KJP

^ You're awesome, Mr. X! :wink: I also live in Lakewood (for 10 years) and see the changes happening around me. Consider several things: > Within the metro area, which I will divide into five basic areas (Cleveland's core, Cleveland's outer neighborhoods, the inner-ring suburbs, the outer suburbs, and the rural fringe), only three of those five have opportunities for enhancing their taxbase (Cleveland's core, the outer suburbs, and the rural fringe). The reason is that, under this state's policies (which has the greatest impact on regional land use), the most significant way a municipality can grow its taxbase is to offer vacant land to developers. The only reason why Cleveland's core can offer that is because it has had the time to move through the stages of growth, build-out, age, decay and abandonment. If this state has stronger policies and programs to enable municipalities to afford renovating or replacing their building stock, these stages need not apply anymore. > Consider also the last 50 years or so of Americans' incomes and the availability of debt/credit. Individuals in this nation were able to secure higher wages through unionization and, for a time, being the only true economic superpower in the world. Prior to World War II, a much larger percentage of Americans couldn't afford to own their homes or cars and didn't have the access to debt/credit that we have had in the past 40 years or so. And, for better or worse, we're not the only kid on the economic block anymore. That competition, rising costs and other factors are forcing American household incomes to flatten out (which was masked somewhat since the 1970s by women joining the workforce). We keep trying to enhance our standard living by relying on more debt/credit, to the point that this may not be sustainable much longer. The ultimate outcome is that all these new subdivisions of Mcmansions at the urban fringe may not be sustainable much longer. Remember that, in the course of 1,000 years of city-building, the concept of urban sprawl (increasing a metro's land area at a rate faster than that metro area is increasing in population) is still a very recent occurrence. Who knows when this phenomenon will burst? > One trigger to bursting that bubble and causing Americans' to live more frugal lives (as many in the rest of the world do) could be peak oil. Where will we be in 90 years when it comes to oil-fueled suburban sprawl that we've enjoyed? Remember that oil is, without a doubt, the most energy-dense resource on this planet. There's nothing else that comes close to it in terms of its affordability, portability and energy density. Some contend that after we crest the peak in global oil supplies (which may be occurring at this moment), the housing bubble will burst, numerous bankruptcy filings will ensue and people will be forced to live within their means again. On that score, living in older neighborhoods like Lakewood, which has smaller homes, you can walk or take transit everywhere, and allows people to live more frugal lives may become attractive if not essential. Again, we're looking 90 years into the future, and my scenario may be as strange a concept today as urban sprawl was to our grandfathers or great grandfathers 90 years ago. Ultimately, there's no way to know. But given what I see happening in Greater Cleveland, the nation and the world, I am very happy to be living where I am and I suspect I'll stay either here or maybe move downtown if/when I can afford it.

When I first saw the picture of that King Midget, I thought it looked like a kit car. So I clicked on the link and sure enough! I think kit cars are a great idea to save money and if they have a battery powered car, that's terrific! That's just about all you need for going grocery shopping, moving things, or for tooling around the neighborhood. But does it come with XM Satellite Radio? :-D

At the risk of speaking on behalf of Wolstein, my understanding is that: A) Wolstein apparently believes that Shaia is not serious about developing his property. Nancy Lesic has noted correctly that Victor Shaia has no development experience, but Wolstein & Co. haven't taken into consideration his nephews' development resume. I suspect they simply aren't aware of their resume yet. For that reason, Lesic has questioned Shaia's timing of advancing his project's plans. They view this not as: Shaia plan vs. that of the other 12, but 13 property owners who are trying to get as much money out of Wolstein as they can. B) Wolstein apparently believes that the surface parking is essential to his project and wants to make sure that Shaia's land stays surface parking, thus his desire to acquire it. Wolstein also believes that additional public funds (such as through the port authority) are NOT available for financing structured parking in that area (that's from a direct quote I have from Nancy Lesic). As for Wolstein smoothing the path for his project by cajoling City Council, there's nothing new there. All developers do that. OK, now here's my two questions: > What difference does it make to Wolstein whether someone else owns the surface parking lot if Wolstein is going to leave it as a surface lot? > And what does it matter to Wolstein if 300 residents move in next door to FEB (on Shaia's land and per Shaia's proposal) or if 300 visitors park on that property? Come to think of it, if Shaia can provide the public parking that Wolstein wants (even though Wolstein doubts he can for the reasons stated above) AND can build Lighthouse Landing, that would be the best of both worlds. That's 300 residents living next door to FEB and 250 public parking spaces next door to FEB. You can't beat that with a stick. Hopefully Wolstein will come to appreciate that in the next day or two (and so will the rest of you when I'm permitted to reveal something else that's happening).

^ There's been a discussion about that at one of the peak-oil forums where I lurk -- www.theoildrum.com -- but most of the discussion focused on how long it would take for the U.S. car culture to transition over to something more sustainable. It was very interesting, as topics included the 15 years it takes for the U.S. auto fleet to completely turn over, or that Americans in the 1970s didn't run right out to buy new, smaller cars because they couldn't afford to.

Or this retort from Rob1412: Survival in Fort Wayne would be difficult without a sense of humor. By tolerating the preposterous and embracing the merely ridiculous and ironic, I manage to thrive here. http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=297.msg71867#msg71867

Did anyone post this yet? From the Pope: I really should strive to be more rob-like, start fixing up old tractors, move to a semi-rural area, find a 30 year old sweater and scan some ektachromes http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=297.msg71712#msg71712

^ I don't understand your bone of contention here. What exactly are you concerned about?

^ But that doesn't exist anymore in Ohio, unless you want to carry a concealed weapon, start a charter school or ban things like abortion, gay rights or intellectualism.

Hey, I saw a Waterfront Line train today with two people on it! It's all about the land use. Put lots of densely developed, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use neighborhoods within 1,000 feet of transit stations and watch the ridership bloom. We're trying to do that here in Cleveland (other than just at Tower City, Shaker Square, Windermere and University Circle), but it's a slow process unfortunately.

Back to ridership issues, I was on a tour-de-city-per-transit today with a friend of mine from Chicago. It was a lovely day for touring and walking. We used four buses and two Rapids, and all of them were very full. Now, granted, the Rapids were one-car dinkys, so the load would have been less impressive with a two-car train. Two of the buses were standing room-only (the second time this week I've experienced standees in off-peak travel times). There were the usual transit dependent on board, but quite a few people of some means. I suspect the additional folks were on board for the same reason I was -- cost of gas. Plus, we spent some time downtown and at the West Side Market, as well as strolling back into Ohio City's neighborhoods, so we didn't want to be burdened with a car. But, it's good see the ridership was looking pretty strong. We stuck to the main routes where the frequencies are no worse than every 15 minutes on a Saturday and all the connections worked pretty well. A nice day for a transit tour of the city....

^ Worse, they enter and leave via the parking garage behind the theaters, resulting in significantly less sidewalk activity than there otherwise would be.

Corna's vision (and that of a number of others, including Trolleyville USA http://www.trolleyvilleusa.org/ and a new affiliated organization Lakeshore Electric Railway, see http://www.trolleyvilleusa.org/Trolleyville_News_2004_June.pdf ) is to have the remnant of the streetcar track on the 1879-built Superior Viaduct be used as a spur to the trolley between downtown and Ohio City. Several maps have been produced on this, including the Lakeshore Electric Railway's (though I don't think I have their permission to post their map). But others have been posted in the following thread: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=5563.0

From the Flats East Bank thread.... There's nothing funny smelling. Wolstein isn't acquiring property, the port authority is (albeit with Wolstein's money), and they are doing so under the guidelines as defined in eight pieces of legislation recently passed by Cleveland City Council. At least one of those pieces of legislation designates the physical area to be developed, and Shaia's property is part of it. Shaia had been making noise about developing his property for three years, but noise does not equal a pending plan. Thus, Wolstein asked City Council to include Shaia's property in his development area, and he asked the port authority to acquire property and finance the development for him -- guided by the legislation passed by the city. I can understand why Wolstein doesn't yet believe Shaia's plan is nothing more than a trojan horse. He's dealing with 12 other property owners (aka blight brokers) who want nothing more than to get paid. But I think Wolstein will come to realize very soon that the Shaia Family isn't in this for a shakedown.

^ that article was already posted at the Front Street Lofts thread (which is what Lighthouse Landing was called initially). I will answer this at the Front Street Lofts thread.

At a luncheon this past winter, Bob Corna told me that the next step Pirce will take is to start building on the parking lots between the current Stonebridge area and Nautica. I have no further details on that. They are also VERY interested in backing a proposed trolley (a real one, not RTA's buses) on the lower deck of the Detroit-Superior bridge as part of a loop between Ohio City and downtown.

I suspect they will help resolve things. But this is still a very new issue/predicament. Efforts to resolve it will likely start as early as next week. If I hear anything, I will pass it along.

Aw shucks. 8-)

It gets better (or worse, depending on how sick my sense of humor is at any given time).... I spoke to someone today who was in the room during a negotiating session between the port authority and the owners of the various Flats properties. When Tony George was asked to give a counterproposal to the port authority's purchase offer, he responded with "Blow me." That's a direct quote. It went downhill from there. Tony George told a city official that if the Flats East Bank redevelopment project wasn't withdrawn, he would reactivate his "Ohio Citizens League" campaign to shrink the number of city council members. We sure do have a lot of rich, adult crybabies in this city. For more information about George's recent desire to reduce the size of council, see http://www.freetimes.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2985 He dropped that campaign because he said he was satisfied with the way things were being run by council. I suspect he (or a close friend/associate) was personally "satisfied" in some way. Though I doubt it was because someone was willing to relent to his request to "Blow me" (at least not literally). Really classy, Tony.

Plus, on the right side of that photo, that's all the surface parking -- right up to Prospect and east into the 600 block.

Cool pics!

OK, here's the skinny: First off, the Port Authority (PA) is neither pro or anti either side in this situation. The PA's work is defined by legislation passed by Cleveland City Council which has set the physical parameters of the Flats East Bank (FEB) development site. Those parameters include the parking lot owned by Victor Shaia's Main Street Parking LLC, and which is the site of his proposed Lighthouse Landing development. Thus, even if Shaia went to the PA (which he hasn't yet) to request financing for the construction of his parking garage, the PA couldn't respond because he and his proposed project are not a part of the FEB development plan as set forth in Cleveland city law. However, Wolstein, the city and the PA have not yet signed a development agreement for the FEB project. Cleveland City Council's Economic Development Committee is scheduled to meet Tuesday morning to potentially recommend to the full City Council that they should approve the development agreement. However, I am hearing that this agenda item for the committee may be postponed to the next meeting. I cannot yet confirm this nor do I know the reason why it might be postponed. Shaia has something big going for him -- his plan conforms to the Historic Warehouse District's (HWD) masterplan, and the HWD's Design Review Committee approved Shaia's Lighthouse Landing conceptual plan on April 4. Furthermore, the HWD's masterplan was updated several years ago, before before Wolstein's development was proposed in the adjacent Flats district. Ironically, the Flats Oxbow Association didn't even have a development masterplan until Wolstein's FEB was proposed, and the Flats Oxbow Association's masterplan is identical to Wolstein's plan. That's ass-backwards in the planning world. And, the Flats Oxbow Association did not coordinate with the HWD to ensure the shared edges of the two masterplans weren't conflicting with each other. This is the foundation of the disagreement between Wolstein and Shaia. It has not been helped by the fact that Wolstein has refused to discuss the issue with Shaia, saying instead that all discussions need to go through the PA. Ultimately however, this is all about parking. Wolstein says in order for him to proceed with Phase 1 (with demolition, infrastructure and sewers scheduled to start this summer and construction in 2007), he must have the parking lot which Shaia owns. After today, I am convinced that Shaia is serious about developing his property, and the most compelling reason is one I can't share with you yet. Sorry! But take my word for it. But I can share with you another compelling reason... While Victor Shaia doesn't have any development experience (which Wolstein is eager to point out), his two nephews who run Walnut Grove Development Ventures (WGD), based in Richmond, VA, do have a great deal of experience. It is WGD which will be developing Lighthouse Landing. WGD subsidiaries have developed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of projects, including: Charter Commerce Center – Mechanicsville, VA – At this 7-acre site, zoned for office/service, we have completed the first of two 40,000-square-foot buildings and have begun the process of developing the second. The first building is 88% occupied. We currently lease and manage this location. Cokesbury Apartments – Richmond, VA – Historical building that we converted from office/retail into 20 apartments with retail on the 1st floor. Completed in 1998 the apartments are currently 100% leased. W.T. Grant Building – Richmond, VA – The current building is 45,000 square feet and is located across from the newly expanded Richmond Convention Center. We have begun the process developing this historic property into a 100-plus room extended-stay hotel. Charter Creek Apartments – Mechanicsville, VA – This property consists of 150 garden home apartment units. Completed in 1997, it has realized a sustained occupancy of 96% or greater. Kings Charter Planned Unit Development – Mechanicsville, VA – A mixed-use development including office/service, retail, office park, apartments, and residential completed in 1999, we concentrated on the residential portion of the property selling 573 homes. We developed the property for 6 builders and had our real estate company sell the homes for the builders. Stafford Lakes Village – Stafford, VA – This property is a mixed-use development similar to Kings Charter. We developed and sold 445 properties. Stafford Lakes Village Commercial Property – Stafford, VA – Currently we own 92 acres of commercially zoned property. We are working with another developer and have 25 acres under contract for a 200,000 square foot super Wal-Mart. The remaining 67 acres is split between retail and office property. We are marketing 35 acres of the remaining commercial property to a large box, home improvement company. The remainder of the office property will be developed by WGV after the above is underway. Catawba Ridge – Lancaster, SC – This property is currently under contract and is zoned for an 840-acre mixed use property located on a 3,000-acre lake. The expected density will be between 5,000 and 6,200 units. The property is ideally located between Charlotte, NC, and Columbia, SC, a very high-growth area. Our marketing strategy will target those who want a maintenance-free, lake front lifestyle. The property includes access to a marina, several restaurants, a golf course and the lake. __________________ I'm sure I'm leaving out some tidbits, but the greatest irony is that the city bemoans all the surface lots downtown, yet an agreement with another developer is putting at risk an additional investment downtown of $75 million that would turn a parking lot into a more beneficial use. It would seem logicial that the city should step in and facilitate an arrangement to appease both sides of this issue. If that happens, the entire city will win. If it doesn't, it will send the wrong message to developers who haven't invested here before. And on that score, the entire city will lose.

Let me stop you all from posting further thoughts on this until I've had a chance to fill in some details -- which I will do after I've had a chance to eat dinner (!). I spent much of today on the phone with various parties involved in this whole matter, and while I don't want to preempt my article on Thursday, you should know some issues involved here. So give me an hour or so before I can elaborate.

So can MayDay take some credit for bringing you back to Ctown?

^ Or at least bicycle patrols. I wrote an article about five year ago when a North Olmsted bicycle patrol officer caught up to and pulled over a Corvette. Of course, on Lorain Road near the mall, that's probably no great challenge!

^ Excellent points (both MGD and CtownD). I also got the whiney tone from Nancy Lesic -- but she was whiney (and downright nasty) when she worked as Mayor White's spokeswoman.