Are there new members in this Planning Commission or something?

I think this new version is much better looking! They did a decent job of fixing the blankness of the Abby and 19th corner that was apart of the older versions. 

33 minutes ago, JB said:

Are there new members in this Planning Commission or something?

Bowen is out and Kuri is in as chair with co-chair being Fluker. Meeting was impressively on track compared to past ones. That being said, a lot of what was presented was consensus good work/exciting stuff. I hope to see a continued objective state of discussion moving forward with the leadership of Kuri/Fluker.

This all sounds like positive news. Also, IMO this is the best rendering yet! The design seems like it will age better than the others, more timeless if you will.

Charles Slife for Mayor! (Whenever Bibb decides not to run again!)

I don't think Councilman Slife will be winning over the NIMBY crowd with that attitude. Who does he think he works for anyway?

Maybe the PC feels emboldened with a forward thinking mayor now behind them. 

Another point is that the project as designed requires no variances and can be built by legal right. These NIMBY's have no leg to stand on now that PC has seemingly supported the project. Not sure what will really come of this "review" of PRO Districts that Kuri tasked Moss to execute. The PRO did exactly what it should do for a site that is so well placed. DENSITY.

5 minutes ago, w28th said:

Another point is that the project as designed requires no variances and can be built by legal right.

Great point!  Too often variances are needed opening the door for a process that ultimately leads to a design-by-committee.  The more zoning encourages the type of development desired outright, the better.  I think this is a real success story for how zoning updates could lead to better development and be less vulnerable to the people's personal preferences.

 

I'm sure none that share

On 1/21/2022 at 12:04 PM, GISguy said:

 

This is SO refreshing to hear. Wow.

 

Does anyone that shares this sentiment rely on street parking for their vehicle?  You must have properties afford you off-street parking or you don't have a car.  This is changes the paradigm for those that must rely on a car and suddenly loose their reliably available street parking.  This dismissive attitude towards these concerns is the root of displacement.  

10 minutes ago, grayfields said:

 

I'm sure none that share

 

Does anyone that shares this sentiment rely on street parking for their vehicle?  You must have properties afford you off-street parking or you don't have a car.  This is changes the paradigm for those that must rely on a car and suddenly loose their reliably available street parking.  This dismissive attitude towards these concerns is the root of displacement.  

Person who uses street parking here, and I strongly echo that sentiment. We need to encourage people to use their cars less and consider getting rid of them. Anyone who chooses to live in a city should understand that it means dealing with parking issues. I've gotten used to just parking a few blocks away, and not complaining about stupid things like that.

 

And the only way we're going to transform Cleveland into a real city is by making it harder and less convenient to have a car. That's how you increase transit ridership and bike usage.

11 hours ago, grayfields said:

 

I'm sure none that share

 

Does anyone that shares this sentiment rely on street parking for their vehicle?  You must have properties afford you off-street parking or you don't have a car.  This is changes the paradigm for those that must rely on a car and suddenly loose their reliably available street parking.  This dismissive attitude towards these concerns is the root of displacement.  

 

To echo @tykaps: you don't own the parking/street in front of your house, nor are you entitled to it. 

15 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

To echo @tykaps: you don't own the parking/street in front of your house, nor are you entitled to it. 

Also in what world is street parking even bad over there. I used to live down the block and still to this day go over there all the time. You could build three of these projects and probably still have street parking in Duck Island. Oh no, you have to walk two blocks from your car? Welcome to living 20 blocks from a major downtown. It's insane that this isn't an issue yet. 

30 minutes ago, KFM44107 said:

Also in what world is street parking even bad over there. I used to live down the block and still to this day go over there all the time. You could build three of these projects and probably still have street parking in Duck Island. Oh no, you have to walk two blocks from your car? Welcome to living 20 blocks from a major downtown. It's insane that this isn't an issue yet. 

It's not. In fact, there's so much street parking that people often park here to go to WSM and even Browns games. 

I lived in downtown for 10 years and never once paid for parking. Managed to utilize our street parking the entire time, just had to walk a block or 2 occasionally. Very little sympathy from me.

The people making a fuss about this in Duck Island are the very people that moved here recently, needing mounds of zoning variances. A few years ago the old timers complained that THEIR parking was being taken by new residents...

The new folks are some of the most entitled people you can possibly imagine, many with no other outlet due to recent retirement or a need to vent their frustrations to the world.

It's comical to me that they are likely to make an issue about parking at BOZA when this project wouldn't need to go to BOZA if the developer told them to get bent on the additional curb cut on W20th (which eliminates at least 4 onstreet parking spaces by the way!!!). 

26 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

To echo @tykaps: you don't own the parking/street in front of your house, nor are you entitled to it. 

 

Right, neither does Geis.  Why does a developer get to offload his obligation onto the right-of-way?  Folks with small parcels that do not provide on-site parking have to circle block-after-block to find a spot residing here with an understanding that new builds must satisfy parking requirements, which the CPC is now yanking away.  It's not getting from your house to your car, it's the driving around searching for a spot, accommodating guests and service providers, clearing snow and getting garbage picked up, loading/unloading kids, elderly/handicapped, groceries, etc... in traffic.  

 

16 minutes ago, KFM44107 said:

. . .You could build three of these projects and probably still have street parking in Duck Island. . . 

 

Right, that's the point. They are building four of these projects (538 units in Intro. and Waterford Bluffs alone, double that w/Pearl and Intro. Phase II).  Contemptuously dismissing these concerns because they don't support your density objective is irresponsible.  If there's supporting traffic studies and parking demand analysis, I'd love to see it.  

 

What's comical is an online commentator using three exclamation points to complain without irony about others' needs to vent their frustrations to the world.  

5 minutes ago, grayfields said:

 

Right, neither does Geis.  Why does a developer get to offload his obligation onto the right-of-way?  Folks with small parcels that do not provide on-site parking have to circle block-after-block to find a spot residing here with an understanding that new builds must satisfy parking requirements, which the CPC is now yanking away.  It's not getting from your house to your car, it's the driving around searching for a spot, accommodating guests and service providers, clearing snow and getting garbage picked up, loading/unloading kids, elderly/handicapped, groceries, etc... in traffic.  

 

 

Right, that's the point. They are building four of these projects (538 units in Intro. and Waterford Bluffs alone, double that w/Pearl and Intro. Phase II).  Contemptuously dismissing these concerns because they don't support your density objective is irresponsible.  If there's supporting traffic studies and parking demand analysis, I'd love to see it.  

 

What's comical is an online commentator using three exclamation points to complain without irony about others' needs to vent their frustrations to the world.  

Developers get that for the same reason small parcel owners get to offload their responsibilities onto the right of way. You should know what you're getting into if you decided to buy a small parcel in the middle of the city. If you thought the status quo wouldn't change you're crazy. 

 

Also, Intro is building alot of parking to not only accommodate their residential units but also visitors to a major commercial corridor so that's a terrible example.

 

Duck Island outside of the brewery complex has absolutely no such draw. And there is plenty of parking on Columbus Ave for that. 

 

My brother lives in Germany. They've been doing just fine without car centric streets and off street parking with heavy density for decades. And this is in a city with no rail line and an okay bus service (though they do have good bike infrastructure). I think a neighborhood in Cleveland will be just fine. 

 

If you're really worried about it then lobby the city for residential parking passes for side streets. Pay five dollars for the right to park on the street that you reside per every three years like they do where I live in Lakewood and let everyone else park at their own peril. 

 

 

On 1/21/2022 at 11:45 AM, KJP said:

PC member August Fluker said "Come on over to the East Side!" 

Councilman Charles Slife said "Parking problems are a good problem to have.

I think the PC members hit the nail on the head.  They are recognizing that parking is a legitimate problem with more and more development, but it's a good problem to have.  It's the kind of problem they'd love to be dealing with in many east side neighborhoods.  I don't think they are trivializing those with parking concerns, only putting it into perspective.  As a City, it's much better to be solving parking problems instead of abandoned building problems.

In Wash DC parking in the close-in residential areas is a nightmare.  Prepandemic there were regular reports on how popular car-rental-by-the-hour was becoming. Published cost comparisons of owning vs renting often appeared. Renting (averaging ~6 rentals a month) came out cheaper in most cases.  Pricing: the cheapest plan is a membership fee ($7/month or $70/year) plus $11/hour for a Honda Civic.  Naturally a bigger vehicle costs more.

 

Rental may be a good future choice for places like Ohio City, Tremont, downtown, and Hough. 

 

 

1 hour ago, KFM44107 said:

My brother lives in Germany. They've been doing just fine without car centric streets and off street parking with heavy density for decades. And this is in a city with no rail line and an okay bus service (though they do have good bike infrastructure). I think a neighborhood in Cleveland will be just fine. 

 

 

I think this is the better framing for this concern. Bike infrastructure is progressing, but slowly, and our public transit system isn't as robust as it should be. We should be talking about how to improve these so people don't have to own cars, not stopping development to accommodate residents with cars. 

1 hour ago, grayfields said:

 

Right, neither does Geis.  Why does a developer get to offload his obligation onto the right-of-way?  Folks with small parcels that do not provide on-site parking have to circle block-after-block to find a spot residing here with an understanding that new builds must satisfy parking requirements, which the CPC is now yanking away.  It's not getting from your house to your car, it's the driving around searching for a spot, accommodating guests and service providers, clearing snow and getting garbage picked up, loading/unloading kids, elderly/handicapped, groceries, etc... in traffic.  

 

 

Right, that's the point. They are building four of these projects (538 units in Intro. and Waterford Bluffs alone, double that w/Pearl and Intro. Phase II).  Contemptuously dismissing these concerns because they don't support your density objective is irresponsible.  If there's supporting traffic studies and parking demand analysis, I'd love to see it.  

 

What's comical is an online commentator using three exclamation points to complain without irony about others' needs to vent their frustrations to the world.  

 

 

Per the City's urban form guidelines for this location, the developer is not offloading any responsibilities to the right-of-way. It's parked to the required amount isn't it?

You're new here so I get the confusion, but the exclamation points were in jest. Likely the first I've used on this site in 15 years now that you're counting.

2 hours ago, grayfields said:

 

 

 

Right, that's the point. They are building four of these projects (538 units in Intro. and Waterford Bluffs alone, double that w/Pearl and Intro. Phase II).  Contemptuously dismissing these concerns because they don't support your density objective is irresponsible.  If there's supporting traffic studies and parking demand analysis, I'd love to see it.  

 

What's comical is an online commentator using three exclamation points to complain without irony about others' needs to vent their frustrations to the world.  

What you conveniently ignore, similar to the hand wringing NIMBY block club rep at Planning Commission when he claimed the new developments would more than triple the number of units in Duck Island (which is great in my opinion), is that Waterford Bluffs, the Pearl and Intro will all have their own on site parking garages,  Even the Abbey project is providing more than 50 surface spots.  So it is not like these great developments are dumping hundreds of cars on the streets of Duck Island.  Streets that, according to a number of posters, are hardly over flowing with cars at this time.  I wish somebody would have called out the block club rep on this point-although I was glad to see Fluker and Slife basically tell him to go jump in a lake.  Omissions of key facts are just as bad as outright misrepresentations.

Edited January 24, 20223 yr by Htsguy

^ all that and it's literally right next to a heavy rail metro stop. We don't have huge amount of those in this city (or the US for that matter). If you need car infrastructure pick from the near unlimited amount of other options in NEO 🤷‍♂️   

Correct.  It's my understanding that no parking variance is required.  I'm not ignoring the fact this development meets the 0.65 spots/unit (not beds) to fulfill the overlay's parking requirements.  I'm saying that these developments will add hundreds of cars simultaneously (parked and circulating) on these local streets.  When these buildings are occupied, the streets in Duck Island will be overflowing with cars. 

 

If there's data or forecasts on the issue (other than the new units to off-street parking ratio), please call it out.  If there's plans to increase the frequency/reliability of the Redline or the 25, please let me know.  Staff's assertion that the Redline Greenway provides a competitive route to anywhere is not convincing.  Maybe public transit will follow rooftops, but why not give assurances with announcing those discussions in parallel with the developments' approvals if we're so certain folks are giving up their cars?  Stating there's sufficient offstreet parking planned to meet the new demand that these uses will produce is outright misrepresentation. 

I think you need to understand that the city revised zoning regulations for these parcels to specifically instigate this type of development. If this is a problem you should have either raised a bigger fight prior to its implementation or not moved into the area if plentiful on street parking was so important to your daily life.

An interesting side point of discussion regarding apartments and off street parking is where are the surplus tenants supposed to park when there's a street parking ban due to plowing, like we've been getting recently? (I don't mean that as a gotcha question, I'm genuinely curious). 

4 minutes ago, Ethan said:

An interesting side point of discussion regarding apartments and off street parking is where are the surplus tenants supposed to park when there's a street parking ban due to plowing, like we've been getting recently? (I don't mean that as a gotcha question, I'm genuinely curious). 

Most streets in Cleveland don't have that signage. It's just main arteries and secondary arteries. I rarely see residential streets with that. 

 

In fact I got a call from a resident during the snowstorm that people were parking on their residential street during a snow emergency and needed to be towed. Unless there's city signage stating it is a snow emergency street then it doesn't apply. This street did not. 

17 minutes ago, Ethan said:

An interesting side point of discussion regarding apartments and off street parking is where are the surplus tenants supposed to park when there's a street parking ban due to plowing, like we've been getting recently? (I don't mean that as a gotcha question, I'm genuinely curious). 

 

Why do lazy Americans care so much about cars and parking? They ruin cities ya know.

On 1/15/2022 at 4:31 PM, Klingaling87 said:

Both. Generally, brick veneer is around $20/SF-$30/SF and metal panel is $45/SF+. That’s just the veneer and not the stud backup, insulation or AVB. Especially with the volatility in aluminum products right now… metal panels are skyrocketing. 

Metal panel is less than brick. You're talking about high end aluminum composite material (like you see on car dealerships). This is corrugated metal siding.

5 hours ago, yanni_gogolak said:

Metal panel is less than brick. You're talking about high end aluminum composite material (like you see on car dealerships). This is corrugated metal siding.

I’m talking about normal ACM, not even high-end. But some corrugated falls into that price range as well. We’ve been pricing the same ATAS corrugated metal panel that was done on Church + State, and it’s in the $47/SF range. 

Edited January 28, 20223 yr by Klingaling87
More info

2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

I know this should probably go in the Duck Island thread but since it is nearby to Treo...any one know what is going on with The Pearl?  Are they still trying to get the blessings of the block clubs before submitting it to the city?

 

I was told the block club liked The Pearl.

https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2022/02/cleveland-gives-blessing-to-132-unit-apartment-building-set-to-go-up-in-tremont-neighborhood.html

 

 

On 1/31/2022 at 6:48 PM, Htsguy said:

I know this should probably go in the Duck Island thread but since it is nearby to Treo...any one know what is going on with The Pearl?  Are they still trying to get the blessings of the block clubs before submitting it to the city?

 

@HtsguyUpdate: RL Columbus Rd LLC, an affiliate of Realife, bought the land for The Pearl on Jan. 20 for $1.05 million. So it looks like they're committed to this site.

 

Abbey Avenue project to start ASAP

By Ken Prendergast / February 19, 2022

 

How eager is M Panzica Development LLC to start building its substantial mixed-use project on Abbey Avenue in the Duck Island section of Tremont? It submitted applications for its first building permits one day before it went before the City Planning Commission for final design review.

 

MORE 

https://neo-trans.blog/2022/02/19/abbey-avenue-project-to-start-asap/

Is the Fairfield Food market location in Tremont just going to be a parking lot? 

9 minutes ago, gg707 said:

Is the Fairfield Food market location in Tremont just going to be a parking lot? 

 

It appears that way. 

2 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

It appears that way. 

 

Bummer.  That's such a prime location in Tremont.  That would be a cool location for a tiny footprint building like are starting to go up in other cities more frequently.  In Philly:  https://www.architectmagazine.com/project-gallery/xs-house_1_o and https://www.urdesignmag.com/architecture/2019/02/21/tiny-tower-isa-interface-studio-architects/

Haven’t seen this rendering for the Pearl yet - very cool! I like the arches on the ground level and the integration of greenery.

 

That’s very sharp! It’s going  to be a fantastic  addition and one that will add a significant number of new residents to the neighborhood.  
 

Gotta love the number of beautiful high quality new residential projects being built on the near west side from Intro to The Pearl to Battery Park and the list goes on and on.  

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Waterford Bluffs is really coming along! It has such a strong / big presence, and I love it. This is such a great new connector between Ohio / Duck Island / Tremont - so happy to finally see this site developed.

 

Lots of momentum down W20th as well with the future developments here. And can’t wait for Geis’ Abbey Ave apartments too! It’s crazy (in a good way!) to see the level of development and density going up around this area. 

Maybe I missed this, but what’s going in on Willey?

 

@YABO713 That's this development: https://www.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2020/10/developer-looks-to-add-30-apartments-on-inclined-road-in-clevelands-duck-island-area.html

 

BTW, there's a big Dumpster next to Abbey Market. No demo permit has been issued yet for the market or the house next door. Both are boarded up, however.

 

Waterford Bluffs (5-30-22)

 

 

Panzica/Geis  *Berges* townhome development on Smith Court

 

 

 

Site prep for Cooper Flats development on Willey

 

 

 

Last 3 of the West Nineteen Townhomes - each listed north of $800

The Smith Court development isn't Panzica/Geis. It's Berges' townhomes. Great pics, though. Keep 'em coming!

 

Waterford Bluffs (6/13/2022)

 

 

Demolition permits submitted for Abbey Market on June 17. Look for the demo to happen in a week or two.