2 hours ago, X said:

Bedford, Brecksville, and Olmsted Falls as well.  Independence, Solon, Mentor, Avon and Gates Mills also have small areas that were independent small towns before becoming suburbs.  Probably zome others, too, that I can think of later.

 

Euclid was at one time thought to be the city that would anchor the region before Cleveland took off and is just as old as Cleveland (1796). Lorain, Elyria I believe.

1 hour ago, Mov2Ohio said:

 

Euclid was at one time thought to be the city that would anchor the region before Cleveland took off and is just as old as Cleveland (1796). Lorain, Elyria I believe.

 

Newburgh early on was also a contender, though that's now in Cleveland- Newburgh Heights is just a little rump city.  Of course, a number of Cleveland neighborhoods were also separate towns, though that's getting off topic.

Short blip update

 

Rocky River nears completion on Bradstreet’s Landing pier

Updated Jul 26, 2021; Posted Jul 26, 2021

By Linda Gandee

 

https://www.cleveland.com/community/2021/07/rocky-river-nearing-completion-on-bradstreets-landing-pier.html#:~:text=Rocky River nears completion,Posted Jul 26%2C 2021

The site in Beachwood is the city service garage. Someone told me months ago that Industrial Commercial Properties was going to buy and develop the property but the mayor said the information was incorrect. Way to go, mayor....

 

 

I know this issue died years ago but does still linger; if this is the case, there is absolutely zero, none, nada reason for Cleveland to annex East Cleveland. 

1 hour ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

I know this issue died years ago but does still linger; if this is the case, there is absolutely zero, none, nada reason for Cleveland to annex East Cleveland. 

GE Current is much smaller than the now separate GE Lightning – both of which were spun off from General Electric and use “GE” through a licensing agreement – which is not affected by this move. While not great for EC, it’s not as disastrous (yet) as your post would indicate.  

On 4/8/2020 at 1:35 PM, KJP said:

Turns out construction hasn't started on 700 Lake -- but it's about to.......

 

 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 2020

Lakefront luxury development secures construction financing

 

A real estate partnership announced this week in a written statement that it has finalized its construction financing and hired its general contractor for a luxury condominium and townhouse development on the west-suburban lakefront.

The partnership Carney Brickhaus along with its contractor Infinity Construction are due to start construction by summer on 700 Lake in the City of Rocky River. Comprising the partnership are developers James Carney and Andrew Brickman. The latter is principal of Brickhaus Partners.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/04/lakefront-luxury-development-secures.html

 

 

Article on the above project.....

 

 

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2021
700 Lake tops off, and tops the metro area in condo sale price

 

As 700 Lake's development and sales team celebrated the structural topping off of their $35 million lakefront development in Rocky River this week, they had another reason to smile.

 

At the Sept. 1 topping-off event, the project's leading development principals Brickhaus Partners and the Carney family, plus real estate agent the Kim Crane Group at Howard Hanna announced they had sold a penthouse in the development for $3 million.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2021/09/700-lake-tops-off-is-tops-for-metro.html

 

Geauga Lake multi-use redevelopment plans at former amusement park move forward

 

Plans to redevelop part of the former largest amusement park in the world are moving forward in Aurora and Bainbridge Township, Ohio.

 

Industrial Commercial Properties (ICP), based in nearby Solon, Ohio, received approval from Bainbridge's Board of Trustees on Oct. 20 on its "Geauga Lake District," said ICP Chief Operations Officer Chris Salata.

 

Plans for the 377-acre site include retail, a restaurant and entertainment district, an office district near the lake, and multifamily residential sites where Geauga Lake, Six Flags, and Sea World used to operate.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cleveland/news/2021/10/21/geauga-lake-redevelopment-plans-receive-approval.html

 

On 7/19/2021 at 3:57 PM, YABO713 said:

My point being - what can the county or municipalities do to encourage walkable city centers? 

 

I want to bring this back up.  I generally agree that every neighborhood should have some sort of walkable business district (although not necessarily a single "center") that we could call a "downtown" for shorthand.   Where is Fairfax's "downtown"?  Buckeye? 

 

Cleveland Heights has three major walkable "downtowns" -- Cedar-Fairmount, Coventry, and Cedar-Lee.  Cleveland Heights also has the walkability-disaster of Severance, and smaller local business districts that are less well-developed but sometimes loved by locals -- Taylor-Fairmount, Noble-Monticello.  Even in this inner-ring suburb known for its tree-lined streets and sidewalks, there is a lot of room for improvement.

 

Recognizing the value of these walkable business districts and working incrementally to create them should be a priority of every suburb.

I'd say Fairfax's "downtown" used to be E105th and Euclid before it was yanked from all of us. Buckeye's "downtown would certainly be on Buckeye between MLK and E130th

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

I want to bring this back up.  I generally agree that every neighborhood should have some sort of walkable business district (although not necessarily a single "center") that we could call a "downtown" for shorthand.   Where is Fairfax's "downtown"?  Buckeye? 

 

Cleveland Heights has three major walkable "downtowns" -- Cedar-Fairmount, Coventry, and Cedar-Lee.  Cleveland Heights also has the walkability-disaster of Severance, and smaller local business districts that are less well-developed but sometimes loved by locals -- Taylor-Fairmount, Noble-Monticello.  Even in this inner-ring suburb known for its tree-lined streets and sidewalks, there is a lot of room for improvement.

 

Recognizing the value of these walkable business districts and working incrementally to create them should be a priority of every suburb.

 

Bedford and Willoughby have them, though Willoughby's has evolved into more of an entertainment district.

The only inner ring suburb I can think of that doesn't have a "downtown" is University Hts. All of their business districts are on the borders and split between neighboring cities. All of the other inner ring suburbs have one that is walkable or semi-walkable, even if its been half suburbanized/redeveloped. Maybe Fairview Park doesn't either, though I'm not too familiar with that area. The ones which have been suburbanized still at least have the bones to be salvaged. I don't think we will see a place like Beachwood build one though.

16 hours ago, PoshSteve said:

The only inner ring suburb I can think of that doesn't have a "downtown" is University Hts. All of their business districts are on the borders and split between neighboring cities. All of the other inner ring suburbs have one that is walkable or semi-walkable, even if its been half suburbanized/redeveloped. Maybe Fairview Park doesn't either, though I'm not too familiar with that area. The ones which have been suburbanized still at least have the bones to be salvaged. I don't think we will see a place like Beachwood build one though.

 

Maybe East Cleveland as well? The business districts on Euclid are suburbanized or vacant or both. Can't think of an intact walkable district in that city.

That's true, but at one time the commercial strips there were intact and walkable, and if UC spills over, they can easily be again. Better chance of it happening there than in like Mayfield Hts I think - just look at the new autocentric development going in there on Mayfield where that theater used to be. Some places just don't want to have it.

11 minutes ago, PoshSteve said:

That's true, but at one time the commercial strips there were intact and walkable, and if UC spills over, they can easily be again. Better chance of it happening there than in like Mayfield Hts I think - just look at the new autocentric development going in there on Mayfield where that theater used to be. Some places just don't want to have it.

There was a cool plan for the Mayland site but Mayfield Heights in their wisdom scotched it because they created a moratorium on new apartments.  So they're getting a drive through Starbucks and a Sheets instead.  People in Mayfield Heights hear the word apartments and they catch the vapors.  

On 10/25/2021 at 2:19 PM, freefourur said:

There was a cool plan for the Mayland site but Mayfield Heights in their wisdom scotched it because they created a moratorium on new apartments.  So they're getting a drive through Starbucks and a Sheets instead.  People in Mayfield Heights hear the word apartments and they catch the vapors.  

 

Why?  It's not as if Mayfield/Mayfield Hts. is or viewed as a Luxury or high end 'burb.  Nor held in great esteem like Shaker, CH, Pepper Pike, Orange, Gates Mills or Bratenahl. Mayfield Hts, is just a vanilla suburb you can find anywhere in America.

14 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

Why?  It's not as if Mayfield/Mayfield Hts. is or viewed as a Luxury or high end 'burb.  Nor held in great esteem like Shaker, CH, Pepper Pike, Orange, Gates Mills or Bratenahl. Mayfield Hts, is just a vanilla suburb you can find anywhere in America.

 

From recently speaking with people who live and work in Mayfield Hts, it's from alot of the old Italians and newer Russians and the misguided mindset towards "urban" people that many of them unfortunately hold.

Just now, PoshSteve said:

 

From recently speaking with people who live and work in Mayfield Hts, it's from alot of the old Italians and newer Russians and the misguided mindset towards "urban" people that many of them unfortunately hold.

 

You mean racism and classism?

 

 

2 minutes ago, MyTwoSense said:

 

You mean racism and classism?

 

 

 

Shocking, right?

On 10/25/2021 at 2:19 PM, freefourur said:

There was a cool plan for the Mayland site but Mayfield Heights in their wisdom scotched it because they created a moratorium on new apartments.  So they're getting a drive through Starbucks and a Sheets instead.  People in Mayfield Heights hear the word apartments and they catch the vapors.  

In Mayfield Heights, there is starting to be a big problem associated with the apartment complexes.  Complexes like Gates Mills Place (former Gates Mills Towers), Drake (Marsol Towers), Coppertree (Pymouth Park), the mid-rises behind Mayland and low-rises (1, 2 and 3 floors) throughout different parts of the city are aging.  All of them are probably in the range of 50 years old.  No apartment complexes have been built for decades.  There has been considerably more in the way of criminal problems at many of them.  I believe that the increase in negative activity was the factor in the decision to not allow more apartments in the city. 

 

Another reason that played a roll in the decision is the increase in rental properties.  News Channel 5 on October 8th ran a story concerning the shifting of the population base from owner/resident to renter/resident in various suburbs the area.  Between 2010 and 2019, the population of Mayfield Heights living in rental properties increased from 43% to 48%.  The study results reported that Euclid and Bedford Heights joined East Cleveland and Warrensville Heights with more than 50% of their populations living in rental properties.  It went on to predict that within the next few years, Lakewood (currently at 50%), Mayfield Heights, Bedford (currently at 48%) and Maple Heights (currently at 47%) will see a majority of their residents living in rental properties.  

 

Most of Mayfield Heights has been built out since the 1970's (and really since the mid-1960's).  The housing stock is dominated by bungalows and ranches.  The properties are small in square footage on small lots.  Improved, remodeled and expanded houses can bring in bigger sale prices, but the largely unimproved and smaller ones requiring a lot of work are quite numerous.  As the population ages, it won't be surprising to see a large number of these types of houses come on the market in a shorter period of time.  If that is the case, they will be prime targets to go the rental route.  Euclid has a massive percentage of post-war small bungalows on small lots.  The bottom fell out of that city's housing market when many of those houses went up for sale in a short period of time.  It ended up being a big factor in Euclid's shifting to a renter-occupied majority population.

Edited October 28, 20213 yr by LifeLongClevelander

The fact that existing housing is aging sounds like a good reason to build new housing. I'm sure the gas station will be great though.

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

The fact that existing housing is aging sounds like a good reason to build new housing. I'm sure the gas station will be great though.

Particularly because GM and Ford announced they are going to stop producing gasoline powered cars by 2035.

https://www.csnews.com/automakers-lay-out-plans-eliminate-gas-powered-vehicles

3 hours ago, freefourur said:

The fact that existing housing is aging sounds like a good reason to build new housing. I'm sure the gas station will be great though.

There have been situations were particularly dated or poor condition houses have been demolished and a new one built on the same lot (I know somebody who has one of these new houses).  In some places, several houses on adjoining lots are purchased and demolished.  The lots are then combined and divided into fewer, but larger ones.  Off of Brainard in Lyndhurst, this has happened.

 

As for the gas station, somebody will always need to go to one of these gas stations/mini marts (we cannot have enough of them) to purchase over priced snacks and drinks.  If somebody is fortunate, they can purchase alcoholic beverages, too.  Then again, one can always consume the hot dogs heated on rollers for countless hours, pizza slices dried out under heat lamps or substances that are supposedly edible food items. 

1 hour ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

There have been situations were particularly dated or poor condition houses have been demolished and a new one built on the same lot (I know somebody who has one of these new houses).  In some places, several houses on adjoining lots are purchased and demolished.  The lots are then combined and divided into fewer, but larger ones.  Off of Brainard in Lyndhurst, this has happened.

 

As for the gas station, somebody will always need to go to one of these gas stations/mini marts (we cannot have enough of them) to purchase over priced snacks and drinks.  If somebody is fortunate, they can purchase alcoholic beverages, too.  Then again, one can always consume the hot dogs heated on rollers for countless hours, pizza slices dried out under heat lamps or substances that are supposedly edible food items. 

The infill housing helps as do the small subdivisions that they squeeze in (Hidden Woods) but a large vacant parcel like Mayland is a once in a generation opportunity for Mayfield Heights.  They blew it. 

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

The infill housing helps as do the small subdivisions that they squeeze in (Hidden Woods) but a large vacant parcel like Mayland is a once in a generation opportunity for Mayfield Heights.  They blew it. 

I agree that the city blew it big time.  For a city with its tight zoning processes and codes, to come away with how Mayland is being redeveloped is hugely disappointing.  The only thing that may have factored into what the plan is calling for is the debacle that stemmed out of what turned into the Costco and Ashley Furniture locations.  The city fought the developer through multiple levels in the court system and lost each time before finally giving up.  In the end, it cost Mayfield Heights in the range of $750,000 to $800,000 in legal fees.  A gas station/mini-mart, chicken fast food place, Starbucks, professional/medical office buildings and senior citizen facility will end up being more of the same type of bland, common, nothing special and nondescript stuff all along Mayfield Road.  The various establishments along Mayfield Road are just a hodgepodge of disconnected and disjointed properties.  Even at Mayland, many years ago the owner of the main section shopping center (now demolished) put up guardrails to separate the other section (which is still standing) out of some petty disagreement with the owner of that original section.

 

What I found shocking is the shift towards residential rental property dominance in the city.  For a city with no significant apartment construction for many decades, seeing such a significant gain to occur is commentary on the housing stock.  From what I know, there is very little in the way of vacant land remaining for development in Mayfield Heights.  Any significant changes in housing will come from construction on existing house lots.  Seeing that Channel 5 report makes me feel that the leaders are seeing problems with the direction of the city and the not-so-positive associations with six of the seven suburbs that have crossed over to a majority of rental residents or will do so in the next few years.  Only Lakewood stands out from the rest. 

4 minutes ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

I agree that the city blew it big time.  For a city with its tight zoning processes and codes, to come away with how Mayland is being redeveloped is hugely disappointing.  The only thing that may have factored into what the plan is calling for is the debacle that stemmed out of what turned into the Costco and Ashley Furniture locations.  The city fought the developer through multiple levels in the court system and lost each time before finally giving up.  In the end, it cost Mayfield Heights in the range of $750,000 to $800,000 in legal fees.  A gas station/mini-mart, chicken fast food place, Starbucks, professional/medical office buildings and senior citizen facility will end up being more of the same type of bland, common, nothing special and nondescript stuff all along Mayfield Road.  The various establishments along Mayfield Road are just a hodgepodge of disconnected and disjointed properties.  Even at Mayland, many years ago the owner of the main section shopping center (now demolished) put up guardrails to separate the other section (which is still standing) out of some petty disagreement with the owner of that original section.

 

What I found shocking is the shift towards residential rental property dominance in the city.  For a city with no significant apartment construction for many decades, seeing such a significant gain to occur is commentary on the housing stock.  From what I know, there is very little in the way of vacant land remaining for development in Mayfield Heights.  Any significant changes in housing will come from construction on existing house lots.  Seeing that Channel 5 report makes me feel that the leaders are seeing problems with the direction of the city and the not-so-positive associations with six of the seven suburbs that have crossed over to a majority of rental residents or will do so in the next few years.  Only Lakewood stands out from the rest. 

You are correct.  I am fairly familiar with Mayfield Heights and it have been effectively built out for at least 50 years. A lot of housing on some of the older streets is old cottages which probably make nice rental properties for small investors. But I can't think of any site for a large scale development save for maybe the Landerhaven/ former golf course area.  I think there is a smallish housing development being built there but it is mostly office park. 

Edited October 27, 20213 yr by freefourur

It's interesting to hear of such a large increase in rentals in Mayfield Hts. The city has always had a large number of rentals though, since they have such a large number of apartment complexes. I always thought of it as more of a transient community, similar to Lakewood in that regard. What's more interesting to me though, is that the city has a shrinking share of owner-occupied homes, when someplace like South Euclid is seeing the inverse - from roughly 2000 rental properties 4 years ago down to about 1700 today. I knew the demand for them was going to go somewhere, and Mayfield Hts, with its aging housing stock and lax code enforcement seems to be one of the places they're going to go.

 

Definitely second that if the concern is aging housing stock, new housing is the answer. For sale housing could have fit on that property - be it townhouses in the rear, or condos, which seem to be easier to finance in the suburbs lately.

3 minutes ago, PoshSteve said:

It's interesting to hear of such a large increase in rentals in Mayfield Hts. The city has always had a large number of rentals though, since they have such a large number of apartment complexes. I always thought of it as more of a transient community, similar to Lakewood in that regard. What's more interesting to me though, is that the city has a shrinking share of owner-occupied homes, when someplace like South Euclid is seeing the inverse - from roughly 2000 rental properties 4 years ago down to about 1700 today. I knew the demand for them was going to go somewhere, and Mayfield Hts, with its aging housing stock and lax code enforcement seems to be one of the places they're going to go.

 

Definitely second that if the concern is aging housing stock, new housing is the answer. For sale housing could have fit on that property - be it townhouses in the rear, or condos, which seem to be easier to finance in the suburbs lately.

anything new regarding Green  Rd-Mayfield development?

 

43 minutes ago, freefourur said:

You are correct.  I am fairly familiar with Mayfield Heights and it have been effectively built out for at least 50 years. A lot of housing on some of the older streets is old cottages which probably make nice rental properties for small investors. But I can't think of any site for a large scale development save for maybe the Landerhaven/ former golf course area.  I think there is a smallish housing development being built there but it is mostly office park. 

There was a development in the former Locust Grove portion of Landerhaven (between Landerhaven and Cedar, east side of Lander) where the developer went under.  It started up again and cluster homes are being built.  Cluster homes are going in on Cedar, west of Lander.  Most of the older homes with deeper lots were purchased and demolished to build the cluster homes.  Further down Landerhaven Drive, a senior living facility opened within the last year.  Landerbrook and the rest of Landerhaven is all office park area. There is a section on the east side of I-271, south of Ridgebury and that may be the last larger section of undeveloped land.  Most of the houses on the south side of Ridgebury beteween I-271 and SOM have lots that are about 750 feet deep. 

5 minutes ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

There was a development in the former Locust Grove portion of Landerhaven (between Landerhaven and Cedar, east side of Lander) where the developer went under.  It started up again and cluster homes are being built.  Cluster homes are going in on Cedar, west of Lander.  Most of the older homes with deeper lots were purchased and demolished to build the cluster homes.  Further down Landerhaven Drive, a senior living facility opened within the last year.  Landerbrook and the rest of Landerhaven is all office park area. There is a section on the east side of I-271, south of Ridgebury and that may be the last larger section of undeveloped land.  Most of the houses on the south side of Ridgebury beteween I-271 and SOM have lots that are about 750 feet deep. 

The north side of ridgebury had those same deep lots and a development was built on that side. That requires a lot of negotiating with current owners. One holdout can block the whole thing. That's why mayland presented a great opportunity to do something big. 

17 minutes ago, PoshSteve said:

It's interesting to hear of such a large increase in rentals in Mayfield Hts. The city has always had a large number of rentals though, since they have such a large number of apartment complexes. I always thought of it as more of a transient community, similar to Lakewood in that regard. What's more interesting to me though, is that the city has a shrinking share of owner-occupied homes, when someplace like South Euclid is seeing the inverse - from roughly 2000 rental properties 4 years ago down to about 1700 today. I knew the demand for them was going to go somewhere, and Mayfield Hts, with its aging housing stock and lax code enforcement seems to be one of the places they're going to go.

 

Definitely second that if the concern is aging housing stock, new housing is the answer. For sale housing could have fit on that property - be it townhouses in the rear, or condos, which seem to be easier to finance in the suburbs lately.

With all of the existing apartment complexes, Mayfield Heights already had a significant portion of rental housing units to start with, but now with the aging out of the population, the small homes on small lots with only so much demand, it has reached a tipping point.  Due to the date of the survey being through 2019, that did not include those senior living type apartments on Landerhaven.  Those did not open until 2020.  It wouldn't be surprising that by now, Mayfield Heights may have already flipped to the majority of its residents being renters and not owners.  Lyndhurst, though being a slightly older city, just does not have the number of apartments that Mayfield Heights has.  Even though it is facing the same housing stock issues, Mayfield Heights had a significant head start on the rental side due to the number of apartments that have been around for a long time. 

5 minutes ago, freefourur said:

The north side of ridgebury had those same deep lots and a development was built on that side. That requires a lot of negotiating with current owners. One holdout can block the whole thing. That's why mayland presented a great opportunity to do something big. 

If a developer has a big enough desire and financial backing, enough money can sway a deal.  Home owners can band together to get a better deal.  Prospects of building a $350k-$400k per home subdivision have ways of getting some nice deals cut.

1 hour ago, Htsguy said:

anything new regarding Green  Rd-Mayfield development?

 

 

Can't give details at this time, but there is something brewing there. Also something further east on Mayfield. All should be much more exciting than the new Starbucks in front of Marc's. Unfortunately the apartment conversion of the old Catholic school on Green south of Mayfield (and the new build on the vacant lot out front) all fell thru when the church decided to sell the building to someone else. It's now a new Jewish elementary school which just opened a few months ago.

 

For those without a subscription, it will be highly automated with most work performed by robots, but a similar location near Cincinnati employs 400.

Clearly this could have gone any where in Northeast Ohio near a freeway so glad-job and tax wise-it is in Cuyahoga County.

On 10/27/2021 at 11:21 AM, freefourur said:

The infill housing helps as do the small subdivisions that they squeeze in (Hidden Woods) but a large vacant parcel like Mayland is a once in a generation opportunity for Mayfield Heights.  They blew it. 

 

I missed this discussion but I grew up there and I really loved growing up there. And what's happening with Mayland makes me sick. It's unbelievable how oblivious they are to what's happening around them. Look at what Shaker's doing, look at what South Euclid and Lyndhurst are doing. Look what Richmond Heights is doing at the mall site. Meanwhile in Mayfield, the dinosaurs at city hall think they can bring back the glory days of the 80s by doing exactly what they did in the 80s. "We got Sheetz everyone! That will attract young families!"

 

They are bringing their own downfall and it kills me.

Edited November 7, 20213 yr by mu2010

 

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2020/12/rehab-hospital-proposed-for-pearl-road-near-another-rehab-center-under-construction-in-strongsville.html

 

finally starting

 

 

Edited November 8, 20213 yr by MrR

On 11/7/2021 at 9:59 AM, mu2010 said:

I missed this discussion but I grew up there and I really loved growing up there. And what's happening with Mayland makes me sick. It's unbelievable how oblivious they are to what's happening around them. Look at what Shaker's doing, look at what South Euclid and Lyndhurst are doing. Look what Richmond Heights is doing at the mall site. Meanwhile in Mayfield, the dinosaurs at city hall think they can bring back the glory days of the 80s by doing exactly what they did in the 80s. "We got Sheetz everyone! That will attract young families!"

 

They are bringing their own downfall and it kills me.

Understand the reasoning concerning the city not desiring another apartment complex.  The rest of the redevelopment is bland, run-of-the-mill stuff that is so common everywhere.  A super-sized gas station/mini-mart?  Another fast-food outfit?  I think the city lost its backbone when fighting the developer for the development of the land that became Costco.  Every turn, the city lost in court and by the time the city threw in the towel, it amassed $750k-$800k in legal fees.  Considering Ottino has long ties to Mayfield Heights, it is curious why the city and developer couldn't come together with an innovative project.

 

As for the city wanting to attract young families, the city's leaders are living in the past.  A huge percentage of the housing stock is dated.  The large numbers of bungalows and ranches, if they haven't seen significant changes or improvements, really don't appeal to young families.  If a young family does purchase one, it may be no more than to serve as a "starter home".  The city's leaders view apartment residents as transient type residents.  Even without the addition of new apartments, the housing stock has trended towards more rentals.  The tenants of those rental houses or those purchasing what may amount to a starter home can be grouped with the apartment residents.  

 

The downfall has been going on and it started long before the Mayland project was even proposed.

1 hour ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

Understand the reasoning concerning the city not desiring another apartment complex.  The rest of the redevelopment is bland, run-of-the-mill stuff that is so common everywhere.  A super-sized gas station/mini-mart?  Another fast-food outfit?  I think the city lost its backbone when fighting the developer for the development of the land that became Costco.  Every turn, the city lost in court and by the time the city threw in the towel, it amassed $750k-$800k in legal fees.  Considering Ottino has long ties to Mayfield Heights, it is curious why the city and developer couldn't come together with an innovative project.

 

As for the city wanting to attract young families, the city's leaders are living in the past.  A huge percentage of the housing stock is dated.  The large numbers of bungalows and ranches, if they haven't seen significant changes or improvements, really don't appeal to young families.  If a young family does purchase one, it may be no more than to serve as a "starter home".  The city's leaders view apartment residents as transient type residents.  Even without the addition of new apartments, the housing stock has trended towards more rentals.  The tenants of those rental houses or those purchasing what may amount to a starter home can be grouped with the apartment residents.  

 

The downfall has been going on and it started long before the Mayland project was even proposed.

 

Yeah, I could understand not wanting another Mega Complex like Gates Mills Towers or Marsol or something like that, and we can't accuse them of not having a balance between apartments and housing. We can't accuse them of not having affordable housing either. What bothers me is the blanket ban and refusal to consider any 'apartments' at all in any context when clearly the city and surrounding suburbs desperately need a downtown and apartments would be an integral part of creating one. A nice simple downtown with a few family friendly restaurants, patios, an ice cream place and a pub or two in a walkable setting would do wonders to spruce up the area's appeal to young families. Something would also need to be done about the housing stock as you mentioned. They are eventually going to need to do what South Euclid and Cleveland Heights have done and form a CDC to work on that stuff but that is probably not in their radar.

 

FWIW, I have several early 30s friends starting families and raising kids there, but of course, they all grew up there. Some have left for other suburbs. I brought this up to one friend the other day who mocked the gas station plans and the old timers running the city, but all in all he's more concerned about his kids' Halloween costumes and sporting events. 

 

I agree with everything else you said though I wasn't aware of all the Costco history you mentioned, that is interesting. I think I was away in college at the time and not paying attention. Were the lawsuits all about zoning type stuff?

Edited November 9, 20213 yr by mu2010

24 minutes ago, mu2010 said:

Yeah, I could understand not wanting another Mega Complex like Gates Mills Towers or Marsol or something like that, and we can't accuse them of not having a balance between apartments and housing. We can't accuse them of not having affordable housing either. What bothers me is the blanket ban and refusal to consider any 'apartments' at all in any context when clearly the city and surrounding suburbs desperately need a downtown and apartments would be an integral part of creating one. A nice simple downtown with a few family friendly restaurants, patios, an ice cream place and a pub or two in a walkable setting would do wonders to spruce up the area's appeal to young families. Something would also need to be done about the housing stock as you mentioned. They are eventually going to need to do what South Euclid and Cleveland Heights have done and form a CDC to work on that stuff but that is probably not in their radar.

 

FWIW, I have several early 30s friends starting families and raising kids there, but of course, they all grew up there. Some have left for other suburbs. I brought this up to one friend the other day who mocked the gas station plans and the old timers running the city, but all in all he's more concerned about his kids' Halloween costumes and sporting events. 

 

I agree with everything else you said though I wasn't aware of all the Costco history you mentioned, that is interesting. I think I was away in college at the time and not paying attention. Were the lawsuits all about zoning type stuff?

I believe that the city's leaders feel that the number of apartment units are putting disproportionate demands on the city's services.  The Drake (formerly Marsol Towers) and Coppertree (formerly Plymouth Park) have quite a few problems and regularly see police.  Gates Mills Place (formerly Gates Mills Towers) has gone significantly downhill and within the last few years have seen at least two homicides.  At one time, Gates Mills Towers was the "exclusive" complex in the city.  The crime and associated problems with those complexes have clouded opinions.  The city does have quite a few other complexes:  the garden-style complexes on the west side of Golden Gate Blvd, Mayland Towers (behind the old shopping center), Hawthorne (just south of Mayfield Road), off of Ranchland (north of Mayfield Road), the low-rise complex next to Coppertree, the complexes off of SOM (north of Eastgate), behind Eastgate (next to Gates Mills Place) and the ones off of SOM (south of the hospital).  With all of these other complexes, perhaps some think that the balance has already been reached.

 

Within a few years, there may be a tipping point reached with housing stock in Mayfield Heights.  As the community ages (the signs are visible already), it may cause a dramatic shift in housing.  There could be a time where many of the older homeowners (or their heirs) will cause a large number of these older, small, minimally improved homes on small lots going on the market in a short period of time.  It may cause a significant drop in market price and open up more properties to become rental units.  If it happens in too a short period of time, Mayfield Heights could be going the same path that was taken by Euclid.

 

As for the city's leadership, at least the situation isn't like it was going into the 1980's.  At that time, term limits were passed that restricted the mayor and council members from serving no more that 3 consecutive 4-year terms.  Old names of a newer generation still linger on however. 

 

The city fought the development that turned into Costco.  The residents west of that property didn't want it.  The land was zoned residential.  Before I-271 was constructed, that area was going to be part of a housing subdivision.  When the initial construction work was being done, they uncovered some of the work done in the 1950's for that subdivision.  It didn't matter.  

 

As for a city fighting developers, a developer wanted to come in and develop a huge stretch of the north side of Wilson Mills Road in Highland Heights.  The developer was from western New York (Buffalo area?) and was going to buy up all of the houses from Miner to Lander Roads and eventually go all the way to Bishop Road.  Most of the houses are situated on big, deep lots and the plans called for massive strip-style shopping centers.  The city was completely against it as they felt that the infrastructure and Wilson Mills Road could not handle the expected traffic.  The city also knew they could not fight and win.  The developer attempted to use strong-arm bully tactics to threaten property owners.  They told the property owners that if they decided to hold out and not sell, the development would occur without their properties and they would not be able to sell later.  The property owners decided to band together and not sell.  Eventually, the unified effort caused the developer to abandon the plans.

Gates Mills Towers has become... troubled? Damn, my sister, her husband and their first kid lived there; it was a wonderful place to live and visit.

 

That really is sad, if true.

Edited November 9, 20213 yr by TBideon

We need to keep this thread on actual development news, please.

Does anyone know what they are constructing at the Silverpoint location now?   It's a large single story concrete box and doesn't look like anything resembling  the "mixed use" multi building campus shown in the original renderings.

 

Picture of construction:

https://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/community/community_scene/silverpoint-going-up/article_12748ad6-4d69-11ec-bce3-835b4a0edee1.html

 

Edited December 15, 20213 yr by paule123

Another big box store to compete with the empty big box stores next door at Harvard Park

Mentioned in the Winter 2022 edition of the Warrensville Heights magazine, the Silverpoint construction is for Floor & Décor, a national chain specialty retailer of upscale flooring and related accessories.

Thanks for the info. I've been wondering what it was going to be. Disappointing that this is what the development has become, but I guess at least its something new to the region.

I know this isn't very urban, but it looks like there's a Rocky River project brewing.  Not a KJP bomb by any means, but thought I would share.

 

On Center Ridge, in between a couple of condo buildings, there's an old house owned by the Christensen family (on 1.7 acres) that's always seemed out of place.  The Christensen family previously owned (I believe) all the land that the now Christensen and West River Estates - 300+ SF homes sit on, including mine.   Next to it is a big patch of trees on 1.6 acres.  I always thought this would be a nice development opportunity.  For over a year now, I've seen several surveys being done but nothing else so I didn't think much of it. 

 

That was until last week, when that whole patch of trees were suddenly cleared out.  I immediately jumped onto MyPlace to see who owns that parcel.  Not to my surprise, the parcel with trees was purchased by The Krueger Group in 2020 for 465k.  My guess is, since then, they've been after the Christensen parcel, whom appeared to be holding out as long as possible.  My guess was right.  In early February, the parcel transferred to Center Ridge Development LLC for $575k.  It didn't take long to trace that LLC to The Krueger Group.  

Anyone have any idea what Krueger is planning or what the scale of a MF building could look like on a parcel of this size (3.3 acres)? 

 

@RE Developer In Training I found this on the Rocky River website, which has the minutes from the last meeting of each board/commission. The Planning Commission's last meeting was Dec. 14, 2021 had this entry which referred to its approval at a past meeting of the Design/Construction Board of Review whose minutes were no longer on the website:

 

1. THE KRUEGER GROUP - PPN: 303-26-005 – Multi-Family Apartment Development -
Vacant Lot next to 22591 Center Ridge Rd. Mr. Jack Doheny of The Krueger Group, came
forward to present the final plan.

Mr. Bishop said he understands all of the variances were granted by the BZA and that they
received formal final approval from the Design and Construction Board of Review. He said he
believes that they addressed all of the minor conditions from the preliminary approval. He asked
if anyone on the Commission has any questions.
Mr. DeMarco asked if they will need to come before the Planning Commission if they propose a
monument sign in the front that is listed on the site plan but there are no details that have been
submitted. Mr. Bishop said that it can be a separate submittal once the monument sign is fine

tuned and ready for approval. Mr. McAleer said that he has spoken to two neighbors since the
last meeting and both of them attended the public hearing, which was a new experience for them.
They both provided separate positive feedback relating to how this Commission operates and
they feel comfortable with the presentation and the fact that their concerns were addressed.

Mr. DeMarco moved to grant final approval to The Krueger Group, PPN 303-26-005 for a Multi

Family Apartment Development at the vacant lot next to 22591 Center Ridge Rd. The applicant
will return with a separate sign application when that process is ready. Mr. Capka seconded.

 

I've sent an e-mail to Bobby Krueger to learn more.