issue I had was the tone set within the article towards having a dollar general on the street. When were those townhomes and condos developed? Seems "unusual"/ahead of their time that for-sale units were developed there?

I don't necessarily love it, but I do like the outdoor space. That's seemingly not a very common development practice to have balconies. I can't even open my windows.

Unless somebody wants to develop another Larchmere Courts or Larchmere Lofts on the lot, then the building is fairly suitable for a dollar store. Larchmere is a great street with a good building stock. The building isn't recessed like the one across the street. I don't like the large parking lot, but I'm not sure how many developers would want to re-develop the lot?

I guess I fail to understand why somebody wouldn't the store on Larchmere other than its association with poor people and that Larchmere is a trendy street? Oh no, its by a school. Not safe for kids! Oh no, our lovely antiques stores! There's an abandoned building there that can be re-purposed for something new that will serve nearby residents.

Are the people who are signing this of means? Often times "Dollar Store" types of stores serve an important role in urban and lower income neighborhoods. https://morningconsult.com/2017/11/20/surprising-impact-neighborhood-dollar-store/ https://www.citylab.com/life/2012/02/what-dollar-store-locations-reveal-about-america/1115/ Really, it just sounds like nimbys being nimbys. Meanwhile, on the other side of the city: http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2018/04/family_dollar_sale_in_clevelan.html

I'm here for this.

If they build up both sides (in the long run), could the garage be retrofitted/built taller? Not saying that it’s necessary, nor am I a proponent of parking. I just have friends that live in apartments in this area. There’s a bit of run around for garage parking between the apartment conversions who don’t have dedicated parking. I hate walking past this lot and garage. They’re so ugly. Not sure which is worse... this or the whole in the ground next to the Union Club.

Is it? I live right next to this, but I'm so used to just crossing the street. I'll have to check this out. I can't believe I haven't noticed this, haha. So unaware. ?

I think that many people equate downtown to have giant skyscrapers and that’s all they want. Jacobs lot makes sense for a skyscraper, but much of the empty lots really don’t need it. Similarly scaled buildings to the rest of Warehouse District makes sense. Pedestrian level is more important than having a robust skyline. Weston’s plans are nice, but would still be great minus the towers.

I agree with your points. I shop at Geigers, and other local stores Downtown. I think that some of these retail spaces might be too large and/or expensive for some local businesses though. I know that personally, I rarely-to-never go to Steelyard. Same with Friends. But regardless you're right. I think that a small format big box store could work in Cleveland, especially near one of the busiest intersections. The issue with Steelyard and downtown residents is that those without a car its not the most accessible. The #81 ... is a journey. There's uber/lyft or a ZipCar (I use the latter when I do head down there). Pending weather its not a terrible bike ride. However, I do most of my shopping online. I'm not sure if we can draw in national retail yet, and local retail can be risky starting a new business - especially in really expensive spaces. As a student I know that there is some missing retail needs that many campuses have, and this is pretty close to CSU. However, I'm not sure if theres enough students living close to campus yet.

Yes, sorry for going off topic. I was just saying that I hope that JHB can be creative and lead the way. They have a seemingly larger street frontage than other projects and this, with 925, is a sore spot along Euclid. Its exciting to see the project taking off now.

Regardless of my phone's autocorrect mishaps and me not correcting it the second time... I live on Euclid Ave and attend graduate school at CSU down the road. There's a handful of vacancies along the corridor that aren't being filled. A couple thousand new units won't necessarily resolve that issue. There's a retail vacancy trend nationwide, and was just saying that maybe JHB should look for other alternatives to their ground level space. A lot of the spaces are being marketed as large, flaship locations. Maybe instead of offering it as a large 5,000 sq space (Garfield) they could break the space up. There's a bunch of alternatives than what's being offered and I'd like to see a thriving corridor/city. JHB has about 250 ft ish of street frontage compared to about 60-70 in the Garfield. Their plans call for more than 20,000 square feet of retail. That could be workshare, offices, anything. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/6/5/whats-up-with-all-those-empty-commercial-storefronts-in-new-mixed-use-developments

This might be a little off topic but, hopefully JHB can line up tenants. There’s many ground level vacancies from other projects (Garfield, Schofield, Standard, etc). Besides restaurants it doesn’t seem viable in our city for retail spaces to go into the large, fairly expensive spaces. The scheduled has had a pop up shop and will now have a seasonal bar. This isn’t a Cleveland issue per se as it’s a fairly common issue nationwide. Maybe something else besides retail could go into the spaces like startups or other things. But there’s alreasy a smattering of street level vacancies around JHB so hopefully they’re more successful.

I don’t think it will be built without the tax credit being passed and/or it being scaled down. I’m still hopeful. The one that I’ve lost the most hope on is the Weston parking lot project.

There was a track issue that was damaging the wheels.

Maybe if they didn’t waste tens of millions of dollars on police misconduct a $60 million investment wouldn’t be so risky. I’m not sure why they would want to invest in the police force if they’re going to keep beating and killing people. “ “This was a $60 million project. That’s a lot of dough. A lot of money. [Mayor Frank Jackson’s office] needs to explain this us,” Polensek said. “There might be something very valid but until they tell us at the table, we’re all speculating.” ”

Well stated. LAND Studio has no business to be involved in the historic Shaker Square. Just look at Public Square as an example. A $32 million dollar budget rose to $50 million under their watch. Transit needs were an afterthought and now additional millions are needed to correct this. Look at The Bike Box they had placed in front of CVS in Shaker Square and you will see how their aesthetics do not match the architectural history of the area. I got shot down on this forum for saying that Public Square was poorly executed. But I agree with your sentiments.

I like the signage. I also really liked the name Mayfield Station more than Mayfield Lofts. Mayfield Lofts is so boring. Hopefully the momentum builds up and the giant parking lot next to the train line can be developed as well.

I wish I could like this more than once. Many people do not understand transit. I took the the 26 home (downtown) from my friends apartment in battery park at 9 PM. It was full. I have friends who live near Detroit in Ohio City/Detroit Shoreway who use the 26 all the time to get downtown. However, when it goes to 30 minutes it becomes somewhat inconvenient so then they grab an Uber. If the 55 had a couple more stops it would surely increase ridership to the 55, especially from people who live north of Detroit - which has been and is becoming more desnse with townhome and apartment projects. https://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2017/08/west_shoreway_100m_re-do_bring.html

Exactly. An airport should never have been placed on the Lakefront, regardless if land was existing or manufactured. We have swaths of parking lots, a highway, and an airport that has suffered from major decline along our lakefront. https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/433 “All of the vegetation and wildlife now present has occurred naturally, including more than 280 species of birds and several varieties of butterflies. Revitalization of the area occurred after the last fill deposit without human intervention (planting, seeding, or stocking). However, some grooming activity has enhanced the site for birding walks. Dike 14 is held under public trust by the State of Ohio, and is currently under lease to Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority. The Cleveland Lakefront Nature Preserve formally opened to the public on a daily basis in February 2012.“

This is fairly similar to how I've thought to re-develop it. People don't realize how important green space is beyond them just being "parks". Public space, but there's numerous other benefits especially as we've had issues with our Lake and rivers. Our tree canopy in Cleveland is around 20%, half of the minimum recommended for a city. Cinci is 40%. Pittsburgh is 40% with a goal of 60%. We have a lot of impervious surface issues and run-off issues. There's so many factors that go into having park spaces other than just having a place for people to go (although public space is great). https://www.siemens.com/entry/cc/features/greencityindex_international/all/en/pdf/gci_report_summary.pdf Cleveland is ranked one of the worst cities for green space. Bizarre to see so much hate on this forum from people about "useless green space".

The bus pull off has pros and cons. In heavier traffic the bus could get stuck. As long as there's pedestrian safety implemented it would work well. My concern is just that many people still treat it like a highway. It would be nice if they installed the CSU shelters there as well. I agree with there being "BRT lanes" along the Shoreway. It shouldn't be a a very expensive feature to implement. It could boost ridership too if commuting was more competitive against driving. It really doesn't make sense to just start it/end it at Clifton.