Mitchell Schneider held a telephone conference call this evening to shill for Oakwood Commons.  Talking points:

 

• Park's acreage will make it similar in size to Cain Park
  
• $700,000 in projected revenue to the city's general fund.
  
• Synergy with Cedar Center rather than predatory competition
  
• First Interstate's Legacy Village already contributes taxes to the SEL district; most of Oakwood's property taxes would go to CH-UH school district.
  

 

There were a handful of questions but nothing that's swayed me one way or the other as yet.

Assuming you were a S Euclid resident, which way do you vote on Issue 96?  A yes vote would approve the re-zoning and allow the development to proceed.  A no vote would be to reject the re-zoning.

 

Honestly, if I lived east of Belvoir and/or north of Mayfield (i.e. far, far away from this potential development), I would probably be voting yes.

Mitchell Schneider held a telephone conference call this evening to shill for Oakwood Commons.  Talking points:

 

• Park's acreage will make it similar in size to Cain Park
  
• $700,000 in projected revenue to the city's general fund.
  
• Synergy with Cedar Center rather than predatory competition
  
• First Interstate's Legacy Village already contributes taxes to the SEL district; most of Oakwood's property taxes would go to CH-UH school district.
  

 

There were a handful of questions but nothing that's swayed me one way or the other as yet.

 

Here's the thing.  Whatever they're selling you today is very unlikely to be what you're going to get tomorrow.  This is true of any development, but perhaps especially true of First Interstate.  They made a lot of promises about Legacy and much of what was drawn up in the original plans never happened.

 

I have a feeling that this is going to pass regardless though.  Just a gut intuition.

Not to get too far off topic, but was there a forum for Legacy Village...  are there diagrams of what was originally promised?

Not to get too far off topic, but was there a forum for Legacy Village...  are there diagrams of what was originally promised?

 

Off of the top of my head, I can tell you that Legacy was supposed to be mixed-use.  The developers never got to the residential/commercial stage, for whatever reasons (perhaps it was the economy, but still).  I guess my point is that things can change and in an area that is already far too over-saturated with retail, this is the best that First Interstate can come up with as far as a development.  I don't even want to imagine worst case scenario, but I'm thinking check cashing places and who knows what else.

 

Here's a thought: Why might First Interstate have not tried to put together an office/commercial park?

I agree.  See my comments above re: Cedar Center.  There are a lot of pretty drawings but what comes out in the end is never quite what is sold on the public.

 

I also agree that I think it will pass, largely for the reasons you stated. This is in a pretty remote cranny of South Euclid and will not obviously affect a large portion of the city.  To me it's an easy sell, unless you're concerned about the traffic or you're just generally anti big-box.  I think there are a handful of them, but nowhere near to the extent there are in Cleveland Heights, where this would have a lot tougher time passing.

 

The best argument against this thing is that the fears of some ugly residential being dropped in there are unfounded.  And they might be, given the size of the property.  You could argue that even a development full of cul-de-sacs would be better than allowing this kind of retail at this spot.

I am really on the fence with this one.  The fact that every politician seems to be all for it makes me want to go the other way.  We're over-saturated with retail and while this may bring jobs to the city (and therefore some tax revenue), I don't see it as much of a positive gain regionally.  Big box will definitely feel out of place there.

 

On the other hand, it appears a Yes vote will preserve several acres as parkland, while there's nothing to ensure that if it remains residential and it's developed that way.  The market is also flooded with housing, but I don't think that will stop a developer from swooping in and putting up some potentially ugly and shoddy new housing.  Also, it's his land, who a I to say what he can and can't do with it?  It's a shame someone won't do something really useful with that swath. 

 

We've heard promises from developers in the past - look what happened at Cedar Center.  The city will roll over for anyone if it means a chance at more revenue.  I don't know who the prospective tenants are but it blows my mind that any are lining up to be a part of this project in such a transitional area when it barely supports University Square and Severance is 5 minutes one way and Legacy Village is 8 minutes the other way.

 

 

 

Yeah, retail is oversaturated as it is. How does this help Cedar Center North get off the ground just a few blocks away? Let alone, trying to fill in the vacancies at Severance, University Square, and Legacy.

Yeah, retail is oversaturated as it is. How does this help Cedar Center North get off the ground just a few blocks away? Let alone, trying to fill in the vacancies at Severance, University Square, and Legacy.

 

In fairness, First Interstate and those in South Euclid that support the Oakwood development probably don't give a rat's behind about Severance and University Square.  This is what a lack of regionalism does.  We get more and more retail because the suburbs are all competing against each other, but in the end, everyone loses.  South Euclid can't pay its bills so it whores itself out.

The best argument against this thing is that the fears of some ugly residential being dropped in there are unfounded.  And they might be, given the size of the property.  You could argue that even a development full of cul-de-sacs would be better than allowing this kind of retail at this spot.

 

Their anti-residential argument is that it will cost the taxpayers more to service (public safety, garbage collection, etc.) this new area than the amount in new taxes that might come in. 

First Interstate purchases Oakwood Country Club property in Cleveland Heights; makes plans for senior living, retail, greenspacePublished: Tuesday, October 18, 2011, 2:46 PM    Updated: Tuesday, October 18, 2011, 2:46 PM

 

CLEVELAND HEIGHTS -- First Interstate Properties has finalized the purchase of the 90 acres of the former Oakwood Country Club located within Cleveland Heights.

 

First Interstate Properties President Mitchell Schneider said that his firm is spending $2.2 million for the Cleveland Heights property, property he is looking to develop into senior living and retail use.

 

In addition, Schneider said First Interstate would preserve the Oakwood clubhouse, built in 1905, for use by the seniors living on the site, and preserve 30 acres as greenspace.

http://www.cleveland.com/sun/all/index.ssf/2011/10/first_interstate_purchases_oak.html

 

Their anti-residential argument is that it will cost the taxpayers more to service (public safety, garbage collection, etc.) this new area than the amount in new taxes that might come in. 

 

That one is hard to believe.  Otherwise, why develop anything?  From the above article:

 

"Schneider said South Euclid City Engineer Andy Blackley concluded that if homes are built, each new home would increase city costs for services by $1.50 for each new dollar the city would receive in taxes."

 

Well then why did they push through that Cutters Creek development off Anderson a few years ago?  Is this poor tax revenue:projected expenses ratio due to the fact that the land is in the CH-UH school district and therefore SE would not get most of the property taxes?  I want more numbers.  The article cites 350 homes that could be built on the property.  Let's say 300 households with income, at an average of $48k (the 2010 census median).  That is a increase in the tax base of $14.4 million.  At 2%, that's income tax revenues of $288k?  Plus perhaps something from property taxes.  Schneider repeatedly cited $700k in tax revenue directly to the South Euclid general fund.  That seems incredibly inflated, even if that 700 jobs he touts all materialize.  The AVERAGE salary for those 700 workers would have to be $50k a year for that to generate $700,000 of yearly income tax revenue to South Euclid.

 

I guess the crux of this thing comes down to whether or not you really believe that residential of an unknown nature COULD be built at that location anytime soon, and whether that possibility is worse than what's being offered, namely: some hideous retail, a couple hundred thousand a year in income taxes and a rather secluded city park.

Yeah, retail is oversaturated as it is. How does this help Cedar Center North get off the ground just a few blocks away? Let alone, trying to fill in the vacancies at Severance, University Square, and Legacy.

 

In fairness, First Interstate and those in South Euclid that support the Oakwood development probably don't give a rat's behind about Severance and University Square.  This is what a lack of regionalism does.  We get more and more retail because the suburbs are all competing against each other, but in the end, everyone loses.  South Euclid can't pay its bills so it whores itself out.

 

Exactly.  This is insane.

I saw a 3D sketch of the Oakwood plan on TV and on the internet at http://voteyes96.net/.  The rendering is consistent with the site plans shown thusfar.  Keep in mind this image represents the best of what to expect (when all the trees are 40ft and mature).  

^ Yes, I love how so many renderings of suburban strip malls and even city streetscapes show what the project will theoretically look like with mature vegetation 40 years down the road. More often than not, a lot of the trees end up dying/stunted or just never get that big to begin with, or in most cases the plaza goes out of fashion or is rebuilt without the trees taking full root.

 

With so many zoning codes now requiring plantings for every X amount of parking spaces in parking lots across America, it's really hard for me to envision if a a Target or Wal-Mart parking lot in 2050 will really have majestic 50' tall oak trees similar to what you'd see along the boulevards in Cleveland and the Heights.

Even with the mature trees, only somebody from Streetboro could possibily find that rendering attractive (I take that back 90%, of most surbanites (and even a fair share of city residents) would not find those nice new shiny warehouse looking stores attractive).  Look at Westgate, look at Avon Commons, look at the junk on either side of Rt 43 in Bainbridge near Geauga Lake.  The list goes on and on.

Here's my rendering of what that will look like 40 years down the road.

 

http://tinyurl.com/3kgzu9v

With South Euclid passage of Issue 96, developer Mitchell Schneider says "It's time to get to work" on Oakwood Commons

 

http://www.cleveland.com/sun/all/index.ssf/2011/11/with_south_euclid_passage_of_i.html

 

One of the PD "commentors" said that there is going to be a Super Walmart.  Presumably, the Walmart in Severance/Cleveland Heights will close.

^Maybe that will be Schneider's way of punishing Cleveland Hts....although as a resident of CH and a person who has never been in a Wal-Mart in my life, I personally would not see it as any great loss (although the loss of tax revenue would hurt aswell as the big gap at Severance).

The Super Walmart rumor I think was more of a scare tactic, intended to reinvigorate the community that fought so hard against the one at Severance.  Not certain about this, but I believe CH has a poison pill in the deal with Walmart should they desire to close that store and leave it empty at Severance. 

 

I listened into a town hall meeting with Mayor Welo a few weeks back and, although she claims even she doesn't know for certain who the tenants will be, she has fielded calls from Loews and Kohl's to name a few retailers who wanted to know more about the City.  Personally, I would welcome a Loews to the inner ring as we don't have one anywhere close and I prefer that store to Home Depot.  In the end, I see this being a carbon copy of the retail center in Highland Heights on Wilson Mills Blvd and Alpha Dr.

^ugh...does that include all the asphalt up front.

By the way, I read an article a couple of weeks ago which stated Lowe's is closing 20 underperforming stores and cutting the annual number of new store openings from 30 a year to about 15.

By the way, I read an article a couple of weeks ago which stated Lowe's is closing 20 underperforming stores and cutting the annual number of new store openings from 30 a year to about 15.

 

None in the CLE region

^ugh...does that include all the asphalt up front.

 

See the rendering posted by img on page 4.  Heaven forbid there not be ample parking for the 1-2 days out of the year it would actually be needed.

Does that include Denny's?! ;)

 

This is such a waste.  Ay-oh, way to go South Euclid!

Everyone dissing SE because it's getting 2 large developments. Sure, I'm frustrated that neither will look like downtown Lakewood, but let's review 2 simple factors:

 

1. Just about every store opening at Cedar Center North is located in downtown Lakewood. And I love downtown Lakewood. The difference is that there will be a parking lot at Cedar Center to provide parking. Oh wait, the shopping center in downtown Lakewood also has a parking lot. The stores that both will have: Panera, Chipotle, Five Guys, and a Jimmy John's. Sounds the same to me. Actually, it sounds a lot like Westgate, Southpark, and Mentor to be honest. SE has every right to have these stores too. I didn't know there was some sort of prohibition on letting SE have these sort of food options too.

 

2. Oakwood Commons is from the developer of Legacy Village and Steelyard Commons. We have all praised Steelyard Commons for bringing retail to the city. SE is an inner ring and in recent years has desperately sunk behind its neighbors in retail offerings with the loss of Cedar Center North. University Heights' University Square and Cedar Center South; Beachwood's Beachwood Place and La Place; Lyndhurst's Legacy Village; Mayfield's Golden Gate and East Gate; and Cleveland Heights' Severance Circle. As a resident of South Euclid, I shop at EVERY ONE OF THESE SHOPPING CENTERS. Each has stores I like and use. It's odd because the only place I shop in my own city is the Starbucks and a few indy shops like Warehouse Beverage and some Jewish restaurants. I spend a lot of money in stores and I'd love to spend it in SE. The places I do shop are mostly smaller indy shops and that's great but I'd love to have the option to shop in SE than go to Beachwood or Mayfield along the I-271 corridor, if I could. I often question why every suburb around me has huge modern shopping centers and my city has none. I am in favor of my city having better retail. The shopping center at Green and Mayfield needs a major overhaul and is not enough for a city of 20,000 people with few other businesses. Beachwood is making big $ from all the businesses along Chagrin and Richmond - 100's upon 100's of hotels, office buildings, and campuses. Lyndhurst has Landerhaven. Both have Fortune 500's. SE has none of that. So yes, I support new development, if it means developing a private golf course into a retail development. I love green space and with the right circumstances, I'd have supported the scare-tactic-using Citizens of Oakwood in their campaign to stop Oakwood. Only problem with Fran and her extreme military tactics is that they propose the owner of private land donate it all as a park magically all the money to maintain the park would fall from the sky.

 

As for SE - I am sort of sick of people bashing it. I am a resident of the city and moved there from Lakewood and love it. City services are excellent, never have I seen crime or experience it. There is an extreme variety of ages and diversity in this city: college kids, seniors, children, families, young professionals, and so on. I'm sorry Lola isn't in our backyard for the extreme urban pioneers. I'm also sorry that everything isn't beautiful for all the exurban paranoia folk. Sorry everyone isn't white. Sorry everyone isn't rich. My neighbors to my left are from Korea, my neighbors to my right moved here from Hungary, many Orthodox Jewish families live on my street, my neighbors across the street are African American, Israeli, and American, respectively. I am 30. My neighbors to the left have kids, to the right are empty nesters. I've never seen such diversity in my life. It's a nice feeling. Last time I checked, Notre Dame is beautiful; All the independently owned businesses on Mayfield and Cedar are unique to SE only; The library in a former mansion is beautiful; Our other country club is beautiful; Access to highways, college campuses, malls, museums, downtown, and University Circle is central and excellent. Sidewalks everywhere, trees everywhere, wildlife ALL THE TIME, and an outstanding dog park all things that are nice amenities of the city. A YMCA, a good school district, and excellent tennis courts at the SELREC. The Bavarian Tea Shop is awesome; The fact that I can walk to the Apple Store in 10 minutes and to Whole Foods in 10 minutes is something I am proud of. I hate to have to sit here and protect my city, but ya know what, too many people bash South Euclid on here in a way that I feel you are hardly any better than the people who degrade the Cleveland.com forums. Honestly, it offends me and makes me sad that we urbanOhioan's can't be more openminded and considerate to all the cities in our region than just the hip neighborhoods in the city. And for those who just can't hold in their tendency to bash other cities, you should check out the previous edition of the Heights Observer, which ranks SE the #2 suburb of Cleveland, next to Cleveland Heights. It ranked in first with access to amenities and first for access to parks. The fact we are getting our largest park ever now, I'm very pleased.

Whoa, easy there.  Many of us don't hate on South Euclid.  I actually just had a conversation where I was defending the city a couple weeks ago.  But that doesn't change the fact that these two new developments are a disgrace to the inner ring (and yes, Lakewood does those things sometimes as well, although there's nothing in Lakewood anything like what Oakwood Commons will be, and the plaza in downtown Lakewood is a disgrace as well).

 

I'm equally hard on any city that develops crap.  I believe I've hammered University Heights on here for replacing a strip of multiple stores built up to the street with a McDonald's surrounded by a parking lot.  And one of the previous posters that thinks these new developments are crap as well is a resident of SE.

^Agreed...nobody is bashing South Euclid....just bad design and inappropriate development for an inner ring suburb, especially given the great retail urban design which is being built throughout the country.

I'm only speaking in general about what I see everytime I click the Oakwood or Cedar Center threads. Lot's of rage and anger towards SE. I'd rather not spark a conversation of who dished SE and who defended it because at that point the thread will get a huge AX saying OFF TOPIC. I'd much rather discuss a point you made: "these two new developments are a disgrace". What do you feel the better solution would have been? The Citizens of Oakwood had no solution except to say the privately owned land should be donated as a park. To ask someone who just spent millions buying land to then donate it is absurd. To then ask for this happen and not offer a solution on WHO will maintain the park, WHO will convert the golf course into a park, WHO will buy the park.. NONE of those things were answered by Fran. Maybe had they offered a realistic plan, I'd have supported it. The developer stated that if the ballot failed and Oakwood was stopped, he'd have built housing which would have most likely eliminate the park and would also bring no new jobs nor nearly as much revenue to the city. So, to say the solution to Oakwood was to vote down 97, I'd have to say NO, that's not the solution. If the solution was an urban designed shopping center, then I'd have to ask why, considering there is no street parking there, and it's a very busy high speed road - that is not the place to build up to the sidewalk. I'd argue the opposite for anything along Mayfield since much of the retail is already built in that fashion and there is a lot of side street parking available. That is not an option at Oakwood since the streets are on the opposite side of the boulevard. So again, I'd say that is not the solution. We can't say the project is a disgrace based on what retailers are coming because NOBODY knows what they even are. So, what I'd really like to discuss is WHY this and Cedar Center are disgraces. We often cite other urban success stories, but sometimes we fail to realize what works in one city doesn't necessarily work in the next.

Also - I will agree 100% maybe even more on the disgrace of a Gordon Food Services and Bob Evans as the first two announced retailers at Cedar Center. I hate both and will not go to either, but, I realized when I was driving to Solon last night, I passed a Bob Evans at Chagrin and I-271, and another one at 422 and Som Center and yet ANOTHER one in Aurora by their big shopping center. I realized THEY ARE EVERYWHERE and there's not much we can do to stop them. It's like McDonald's - everywhere! Every part of Cleveland, every city in our country. So yes, it is disgraceful, but no, it's no different than anywhere else. As for the rest of the retail announced at Cedar Center, I'm quite impressed. Especially by the return of Golden Dragon and a new coffee shop. Even if Sbux moves over, it will absolutely be a good thing because the current location is almost always so packed there is nowhere to park and the inside has almost every seat accounted for when I go there. So these are some of the things I'm looking at right now. Panera serves coffee drinks and so that means 2 new coffee shops to go hang out at. Nice for the Notre Dame and JCU students. Nice for all the UH and SE residents to have more options.

 

When I think of disgrace in the area, several things DO come to mind: 1) the vacant parcel behind Wal-Greens is a huge eyesore; It is screaming "TEAR ME DOWN"; The huge field of weeds next to Burger King is also a huge eyesore; Not sure who owns this land but I know that it went to auction and someone bid on it and won; And the shopping center torn down for a McDonald's - if they added more to the mix than just 1 place, I'd have been ok with it. But that center once had 5-6 places in it and now it's going to be a McDonald's of all the places we hate, I definitely put them right next to Wal-Mart and Bob Evans. However in all due respect, I will accept that as some people love these places the way I love Whole Foods or Melt, so to each their own.

To be honest, no I do not think South Euclid should have every store every other suburb does.  Those lines are arbitrary, and that sort of "competition" hurts the entire region.  South Euclid residents are hardly starved for retail in their general area.  And some of those restaurants you listed in Lakewood are located in historic mixed use buildings.  If this project looked more like downtown Lakewood (as a whole), it would be eagerly welcomed by the region's urbanists.

Not sure how a Jimmy John's and a Panera in South Euclid hurts the entire region. Some retailers have 100's of locations in a single city. Cleveland has a Jimmy John's by CSU, another by Public Square, another planned for University Circle. Are those ones hurting each other, even though they are all owned by Jimmy John's? We're not talking about business headquarters such as the way multiple city's competed over American Greetings. We're talking about national chains here in the retail sector. Their formula for success is: expand and grow. Plain and simple as that. If Jimmy John's doesn't get built at Cedar Center, then it eventually gets built at Legacy. So I'm not following the reasoning for not building Cedar Center with retailers that already exist, considering there is indeed demand in that area.

 

As for re-adapting historical buildings - yes it's nice when it's available. Not everywhere has historic buildings to re-adapt. South Euclid was built up in the 40's, so nothing there is historical. As a matter of fact, Cedar Center is a re-adaptive use of land. Oakwood is a rare land opportunity that places like Lakewood does not have available. Each city has different opportunities. The developers develop what becomes available.

 

What is it that we want to see happen to make projects a success in the mind of urban planning? Right now, nothing in Cleveland or the entire region is up to par with what is happening all over the country in that regards. Take the Whole Foods in Santa Monica that I was just at: a 2 level underground parking garage and zero surface spots available. The only thing that Uptown or Lakewood does better than Cedar Center is that they HIDE the parking lots behind the building.

Actually, restaurant franchisees often raise these issues, having been falsely assured certain territories.  But I was talking about the project as a whole, which revolves around major retail, which the eastern suburbs have no shortage of.  Building more of it only leads to emptiness nearby, as well as more excuses to never add any retail downtown.  There's no reason you can't have your Jimmy Johns without the megaplaza.  Does South Euclid not have any empty retail buildings that could house a Jimmy John's?  I'm pretty sure it does.   

South Euclid has very little empty retail, contrary to what people seem to think. Mayfield (the main retail area) is full of small mom and pop shops and non-national stores. There may be a few empty spots, but they have no parking available. That is the problem with those spots. They were built when Mayfield had street parking which it no longer does. The road is very busy and never again will the right lane become a "parking lane". The shopping centers at Green and Cedar are 100% leased on both sides of the street and have been for as long as I can remember. There are no vacancies in the area except University Commons which is faulted in design. Now that you got me thinking about it, now I see why Schneider wants to develop Oakwood. There aren't any places for Kohl's or Olive Garden to expand, and this would indeed bring new retailers to the area. And it also has me thinking that the reason there's no shortage of retail is because it's a very busy area - highly and densely populated by residents but also an area that is attracting people from all over NE Ohio. Whole Foods (about 2x the size of the other location), Legacy, Beachwood, La Place - all have retailers that are nowhere else in NE Ohio, so people are DRIVING into our area to shop here. That means 2 things: They are car dependent and need parking spaces and also it means that if a Jimmy John's or Panera (or some other retailer that "shouldn't have too many locations in the region" should be built somewhere, it should be built here along the Cedar Road corridor instead of the exurbs and interchanges along highways because the entire area becomes a place to go, a destination for the shopper.

Tried to send this to Biz via PM, but the box was full:

 

Hey Biz, I was just reading your South Euclid thread and saw you were recently in Santa Monica.  Do you travel to LA often for business?  If you do, hit me up with a PM next time you're in town as I live right in the Mid-City area of LA.  Would be nice to meet a fellow UO'er out here. Cheers---Jeremy

 

 

 

      No one hates South Euclid . I also happen to be a resident there. I even happen to live in the "West Five" dont you know. I voted against this project for obvious reasons. Currently traffic backs up on warrensville next to the West Five during certain times of the day, now add thousands more cars.and we will see if I can turn in or out of my street. Once cedar center center and the new Mcdonalds are finished it will add many more. In addition those who tout the park as a benefit are wrong. Does anyone remember the loving youths who burnt down the playground of possibilites in Bexely Park. Having a park is nice, but where once there were none now there will be unsuprivised youth which means trouble at some point. Many of my friends live on East Antisdale, what do you think has become of the property values of those who face Oakwood Commons. The city wouldn't even fight for a 100 ft buffer, 50 ft is way too close for such a big project. Nice trucks and cars and youths for the rest of their home ownership experience.

    The area between Mayfield and Cedar was built as a residential area with a golfcourse that was already there, a nice and quiet area with commercial on the edges where it belongs. Not in the middle. Biz where do you live? I bet not in the West five . Maybe on the other side of Belvoir? What the realtors call desirable maybe?

      Yes there is never wrong with chains, but non chains would have made Cedar center unpredictable and exciting. That is the point of chains in that every where you go the experience is the same.  GFS, Bob evans, maybe an Olive Garden, pet store, and some chinese; wow how exciting. They tore down and spent all that money for that and will still come out owing money. How sad.

      Oakwood is a highly uninspired use of that land, it is sad that couldnt think of a better use. In the end it's just another shopping center, and a low end "value" one at that. Fran Mentch at the end realized it would probably never all be park , but at least she hoped for something better than this.

 

 

I'm bashing South Euclid. ;) 

 

No, seriously, I think that South Euclid is making a huge long-term mistake for small short-term gain to keep itself afloat and it's really sad.  Oakwood has/had so much greater potential.  First Interstate may have done a nice job in bringing retail to the city in its Steelyard Commons development, but the eastern suburbs have never had a lack of retail problem.  We really don't need more retail like that part of Cleveland may have needed it. 

 

This development makes no sense in the bigger picture, it's simply a money grab for South Euclid because every little fiefdom in Cuyahoga County has to get a piece of the action and justify its existence.  If South Euclid was/is having revenue problems, it should either completely merge with Lyndhurst or Cleveland Heights, or be split between the two.  The story of Oakwood Commons is a perfect example of why we need to consolidate governments and prevent such duplication in Northeast Ohio.

I wonder if Cleveland Heights could have made a Godfather offer to annex all SE land east of Warrensville, not counting Cedar Center.  Basically the West 5, which are part of the CH schools anyway, and Oakwood.  A vote on allowing this development on the Oakwood property would certainly have failed in Cleveland Heights, protecting Severance.  South Euclid has 5 less streets to plow and police about and adds to their funds, which are clearly dwindling.  That divestiture would make it potentially easier for a merger with Lyndhurst.

 

I live in South Euclid.  I don't think it's great.  It's an okay place to live.  Affordable is the best thing you can say about it.  This development could cannibilize Severance, obviously if the Wal-Mart shifts or Lowe's is added to compete with Home Depot.  There are plenty of vacancies along Mayfield.  Small locations, sure, but there is parking in the back, so I don't see that as a problem.  The abhorrent land use proposed for this development was promised to be mitigated by sustainable, LEED-certified construction, and greenspace preservation.  It is now the city's job to hold First Interstate to those promises.

 

      No one hates South Euclid . I also happen to be a resident there. I even happen to live in the "West Five" dont you know. I voted against this project for obvious reasons. Currently traffic backs up on warrensville next to the West Five during certain times of the day, now add thousands more cars.and we will see if I can turn in or out of my street. Once cedar center center and the new Mcdonalds are finished it will add many more. In addition those who tout the park as a benefit are wrong. Does anyone remember the loving youths who burnt down the playground of possibilites in Bexely Park. Having a park is nice, but where once there were none now there will be unsuprivised youth which means trouble at some point. Many of my friends live on East Antisdale, what do you think has become of the property values of those who face Oakwood Commons. The city wouldn't even fight for a 100 ft buffer, 50 ft is way too close for such a big project. Nice trucks and cars and youths for the rest of their home ownership experience.

    The area between Mayfield and Cedar was built as a residential area with a golfcourse that was already there, a nice and quiet area with commercial on the edges where it belongs. Not in the middle. Biz where do you live? I bet not in the West five . Maybe on the other side of Belvoir? What the realtors call desirable maybe?

      Yes there is never wrong with chains, but non chains would have made Cedar center unpredictable and exciting. That is the point of chains in that every where you go the experience is the same.  GFS, Bob evans, maybe an Olive Garden, pet store, and some chinese; wow how exciting. They tore down and spent all that money for that and will still come out owing money. How sad.

      Oakwood is a highly uninspired use of that land, it is sad that couldnt think of a better use. In the end it's just another shopping center, and a low end "value" one at that. Fran Mentch at the end realized it would probably never all be park , but at least she hoped for something better than this.

 

 

 

I admire your viewpoints, but you first state that the new park is a bad idea because our youth will destroy it. You then conclude that Fran's plan making all of Oakwood a park was the best bet all along. You can't have it both ways! What would you propose since a park is a bad idea, retail is a bad idea, and anything that adds traffic is a bad idea?

 

I also would like to point out that a developer is donating 20+ acres to become a park that he will maintain at no cost. I can't recall this happening anywhere in recent memory. I also want to remind all opposed to Oakwood that it will contain a high density residential aspect for seniors, which may introduce some highrises. There are already 2 large complexes adjacent to Oakwood for seniors so it will be a nice addition and population increase. Furthermore, the Oakwood Clubhouse is being implemented into the project and will be saved and re-adapted.

I'd say the time for trying to prevent this project has passed.  We should now be talking about what can we do to make it as good as possible.  There are already a lot of good features in the proposal, including the park and the reuse of the Oakwood Clubhouse. 

 

#1 on my list is incorporating walking and public transit access to this project to minimize the need for parking.  I think one of the biggest failings of Legacy Village is that it didn't incorporate a bus station with direct pedestrian access to the shopping area.  Walking around Legacy is a very pleasant experience; walking to Legacy is daunting.

I smell over-saturation of retail in the Heights.  Make it all park!

Buy it from the developer and make it happen, MTS!  Make him an offer he can't refuse.  I am sure you would get some kind of tax write off

Buy it from the developer and make it happen, MTS!  Make him an offer he can't refuse.  I am sure you would get some kind of tax write off

 

I would if I had the $$$.  It would be the most fabulous park you could visit!

I would if I had the $$$.  It would be the most fabulous park you could visit!

 

Sell your Brownstones!

I would if I had the $$$.  It would be the most fabulous park you could visit!

 

Sell your Brownstones!

:o :o :?

Oakwood is a rare land opportunity that places like Lakewood does not have available.

 

This is exactly right, which is why I believe that the decision to build more big box retail on that land when we already have so much in the near eastern suburbs (heck concentrated in that very vicinity) was a hasty and poorly-thought out decision.  That's the best they could come up with?  Really?

 

As for putting a park there, I think the funds and support to do so could have been raised given the appropriate amount of time.  As residents of Cuyahoga County, do we not all pay taxes that goes towards the Metroparks System?  As of now, there is no Metropark in Cleveland Heights or South Euclid, so I'm curious as to why they couldn't be persuaded to come in and run (and secure) the place?

Oakwood is a rare land opportunity that places like Lakewood does not have available.

 

This is exactly right, which is why I believe that the decision to build more big box retail on that land when we already have so much in the near eastern suburbs (heck concentrated in that very vicinity) was a hasty and poorly-thought out decision.  That's the best they could come up with?  Really?

 

As for putting a park there, I think the funds and support to do so could have been raised given the appropriate amount of time.  As residents of Cuyahoga County, do we not all pay taxes that goes towards the Metroparks System?  As of now, there is no Metropark in Cleveland Heights or South Euclid, so I'm curious as to why they couldn't be persuaded to come in and run (and secure) the place?

 

I could be mistaken - so someone correct me if I am - but I think this property was on the market for a year before it was sold - that's plenty of time for someone else to have purchased it for a different use.  Also, The current use pays a lot of money in property taxes and the new use will as well - I don't think they are asking for any tax abatement.  Turning this into a park would cost a ton of money for maintenance.  So instead of making money off this property it would be costing us money to maintain it.  I'd argue that this area already has a ton of parks - Forest Hill, Denison, Cumberland, Shaker Lakes.  The metroparks were apparently not interested. 

 

Now as to poorly thought out - that's on the cities to have master plans for their communities to ensure poorly thought out developments don't happen. 

 

Look - I'm not a fan of big boxes and the thought of adding tenants like Olive Garden and Red Lobster makes me ill, but the market demands what the market demands, and I bet you those stores would be busy - probably just not with many people from these boards.....

As of now, there is no Metropark in Cleveland Heights or South Euclid, so I'm curious as to why they couldn't be persuaded to come in and run (and secure) the place?

 

Euclid Creek Park?

...

As for putting a park there, I think the funds and support to do so could have been raised given the appropriate amount of time.  As residents of Cuyahoga County, do we not all pay taxes that goes towards the Metroparks System?  As of now, there is no Metropark in Cleveland Heights or South Euclid, so I'm curious as to why they couldn't be persuaded to come in and run (and secure) the place?

Park land can be acquired through one of several state and federal accounts that are funded for that purpose. 

I wonder if Cleveland Heights could have made a Godfather offer to annex all SE land east of Warrensville, not counting Cedar Center.  Basically the West 5, which are part of the CH schools anyway, and Oakwood.  A vote on allowing this development on the Oakwood property would certainly have failed in Cleveland Heights, protecting Severance.  South Euclid has 5 less streets to plow and police about and adds to their funds, which are clearly dwindling.  That divestiture would make it potentially easier for a merger with Lyndhurst.

 

I will never understand why the people who drew the borders included that little sliver of land north of Cedar and west of Warrensville as part of South Euclid.

 

Anyways, you bring up an interesting point about Cleveland Heights and First Interstate.  I believe that FI also now owns the part of Oakwood that is in CH.  I wonder what kind of cooperation they can expect from CH residents now after the bitter and divisive nature of the election in which CH residents were blamed for fueling the opposition to FI's plans.

I admire your viewpoints, but you first state that the new park is a bad idea because our youth will destroy it. You then conclude that Fran's plan making all of Oakwood a park was the best bet all along. You can't have it both ways! What would you propose since a park is a bad idea, retail is a bad idea, and anything that adds traffic is a bad idea?

 

I also would like to point out that a developer is donating 20+ acres to become a park that he will maintain at no cost. I can't recall this happening anywhere in recent memory. I also want to remind all opposed to Oakwood that it will contain a high density residential aspect for seniors, which may introduce some highrises. There are already 2 large complexes adjacent to Oakwood for seniors so it will be a nice addition and population increase. Furthermore, the Oakwood Clubhouse is being implemented into the project and will be saved and re-adapted.

 

I'm sorry but the addition of the park comes off as a cynical tactic that's, despite maintenance costs, is still going to likely save First Interstate hundreds of thousands of dollars in the long run.  Remember that 33% of the park will be part of the retention basin for the Oakwood Commons development.  So that means that even though that acreage is being used daily by the retail portion of the development, no taxes will be paid because it's technically part of the park.  Luckily for South Euclid (and Lyndhurst) the whole thing is part of the Cleveland Heights-University Heights City School District, so the losses come off of their tab.  The only South Euclid residents who are being screwed by this are the ones who live in the West Five section (common theme here) which use the CH-UH district.