the hotel in university circle does NOT require a dramatic set back from the street, lets not spread rumors.  and if someone thinks you can plop a market rate apartment at East 60th and Euclid Avenue by itself right now... good luck with that. we have had this conversation on this board way too many times.  mix in a dose of realism with your passion, it makes it easier to solve the problems that face us.

^^I'm not sure there's a UO consensus about these issues.  I'd rather see market rate apartments than a psych hospital on that part of Euclid... but that's not the real choice we're faced with.  So, more to the point, I'd rather see a psych hospital employing hundreds of people located on a marquee transit line in the urban core than not, and I'd rather see a psych hospital in the near term than vacant lots for another 20+ years.  I understand his point and respect it, but I suppose I'm less patient.  Plus, there's still plenty of underused Euclid frontage to accommodate future development possibilities.

So what are the two different institutions that are supposed to be combined here?

 

There's two state hospitals being combined into one. Do a Google search to find articles about this, or search here at UO (the Midtown thread). I think you will be able to find them.

 

And I don't have any problem with the setbacks or building placements along Euclid Avenue. Actually I'm generally pleased with them. My concern continues to be that many of these buildings don't interact with the sidewalks because they don't offer opportunities for the public to interact with these buildings, so the street life isn't there. I realize these can be chicken-and-egg situations, but it's getting to the point that there is enough development in many sections to warrant this approach.

I'd rather see market rate apartments than a psych hospital on that part of Euclid... but that's not the real choice we're faced with.  So, more to the point, I'd rather see a psych hospital employing hundreds of people located on a marquee transit line in the urban core than not, and I'd rather see a psych hospital in the near term than vacant lots for another 20+ years.  I understand his point and respect it, but I suppose I'm less patient.

 

Bingo.  I think we all get frustrated with the pace.  Find a way to get the region to absorb substantially higher prices/rents and we won't have to be so patient.  :)  Its amazing frustrating... and very real.

the hotel in university circle does NOT require a dramatic set back from the street, lets not spread rumors. 

 

I was only writing off of a report I read on the U.C. forum -- thank you for correcting me though. 

 

As for: and if someone thinks you can plop a market rate apartment at East 60th and Euclid Avenue by itself right now... good luck with that.

 

I specifically wrote the equation as Psych Hospital now, Urban developments later.

 

 

We do have to be realistic, Euclid Avenue from PS to UC is nearly 4 miles long, that's half the length of Manhattan.  It would take a century of strong leadership and intelligent design to make the full corridor an urban artery with retail/residential/commercial activity at every intersection -- however, one asset Cleveland has an abundance of is land -- why not build these projects one block north or south of the EC and allow the corridor the develop as the market sees.  Sure, right now E18 and Euclid is more valuable than E55 or E60, but over time that will change (if left alone).  By placing government service buildings here we are potentially shifting (forever) the future value of the adjacent blocks. 

 

Though I completely understand the idea of taking any reasonable projects/development now.  I just think we are either at the dawn of sustained urban growth, or the precipice of another missed opportunity with regard to the EC.

 

You can't just ram market rate apartments in amongst mental hospitals, homeless shelters and industrial parks.  Not now, not later.  I think that ship has sailed.  Cleveland's planning regime was faced with a choice here and they made one.  I did talk to Bob Brown when these plans surfaced, and he made it quite clear what choice had been made.  He also made clear the reason why: short term job growth trumps long term planning.  The city's position on this is a valid one, but it's not the only possible choice. 

 

To me, there's no sense in trading a few hundred jobs for a poorly planned city that chases away thousands more.  And if you're going to remake your entire main street, why would you then sacrifice it to the very first development options that come along?  If this wasn't worth doing right, what is?

^I don't disagree with your comment about "saving" places along euclid at all.  unfortunately both housing projects are "private" development and thus there is not much one can do.  the psych hospital I agree would be best built elsewhere. like i said... i'm not sure it is getting built at all right now. we'll see.

 

 

Yes.  People on this board, for whatever reason, have a very distorted view of what "we" can do in terms of dictating development.

Let's not forget too that there is plenty of underused land along Euclid between the innerbelt and East 55th, and this land is arguably much more near/mid term viable for market rate development than the East 60s because of its proximity to downtown (including CSU), Asiatown and other existing amenities.

 

If we want to lament lost opportunities on Euclid, ahead of these new projects currently agitating people, I would point to some of the Clinic's most egregious land hogs (Cole Eye Institute!) and the plethora of low rise non-profits nearby, which, noble as they are, have gobbled up the most prime parts of Euclid with very little development intensity.  It was a different time when these things were developed, but still a tad disappointing today.

 

And for pete's sake, Emerald Housing (or whatever it's called) is not a "shelter."  It's supportive housing.  It doesn't get emptied out every morning, there won't be lines outside.  It's not an ideal neighbor but it's not a flop house either.  And the only "industrial park" is Pierre's ice cream, which long predates this current activity.  The Geiss project is dull and chunky, but it isn't corrugated metal warehousing behind a big lawn along a cul-de-sac either.  It's not ideal but our only chance at getting what we really want is by heating up the market with some seed projects like this.

Yes.  People on this board, for whatever reason, have a very distorted view of what "we" can do in terms of dictating development.

 

Development is dictated every day, at least certain aspects of it.  We don't live in an anarchy.  Developers don't get to "dictate" land use and plannning.  Midtown didn't/doesn't have to be zoned industrial.  The city's decision to let Euclid Ave go industrial in the first place was a major factor driving early suburbanization.  That too wasn't necessary.  It was a policy choice made by officials in a democratic government.  They have the power to make and enforce laws, we have the power to replace them if we want things done differently.

 

Let's not forget too that there is plenty of underused land along Euclid between the innerbelt and East 55th, and this land is arguably much more near/mid term viable for market rate development than the East 60s because of its proximity to downtown (including CSU), Asiatown and other existing amenities.

 

Where?  Not only is that stretch mostly full, a lot of it is recent construction.  Red Cross, RTA garage, Applied Industrial, sewer HQ, some new offices... the only sizeable open lot I can think of, offhand, is the parking lot for the social services center at 40th.

 

I just don't think all seed projects are equally appropriate for all areas, and I really believe that arranging our main street like this will repel as much development as it creates.

Cleveland was born in the industrial revolution.  We grew way too fast because of it and everything was industrialized. That was 100 years ago. It complicates everything we do, we're dealing with reality here... not sim city.

Where? Not only is that stretch mostly full, a lot of it is recent construction. Red Cross, RTA garage, Applied Industrial, sewer HQ, some new offices... the only sizeable open lot I can think of, offhand, is the parking lot for the social services center at 40th.

I confess that Euclid between the innerbelt and 55th is a little fuller than I remembered when I just scouted it out on google maps.  There are still vast stretches of surface parking, including some new ones, but the downside of recent business development there is that this parking is probably not easy to develop.  Even so, I'd still guess there's more opportunity here than in the wasteland east of 55th.  Maybe by redeveloping underused lots, like this one: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Cleveland,+OH&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=45.149289,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Cleveland,+Cuyahoga,+Ohio&ll=41.503065,-81.662951&spn=0.002635,0.006539&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=41.503065,-81.662951&panoid=J4LaFmZfY1oeRjHy4W2UgA&cbp=12,189.05,,0,-1.5

 

Interesting you mention the RTA bus garage at 46th street.  Back in 2007 RTA said it would move its paratransit operations to another garage in Brooklyn so it could sell that Euclid Ave facility for TOD.  Since then it's apparently changed it's mind and is now rehabbing that garage, so looks like we're stuck with it.  Not sure why they changed course, but they may have been disappointed by what they though a buyer would pay for it.

The start of 2011 finds Euclid from E. 55th to University Circle with little land still completely up for grabs. Besides both sides just east of E. 55th, there is little vacant land not at least vaguely committed. A few parcels here and there - that's all. Past Pierre's all the way to the Clinic is now pretty much entirely spoken for. Very different from three years ago!

Regarding the site where the two apartment highrises came down, around Euclid and E. 73rd, does anyone know if that digging (within last week) is the actual beginning of construction for the residential structure?

Yes the project is under construction.  Footers are to be poured in the next couple of weeks.

Pulled off as I was driving down Euclid to snap a couple photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jjames0408/

Awesome.  Thanks!

Whatever jobs created by these "social service"-type projects being constructed or planned right on Euclid would be created a block or two away, as well. Let's not present this "here or nowhere" concept. They needn't not be built right there.

As for mental hospital, etc. intermixed with market-rate apartments - it's a big-city thing.  Done quite a bit in NY, Chicago, Boston, etc. If the exteriors are reasonably attractive - and we surely have to assume security is up to snuff - they can all blend together.

I'd too like to see all new construction along Euclid with very minimal setback - just to add my two cents. Even Pierre's should be closer to the street.

You can't just ram market rate apartments in amongst mental hospitals, homeless shelters and industrial parks. Not now, not later. I think that ship has sailed. Cleveland's planning regime was faced with a choice here and they made one. I did talk to Bob Brown when these plans surfaced, and he made it quite clear what choice had been made. He also made clear the reason why: short term job growth trumps long term planning. The city's position on this is a valid one, but it's not the only possible choice.

 

To me, there's no sense in trading a few hundred jobs for a poorly planned city that chases away thousands more. And if you're going to remake your entire main street, why would you then sacrifice it to the very first development options that come along? If this wasn't worth doing right, what is?

 

Very true. This whole thing reminds me of Chicago's Uptown neighborhood, which would probably be upscale and gentrified if it were not for the large presence of half-way houses and subsidized apartments. Basically this area has and will remain sketchy instead of living up to its potential. Cleveland should not make the the same mistake, because in 50 years this might be a roadblock to turning this area into a vibrant residential neighborhood. Ohio City has some of the same problems right now.

In 50 years, there will be a good argument for building a new, updated facility somewhere else.  Hospitals can have short life spans, relatively speaking.  But I'm sure if you can line up the developers itching to build a vibrant (albeit thin) residential/retail neighborhood right now between CSU and the Clinic, I'm sure TPTB can be persuaded to relocate the hospital and other alleged undesirable developments.

50 years is an awfully long time to wait for the Corridor investment to pay off.  All its concrete will need replaced by then.  At this point, I accept midtown "vibrancy" as a lost cause for our generation.  It's a little late for lining up developers now.  Midtown Inc has spent a lot of time and money planning it out as an industrial park.  Their master plan called for a small mixed-use/residential portion in the 70 streets, which technically, in a sense, we're getting.  Soon Euclid Ave will be just as happening as the north end of W25th St!

There were no developers to line up to execute your SIM City fantasy.  And that was not for lack of effort.  As far as the Euclid Corridor investment paying off, let me know the next time you are in town because you are missing A LOT.

There were no developers to line up to execute your SIM City fantasy.  And that was not for lack of effort. 

 

I don't understand how effort spent planning it as industrial equates to effort spent acheiving an alternate goal.  There can only be one official plan for any given parcel. 

 

I realize you and I disagree on the role of urban planning, but why should developers expect any help from the CDC and/or city for projects that don't fit the published master plan?  What incentive was there for developers to propose residential projects in an area already planned for something else?  If the CDC/city has already articulated a goal for an area, it seems like that can reasonably be expected to influence developer activity.  Why not look to another plot in a different area?  If nothing else, it's a "path of least resistance" analysis.

 

Are you aware of a previous Midtown masterplan that resembled my "SIM city fantasy" and failed?  Does the current official plan also amount to a fantasy?  If that's the case, then those things are a horrendous waste of money.

The issue is, we built this as a transit corridor and there doesn't seem to be anything transit-oriented about a lot of the developments.  There's hubs of urban activity at either end, and we're content to just fill in the middle with industrial park stuff.  Well then that's a LOUSY return on investment because part of that investment was in "Bus Rapid Transit."  (Which doesn't work as advertised even with the holes in the middle as it is, but that's for another thread).  So far there's lip service from the developers: "Oh yeah, the HealthLine was important to us in deciding our location," (whilst they scurry to find more places to put parking lots in their plans) and post-hoc ergo propter hoc statements from RTA: "Over 7 bazillion dollars in development is taking place near the corridor. It's a huge success!"

Let me present something to UrbanOhioans.  I live in Washington D.C. and there is an area here that reminds me, in many ways, of Euclid Ave.  It is called "H Street" or the Atlas District.  It's a 1 mile stretch, that as of 2004 one would have not felt comfortable walking down past 9 pm, and would have had nothing to see, do, or experience on any evening.

 

Between the City's renovation of an historic theater, and the development of a streetcar, the one mile stretch has become the new "hotspot" in D.C.  In the 3 years I have lived here dozens of restaurants and bars have taken to the street.  Yoga Clubs, non-profits, and chic clothing stores have started to fill in the once vacant store fronts.  People are going out nightly and the street has a vibe.  It's the direct result of public investment in streetscaping and transportation.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34449-2004Jun11.html

 

Granted DC has many more Urban residents...  But that's not my point.  My point is that areas that become serviced by BRT or Street Cars are meant to be Urban and lively.  That should be our goal for Euclid Avenue.  We have a downtown and an uptown that are, unfortunately 4 miles apart.  That doesn't bode well for a city that itself is many more miles spread apart and has a population of <500,000.  It's hard to get density, but essential for the kinds of uses and developments we want for Cleveland.

 

The chicken and egg theory, for Cleveland, points to the problem that the best aspects of urban life are yet to be easily and broadly available to suburbanites as an alternative.  Living in the WHD doesn't get you a Giant Eagle, or the top notch shopping of Beachwood Place.  We can't get people to move en masse downtown until it's a viable alternative.  Hough, Central, Kinsman, Glenville these places won't be the "better option" over Parma and Pepper Pike -- what will?

 

A unique, urban, vibrant Euclid Avenue, Warehouse District, Uptown Community, or Avenue District all connected by a speedy, clean Bus Rapid Transit (darn I wish it had been a street car!) is the only alternative that stands apart and reminds suburbanites who "love visiting their cousins in New York" that Cleveland has busy streets, intense night life, and amazing cultural institutions as well.

 

 

Excuse my misty-eyed conclusion but...  Euclid Avenue was once called  "The Showplace of America".  We need Euclid to be that future and that dream -- even if that means being deliberate and choosy with what is planned and developed.  It should be aspirational.  We've got Superior, and Carnegie, and Chester for "roads"; this should be an "Avenue" in the best possible sense of the word.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head there. I have friends who have lived in DC since before the beginning of the H St renewal project, and the change that I hear over and over from them is one of accessibility. People never visited the few businesses that struggled to stay alive on H St because getting to them by public transit was nigh impossible. Certainly many gave that area up as a lost cause - but with the combination of focused redevelopment and the addition of the streetcar it now has new businesses opening every month and an energetic feel to it that draws people in from all over the metro area.

 

Certainly this sort of transformation can take place in areas with such potential as Euclid Ave!

 

 

It is.  The area around Euclid in UC is under major construction with billions of dollars of development.  The area of Euclid from around E40th to Public Square is also flush with development.  What we are really talking about is the area between the Clinic and E40th.... about 30-40 city blocks which has very little infill to begin with.  I contend thatt you will not find a developer willing to build this vibrant strip you all envision until there is nothing left to develop in the two more prominent and promising stretches along the corridor, and there is a lot more work to do there.

 

If I am wrong, then show me one.... single.... developer who even proposed anything along the lines of what you envision.  Just one.  I am a glass half full kind of guy, but I also am realistic.  I also know a thing or two about zoning laws that would have purported to force the private landowners to sit on their property for a decade or two until your vision became a realistic and viable option.

 

The bottom line is that even with the current developments underway, MidTown still has enough vacant and unused lots to offer any developer a decade or two of construction activity.  May I suggest you start looking for that individual and let the City know when you've found him/her.

^^ I feel the same way. The only way I'd want to build there is if I got a sweetheart deal on a large amount of land, and there aren't that many developers (at this particular moment) looking for big tracts for land for any purpose. We should not rush it. I don't want Euclid to be a bunch of CMHA projects and strip malls for the sake of having something.

Jade4 -- welcome to the forum!

 

I think you are right, Hts121. What might change that is the creation of another development node (a thematic development magnet) in the middle of the corridor, such as around East 55th. That's the proposed site of the mental hospital which, its sheer size (14 acres) and employment (500 jobs), could serve as that magnet. But I don't think that project alone can do it, and some think it could repel spin-off development. And, of course, there's a chance this hospital may not get built at all.

 

A base-camp tech center or incubator might do it, as has been discussed often but could be pushed aside if the mental hospital is built here. Ferchill has proposed such a tech center, but now that project may go farther east at East 105th. Would it make sense to have two tech centers? That's what Hemingway Development is proposing with its planned tech center in the former Warner & Swasey plant at East 55th and Carnegie. Is this project enough to become a development magnet for that area?

 

Perhaps if the manufacturing mart at the Galleria matures and needs to expand that it could go here in the East 55th/Euclid area. Imagine if it becomes so successful that it needs laboratory spaces and product testing facilities for start-ups to rent or lease on an as-needed basis? Or there's need for a huge indoor showroom and vendor display, plus lots of offices for support and sales staff? Imagine if land was held outside the mart's building for the more successful manufacturing start-ups to build their own buildings so they can spread their wings and expand?

 

Another magnet might be a commuter rail station on the elevated tracks which go to the southeast side of the city where they split for three separate destinations: Solon/Aurora, Akron/Canton and Youngstown/Pittsburgh. But that assumes a lakefront station for downtown, rather than one at Tower City.

 

Those are a few potential magnets that could be added in the East 55th/Euclid area. But I do think that something thematic is needed in the middle of the corridor to fill that void. I hope we realize it will take decades for that happen, and it will have to be something that's fits a current and long-lasting need, with good timing (ie: decades-old urban colleges like CSU suddenly morphing from commuter schools into urban campuses, or Cleveland Clinic/University Hospitals benefiting from the aging Baby Boomers and the great interest in health care technologies).

 

It's an interesting subject to ponder.

I contend thatt you will not find a developer willing to build this vibrant strip you all envision until there is nothing left to develop in the two more prominent and promising stretches along the corridor, and there is a lot more work to do there.

 

I agree with this.  There is not much of a reason to put market rate housing in the "dead zone" right now because there are plenty of similar opportunities in better locations.  Maybe 10-20 years from now this area will be more appealing but I don't think it is at the moment.  More office projects like the Geis one under construction right now are really the only viable option I see for the near future. 

Your conclusion is correct, Hts121, nobody's going to find a residential developer for Midtown.  Not now.  And this stretch isn't nearly as long or as empty as it's often described here.  30-40 blocks?  From 55th to 79th there are maybe 5 or 6 idle lots.  Virtually none at all beyond those streets.  Demolitions could add a few more, but not a dozen.  One (more) hospital and one competitively-sized tech center will dominate it.  And the new housing isn't even going on an empty lot, they tore down historic structures instead.

In 50 years, there will be a good argument for building a new, updated facility somewhere else. Hospitals can have short life spans, relatively speaking. But I'm sure if you can line up the developers itching to build a vibrant (albeit thin) residential/retail neighborhood right now between CSU and the Clinic, I'm sure TPTB can be persuaded to relocate the hospital and other alleged undesirable developments.

 

True, but I'm worried about a precedence being set and then building more such developments. If that area gets to be desirable down the road there will likely be political forces fighting for the social service buildings to stay instead of being displaced to another part of the city. That is why I brought up Chicago's Uptown, because that is exactly what has happened there. Back in the day when Uptown was looked at as hopeless they allowed for a high concentration of social service housing, which still impacts that neighborhood today.

KJP -  great points, and I completely agree.  My overall point (way above) is that having a dual hub city (UC and Downtown) makes for an awkward tourist (or suburban tourist) visit, which is a reasonable measure of how a city appears to potential future-residents, and overall public.

 

I brought some friends into Cleveland to visit (and to show them this place rocks!) and took them to University circle to start.  After perusing the museums and having lunch at Wade Park we jumped on the Health line, which after about 3 stops gave us a tour of depressed neighborhoods, empty buildings and 1 story low density lots.  No this is not the entirety of the trip, but until we hit the 30s the Cleveland youtube tourist video was being shoved in my face.

 

They were impressed by some of the downtown, and I did my best to paint the picture of the future, but we can't deny this strip of land is in some ways more visible than the urban-planning eyesore between the lake and our city's bluff (read: railroads and pavement).

 

Hts121:  I'm not trying to pretend there are developers ready to build a grand skyline over 66th and Euclid, I'm only pressing the point further that Midtown could make or break the future of the city. 

 

So we either leave it desolate and empty so the youtube cracks can be made for another several decades.... or we fill it in with attractive, albeit not ideal, shovel ready developments that makes the ride from UC to downtown more attractive.  I will go with the latter.  And there is no way that whatever happens with MidTown, it would "break" our city.  No way in hell.

^Totally Aaree.  If the goal is to close the gap with functional, reasonably well sited buildings, Geiss's project will do just fine, as will the two affordable housing projects.  And better yet, they will do it now.  And the jobs they will bring could plant the seeds for future residential demand that is not even close to being there now.

 

For what it's worth, it literally took decades to get the midrise housing of Uptown to actually get started, despite master plan after master plan, cheap land, subsidies and adjacency to some of the region's best amenities.  That's on arguably one of the best sites in the city.  Our market is not an easy place to get new housing with any density built even under the best circumstances.

yes, I would like to develop housing downtown and university circle before we try bringing it to midtown, which really does not make sense at this time and why no developer is interested

Maybe not make-or-break, but I would call this area a rather big deal.  It connects our two hubs and it just received a huge transit investment.  Most nearby cities have a similar dual hub arrangement and we're all racing to redevelop the in-between corridor.  Columbus already won that race, and Cleveland probably had the biggest challenges facing it going in. 

 

Looking at its parallels in Cbus, Cincy, Pittsburgh and Detroit, how do the plans for our corridor compare?  I don't think any of those cities wants to put an industrial area between its two hubs, not even Detroit.  We're alone in making that choice.  My crazy pipe dream of not doing so here is based largely on those regional competitors.  But I realize that there's very little chance of altering the current plans.  They've been in the works for years and changing them (starting with the master plan) would set back redevelopment. 

 

All that said... I think there is still time to change course.  It is crucial to the city's future and possibilities do exist.  Yesterday I saw an article here that Toledo, after years of local disinterest, is getting Chinese investors to develop its riverfront...

I would like to see office campuses along midtown. I know thats not a popular idea on here but ill tell you why. Some companies want to have a campus, and currently they really dont have a place for that in the city. If we were able to get a campuses there, it would definitely improve the look of the street, retain business looking to move into an office campus, and possibly even attract new business who want to an office campus. For business who want towers, you have downtown, and for medical/hightech businesses you have University Circle. That way you would have space for everybody and it would improve the look. Hell, imagine if Eaton would have chose to build a campus there as well as American Greetings, it would have a huge effect on the area. I would choose that over whats planned now and over waiting decades for the chance of residential developments happening which I dont see happening anyways.

I would like to see office campuses along midtown. I know thats not a popular idea on here but ill tell you why. Some companies want to have a campus, and currently they really dont have a place for that in the city. If we were able to get a campuses there, it would definitely improve the look of the street, retain business looking to move into an office campus, and possibly even attract new business who want to an office campus. For business who want towers, you have downtown, and for medical/hightech businesses you have University Circle. That way you would have space for everybody and it would improve the look. Hell, imagine if Eaton would have chose to build a campus there as well as American Greetings, it would have a huge effect on the area. I would choose that over whats planned now and over waiting decades for the chance of residential developments happening which I dont see happening anyways.

 

I do believe Cleveland could use some office parks within the city, however, this location is probably not the best option.  It's not what the maser plan is designed for.  Areas however near E152 and the Shoreway, W117th and 90, Steelyard, Sure, but not here.  JMHO.

I would like to see office campuses along midtown. I know thats not a popular idea on here but ill tell you why. Some companies want to have a campus, and currently they really dont have a place for that in the city. If we were able to get a campuses there, it would definitely improve the look of the street, retain business looking to move into an office campus, and possibly even attract new business who want to an office campus. For business who want towers, you have downtown, and for medical/hightech businesses you have University Circle. That way you would have space for everybody and it would improve the look. Hell, imagine if Eaton would have chose to build a campus there as well as American Greetings, it would have a huge effect on the area. I would choose that over whats planned now and over waiting decades for the chance of residential developments happening which I dont see happening anyways.

 

Office campuses would be great - but the huge problem is what you would need to acquire land from probably hundreds of property owners, many of which I'm sure would argue that their building that has been vacant for years is worth millions of dollars, thus making it economicaly impossible.  Instead, Eaton only has to deal with one property owner, who probably is a lot more pragmatic than these individual property owners would be.

Vertical campuses would be great, ala the Hallmark campus in KC. Horizontal sprawling campuses would violate the city's building and zoning codes. Worse, they would piss me off.  :whip:

^Would you rather let the companies leave though?

which I don't see happening anyways

 

...ever?  I think in the 30-50 year picture if there isn't residential development (at least making progress from Downtown and UC toward the 60s blocks then we're in big trouble.

 

 

As for Campus idea - it's less about what is where, and the categories they fall into.  What matters most (in my opinion) is that the developments are Euclid Avenue centric.  That they face the street, and (in the best case scenario) run along the street instead of being setback with "front yards".  Walking along a street with continuous facades is important in that it creates atmosphere and presence (even if it's not all Bistros and Chic Apartments), that can come decades from now, but I believe it's essential that Euclid be treated uniquely, and that zoning and planning heavily encourage a healthline, sidewalk, Euclid Corridor centric development.

 

 

Compare the Applied Industrial Tech Campus, with a large office building on Euclid against the street.  (Not verified but:) Perhaps they have the same number of suites and square footage, but one encourages further density, and the other seems slightly out of place.

 

Once more -- I'm not passing judgment on the content, strictly the design impact of lower density uses of Euclid.

 

 

^Would you rather let the companies leave though?

 

I'm not sure that's an issue at this point. Are any of them threatening to leave if they don't conform to the city's community-based zoning and buildings codes?

 

I think most enlightened companies and their architects understand that there are benefits to designing and orienting their projects to be accessible to motorists, transit users and pedestrians/bikes (not the least of which is some tax benefits). And if they don't want to delay their projects by fighting with the Planning Commission, then they should conform to the codes or look to build elsewhere where form-based codes aren't in force.

May I suggest that before anyone makes any more uninformed statements about "what's planned for Midtown", that they look at what's actually planned for Midtown?

 

http://www.midtowncleveland.org/pdf/MidTown%20Master%20Plan%202005%20Update.pdf

Looking at its parallels in Cbus, Cincy, Pittsburgh and Detroit, how do the plans for our corridor compare? I don't think any of those cities wants to put an industrial area between its two hubs, not even Detroit.

 

What "industrial area" is being built on Euclid?

 

here there video if it hasnt been posted before

 

What "industrial area" is being built on Euclid?

 

Can't find the PD article now... but Geis' proposed tech center is modeled as a suburban light industrial park, with the intent of competing directly in that market.  The Midtown Inc masterplan envsioned something along these lines, a tech center and related spinoffs, and had set aside most if not all Euclid frontage from 55th to 79th for such.  It also envsions a smaller mixed-use district on Midtown's eastern edge, roughly where the social service housing is being built. 

 

Sounds like Geis' project is not a complete "go" right now, and the same can be said for the mental hospital.  So aside from that housing, nothing is being built quite yet.   

Looks like a "go" to me..

 

 

OK, let me repeat:

 

May I suggest that before anyone makes any more uninformed statements about "what's planned for Midtown", that they look at what's actually planned for Midtown?

 

http://www.midtowncleveland.org/pdf/MidTown%20Master%20Plan%202005%20Update.pdf