Except for Staten Island to Manhattan or Palm Beach Outlets to Clematis, I can't think of any other city that would have an Outlet Mall so close to the CBD.

It will be unique.

^Boston has something sort of like an outlet mall (though not exclusively outlets) ~2 miles from the CBD: https://assemblyrow.com/shop/  

10 hours ago, marty15 said:

There’s also one closer to Columbus on 71 at Sunbury that seems to be doing well. Tangier Outlets. Probably cannibalized Lodi. It’s much newer.

 

 

yes — thats the newest tanger outlets i was trying to think of. i hope its more modern styled than the others. tanger is a big outlet mall chain.

 

tanger jeffersonville: 1993

tanger riverhead long island: 2008

tanger sunbury: 2016

A new downtown shopping mall? Cleveland Muni Lot draws interest from outlet-mall developer

 

Horizon, a small but established outlet owner and developer based in Illinois, is in talks with retailers about a two-level mall that could rise at the edge of downtown, on the eastern end of the massive Lakefront Municipal Parking Lot.

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2020/02/a-new-downtown-shopping-mall-cleveland-muni-lot-draws-interest-from-outlet-mall-developer.html

Wrong location!
This might be good for the out-of-town developer, the corporations that own the outlet chains, and the public who want to buy this merchandise, but it's not good for downtown Cleveland in general. With prospects for the downtown population building up to 20,000 people with good income this year and then beyond, I've been waiting and waiting for good new retail to come back - envisioning stores like Apple, Barnes & Noble, and OfficeMax, but also more quality clothing, respectable jewelers, pharmacies, opticians, etc.

Will the downtown residents, many who speak of rarely needing a car, walk or drive to this outlet mall? Yes, others will come, but I can't envision them patronizing the rest of downtown very much. Meanwhile, we have the vacant storefronts and many new storefronts planned for all the renovated or restored old office buildings and new office and apartment buildings. Almost all include storefronts in their designs. Somehow I'd like to see these filled in with good retail such as mentioned above. I'd like to see those buildings' owners get the commercial tenants - including outlets if there's the demand. I also don't want to see the existing good retail trying to get by downtown - stores like Brooks Brothers or Geiger's - lose business to these outlet newcomers by the Lake.

I'm in favor of most construction downtown but this is too peripheral a location for what it is. There's still a fair amount of underused land around East. 12th or 13th or in the Warehouse District, in the Flats west of Huron Road, or around Prospect in case the NuCleus project actually dies altogether, for example. Those would be preferable locations

Darn. I was chatting with Khouri yesterday about doing an update to this story which I wrote about in November:

 

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-outlet-shoppes-of-cleveland-is-back.html

 

Looks like I won't be doing an update unless I can get something new/different out of Khouri. It's interesting having competition again with Michelle's return.

38 minutes ago, lafont said:

Wrong location!
This might be good for the out-of-town developer, the corporations that own the outlet chains, and the public who want to buy this merchandise, but it's not good for downtown Cleveland in general. With prospects for the downtown population building up to 20,000 people with good income this year and then beyond, I've been waiting and waiting for good new retail to come back - envisioning stores like Apple, Barnes & Noble, and OfficeMax, but also more quality clothing, respectable jewelers, pharmacies, opticians, etc.

Will the downtown residents, many who speak of rarely needing a car, walk or drive to this outlet mall? Yes, others will come, but I can't envision them patronizing the rest of downtown very much. Meanwhile, we have the vacant storefronts and many new storefronts planned for all the renovated or restored old office buildings and new office and apartment buildings. Almost all include storefronts in their designs. Somehow I'd like to see these filled in with good retail such as mentioned above. I'd like to see those buildings' owners get the commercial tenants - including outlets if there's the demand. I also don't want to see the existing good retail trying to get by downtown - stores like Brooks Brothers or Geiger's - lose business to these outlet newcomers by the Lake.

I'm in favor of most construction downtown but this is too peripheral a location for what it is. There's still a fair amount of underused land around East. 12th or 13th or in the Warehouse District, in the Flats west of Huron Road, or around Prospect in case the NuCleus project actually dies altogether, for example. Those would be preferable locations

 

 

pretty sure the outlet mall shops wont overlap with any of your preferred shops, so it wont affect an apple store or something else eventually opening up somewhere downtown. in fact having more shoppers around in shopping mode may encourage more retail downtown.

 

also, dont hold your breath on a new b&n. their brick and morter shops arent doing well. amazon!

I think @lafont and @mrnyc both make good points.  I’m weighing the pros and cons and am coming around on this project, I don’t know what else the muni lot could be developed into.  I wish Top Golf would of chosen that site but not sure it could of worked there.

5 hours ago, mrnyc said:

pretty sure the outlet mall shops wont overlap with any of your preferred shops, so it wont affect an apple store or something else eventually opening up somewhere downtown. in fact having more shoppers around in shopping mode may encourage more retail downtown.

 

I'm back and forth on this. It's really too bad the idiotic decisions of the past (highway separation  + lack of integration with the street grid) is the hallmark "benefit" of this development. Sins of the past. 

 

The destination aspect of this malls proposed entertainment and restaurants doesn't help the pre-existing venues downtown. It's the whole reason Gilbert made those concessions with the Casino. Maybe it's a different because the property is isolated, but still, it shouldn't even be isolated in the first place. And there's no real plan to correct this anytime soon, or ever. 

 

This is the type of retail project that could be a real shot in the arm for businesses in Asiatown, Warehouse District, etc. etc. 

Edited February 22, 20205 yr by surfohio

2 hours ago, Sapper Daddy said:

I think @lafont and @mrnyc both make good points.  I’m weighing the pros and cons and am coming around on this project, I don’t know what else the muni lot could be developed into.  

Residential. 

6 hours ago, lafont said:

Wrong location!
This might be good for the out-of-town developer, the corporations that own the outlet chains, and the public who want to buy this merchandise, but it's not good for downtown Cleveland in general. With prospects for the downtown population building up to 20,000 people with good income this year and then beyond, I've been waiting and waiting for good new retail to come back - envisioning stores like Apple, Barnes & Noble, and OfficeMax, but also more quality clothing, respectable jewelers, pharmacies, opticians, etc.

Will the downtown residents, many who speak of rarely needing a car, walk or drive to this outlet mall? Yes, others will come, but I can't envision them patronizing the rest of downtown very much. Meanwhile, we have the vacant storefronts and many new storefronts planned for all the renovated or restored old office buildings and new office and apartment buildings. Almost all include storefronts in their designs. Somehow I'd like to see these filled in with good retail such as mentioned above. I'd like to see those buildings' owners get the commercial tenants - including outlets if there's the demand. I also don't want to see the existing good retail trying to get by downtown - stores like Brooks Brothers or Geiger's - lose business to these outlet newcomers by the Lake.

I'm in favor of most construction downtown but this is too peripheral a location for what it is. There's still a fair amount of underused land around East. 12th or 13th or in the Warehouse District, in the Flats west of Huron Road, or around Prospect in case the NuCleus project actually dies altogether, for example. Those would be preferable locations

You know it wouldn’t get built at all if it had to be built in where you’re suggesting, right? No developer with even a halfway functioning brain would put an outlet mall in a location where ample parking is not available. You’re asking to fail

On 2/4/2020 at 10:20 AM, Frmr CLEder said:

Except for Staten Island to Manhattan or Palm Beach Outlets to Clematis, I can't think of any other city that would have an Outlet Mall so close to the CBD.

It will be unique.

New Orleans converted a failed riverfront mall to an outlet center, and its very successful 

1 hour ago, inlovewithCLE said:

You know it wouldn’t get built at all if it had to be built in where you’re suggesting, right? No developer with even a halfway functioning brain would put an outlet mall in a location where ample parking is not available. You’re asking to fail

 

I have to agree. That's why if I were the city I'd be steering toward Asia Town/Midtown. That way the project could exist within the urban fabric (existing utilities etc) and be so much more accessible for everyone.

 

The current proposal offers zero chance for spinoff development and has fairly constricted access points. 

Edited February 22, 20205 yr by surfohio

1 hour ago, punch said:

New Orleans converted a failed riverfront mall to an outlet center, and its very successful 

I was there last Spring.  That outlet center is in an extremely busy part of New Orleans - right in the French Quarter's Jackson Square, the huge French Market, and many other extremely popular attractions.  A lot of tours start right by those outlsets too.

Edited February 22, 20205 yr by lafont

51 minutes ago, surfohio said:

 

I have to agree. That's why if I were the city I'd be steering toward Asia Town/Midtown. That way the project could exist within the urban fabric (existing utilities etc) and be so much more accessible for everyone.

 

The current proposal offers zero chance for spinoff development and has fairly constricted access points. 

I don’t think that would work either. Where would you put something with that large of a footprint in an area over there that still has easy/convenient highway access? That’s part of it too. Another part of the appeal, according to the developer, is that it’s in downtown but outside of the CBD. This way it can target suburban shoppers, tourists, and downtown workers/residents. All those things matter. I don’t think you can replicate that in AsiaTown or Midtown. I think this is the perfect location for this development considering all of the things that they are looking for 

I'm stunned at the vehement opposition to this idea by at least several members of city council, especially guys I normally respect like Kerry McCormack and Matt Zone. Check out the debate I've had with Zone today on Twitter. He HATES this project and would rather reject it without anything better waiting in the wings to replace it. This is potentially a $100 million private sector investment that can deliver hundreds of jobs. If it doesn't get built, the property is going to stay a parking lot that gets used maybe 10 times a year by Browns fans who pee/puke here. It's not a lakefront property like he contends. You have to drive/walk/bike 1 mile west and 2 miles east to reach a publicly accessible location on the water from this site.

 

Here's the kicker -- I will rarely if ever set foot in this outlet mall. I couldn't care less if it gets built or not. But I don't ever want to see city officials be the arbiters of what is a "good" business or a "bad" business unless it is something extreme like an adult movie theater or a strip joint. And even those have the right to exist but can be zoned to be in certain locations. What is so awful about an outlet mall? It seems to be placed in the same pariah category as adult-oriented businesses by what I've seen on Twitter today. What am I missing??

Typical. You shouldn't be surprised. It's a lightening rod project, as is clear from this thread. Seeing the project as more than an Outlet Mall near downtown, but not in downtown requires vision and recognition of opportunities, beyond the obvious. Unless the Shoreway and railroad tracks are moved or submerged, which isn't going to happen anytime soon, that parcel of land will have little value beyond it's current use.

Then again, there may be "other" parties with a vested interest in not seeing this project come to fruition.  Off the top of my head, I can think of several mentioned upthread.

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by Frmr CLEder

30 minutes ago, KJP said:

I'm stunned at the vehement opposition to this idea by at least several members of city council, especially guys I normally respect like Kerry McCormack and Matt Zone. Check out the debate I've had with Zone today on Twitter. He HATES this project and would rather reject it without anything better waiting in the wings to replace it. This is potentially a $100 million private sector investment that can deliver hundreds of jobs. If it doesn't get built, the property is going to stay a parking lot that gets used maybe 10 times a year by Browns fans who pee/puke here. It's not a lakefront property like he contends. You have to drive/walk/bike 1 mile west and 2 miles east to reach a publicly accessible location on the water from this site.

 

Here's the kicker -- I will rarely if ever set foot in this outlet mall. I couldn't care less if it gets built or not. But I don't ever want to see city officials be the arbiters of what is a "good" business or a "bad" business unless it is something extreme like an adult movie theater or a strip joint. And even those have the right to exist but can be zoned to be in certain locations. What is so awful about an outlet mall? It seems to be placed in the same pariah category as adult-oriented businesses by what I've seen on Twitter today. What am I missing??

Living downtown for 5+ years, walking past empty storefront after empty storefront, it's easy to understand why this project isn't being received well. Downtown and it's residents aren't looking for outlet malls and fake neighborhoods like the suburbs are. City officials need to find a way to get the national retailers in the empty storefronts instead of building something that could very well die out just as quickly as it gets built.

Here's why I don't want this thing built. We say it's going to attract suburbanites. Yet, is it really? How do we know suburbanites still have the desire to shop in Cleveland proper? I mean, they treat Steelyard like it's the corner of Woodland Ave and East 55th. I can just imagine the first incident of a robbery at the outlet mall on the muni lot, and suburbanites would view this project as another Steelyard. And then we have another vacant retail area like Galleria or Tower City on the muni lot? 

We should be focusing on retail for those living and spending most of their time downtown. Not suburbanites who run to the exurbs when a crime happens in the city.

Prohibiting an outlet mall on the lake is not going to put fresh retail stores onto the streets of downtown Cleveland. - Really folks, it's not.

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by ExPatClevGuy

4 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

Here's why I don't want this thing built. We say it's going to attract suburbanites. Yet, is it really? How do we know suburbanites still have the desire to shop in Cleveland proper? I mean, they treat Steelyard like it's the corner of Woodland Ave and East 55th. I can just imagine the first incident of a robbery at the outlet mall on the muni lot, and suburbanites would view this project as another Steelyard. And then we have another vacant retail area like Galleria or Tower City on the muni lot? 

We should be focusing on retail for those living and spending most of their time downtown. Not suburbanites who run to the exurbs when a crime happens in the city.

 

Suburbanites don't go to Steelyard because it's the exact same stores that are 5 minutes from their homes. Steelyard is geared towards Cleveland residents. Suburbanites (unless they're in Aurora) don't have outlet stores 5 minutes from their homes, and thus would be more likely to come into Cleveland for this.

Just now, PoshSteve said:

 

Suburbanites don't go to Steelyard because it's the exact same stores that are 5 minutes from their homes. Steelyard is geared towards Cleveland residents. Suburbanites (unless they're in Aurora) don't have outlet stores 5 minutes from their homes, and thus would be more likely to come into Cleveland for this.

I just fear that suburbanites are so crime averting that once an incident happens, they aren't going to shop their again. They always cite Tower City as a ghetto, filled with panhandlers, kids running around harassing people as reasons why Tower City failed as a retail destination. I'm afraid they will view this thing the same way eventually, losing customers.

8 minutes ago, ExPatClevGuy said:

Prohibiting an outlet mall on the lake is not going to put fresh retail stores onto the streets of downtown Cleveland. - Really folks, it's not.

I think we can find common ground with this statement: if those retailers want to be here, they will be here.

Adding another mall that brings them here surely will only hurt filling in the retail stores Downtown that they are now not going to fill. That's my issue with this approach. We have empty storefronts, empty malls, empty buildings downtown that can house/fit just about any retailer you could think of. Why are we building something new to attract suburbanites who all have their own versions of these closer? Why would we build something that is meant to mimic downtown/neighborhood shopping feels when we have a downtown that can fill that need? It makes no sense.

That's not really how it works with most of these larger national chains, though.  They don't decide they want to be a part of a neighborhood and then look for a space there.  They want to be a part of a particular retail destination.  They care more about what complementary retailers are in that retail destination as a package than they do about the rest of the neighborhood.

50 minutes ago, X said:

That's not really how it works with most of these larger national chains, though.  They don't decide they want to be a part of a neighborhood and then look for a space there.  They want to be a part of a particular retail destination.  They care more about what complementary retailers are in that retail destination as a package than they do about the rest of the neighborhood.

Why is this so hard for people to understand

What gets me is that here's an out-of-state business that wants to be here. They want to invest their own money here. They want to create jobs here. Among City Council, whose votes could accept or reject this investment, they're willing to say "no" to this. Why?

 

Is it because there's a legally adopted land use plan for this area that proposes uses that would be incompatible with an outlet center? No, there's no active land use plan for this area.

 

Is there zoning or some other metrics applied to this site which determine the appropriateness of a different end user locating in this area? No, the zoning classification for this site is General Industry. That's the second least restrictive zoning aside from Unrestricted Industry Districts. In a General Industry District, you can put anything from slaughterhouses, fertilizer plants, auto salvage operations, blast furnaces, landfills, etc. You can even put an outlet mall.

 

If the city lacks these restrictions or metrics for determining the value of an outlet mall here, it comes across as an anti-business government that said "no" to a $100 million investment offering hundreds of jobs merely because it felt like it.

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by KJP

Just now, KJP said:

What gets me is that here's an out-of-state business that wants to be here. They want to invest their own money here. They want to create jobs here. Among City Council, whose votes could accept or reject this investment, they're willing to say "no" to this. Why?

 

Is it because there's a legally adopted land use plan for this area that proposes uses that would be incompatible with an outlet center? No, there's no active land use plan for this area.

 

 

 

If the city lacks these, it comes across as an anti-business gov't that said "no" to a $100 million investment offering hundreds of jobs merely because it felt like it.

The real question is does the mayor support it? If he supports it, it’ll get done

@downtownjoe

 

Van Huesen, Bose, Levi's, Mikasa, Ray Ban, Timex, and Body Glove are not going to open factory outlet stores on Euclid Ave, Asiatown, or E 55th, period.

- Also, none of them; under any circumstances, period. 

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by ExPatClevGuy

I’d love to stop hearing the same recycled argument that this outlet mall is a bad idea because we have empty storefronts downtown. 
It’s a false narrative - an apples/oranges comparison - as a number of posters have said - outlet mall tenants are not going to individually locate into a downtown storefront.  And how city council people can oppose a major job creator, revenue producer and “attraction” this close to downtown is beyond logic. Outlet malls are one brick and mortar that is alive and well all over the country - why not have one in the city?  Ok, so maybe a large percentage of shoppers don’t take in a show or visit a restaurant after shopping - but maybe some will. I wasn’t initially crazy about the idea but after actually thinking about it - it’s a no brainer, especially after seeing that the project renderings look pretty darn nice. 

6 minutes ago, CleveFan said:

I’d love to stop hearing the same recycled argument that this outlet mall is a bad idea because we have empty storefronts downtown. 
It’s a false narrative - an apples/oranges comparison - as a number of posters have said - outlet mall tenants are not going to individually locate into a downtown storefront.  And how city council people can oppose a major job creator, revenue producer and “attraction” this close to downtown is beyond logic. Outlet malls are one brick and mortar that is alive and well all over the country - why not have one in the city?  Ok, so maybe a large percentage of shoppers don’t take in a show or visit a restaurant after shopping - but maybe some will. I wasn’t initially crazy about the idea but after actually thinking about it - it’s a no brainer, especially after seeing that the project renderings look pretty darn nice. 

If city council as a whole opposes this, that’s so stupid. I’d be interested to see how they sell this to the public, a public who likely were ready to eliminate half of their jobs. They better not oppose a $100 million development 

Channel 8 Story. https://fox8.com/news/retailer-proposes-outlet-mall-near-clevelands-muni-lot/

Channel 3 Story.  https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/local/cleveland/developer-released-plans-for-outlet-mall-on-cleveland-lakefront-city-officials-saying-no-thanks/95-8fa1623b-b740-4f34-b3ed-398010d75fe5

Channel 19 Story. https://www.cleveland19.com/2020/02/22/plans-outlet-mall-downtown-cleveland/

Channel 5 Story. https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/developer-wants-to-bring-new-shopping-outlet-to-cleveland-muni-lot

I am nobody, but I am seeing by the plans that this is a SHOP / PLAY environment, and I have the same concerns about longevity as many others upthread without a third use. This is very isolated feeling property at the moment unless you are in a car. Asiatown is up the bluff, but is also a few blocks further inland, and not exactly a short walk to Reserve Square or CSU.

 

This is still, as @KJP restated, an out of the area investor willing to put a lot of their money in our backyard, so we shouldn't say no... 

 

I think that if these developers add a decently integrated and separate trolley stop (that isn't between the parking lot and the structure) for the downtown trolleys, and make a commitment to fund those trolleys for a decent amount of years, that this project will be viewed a little more favorably. I know the RTA Rail station isn't exactly far, but in the winter months, nobody is going to enjoy that walk.

 

And what is the worst that could happen if this gets built as is? The City makes more money in property taxes and payroll / sales tax, as well as the jobs it takes to construct the project. Then if this fails in the future, the infrastructure will already be there to re-develop the property in the way of the other Northeast Ohio malls (Hopefully like Richmond) have been re-imagined. 

 

As long as the developers aren't asking for kickbacks and handouts to construct this outlet mall, let them put their vision to the test and risk their investment. Cleveland has nothing to lose?

11 hours ago, surfohio said:

Residential. 

I think there’s plenty of room to accommodate residential growth downtown south of Lakeside and north of Route 2.  Residential on the muni lot, if vertical, would be regulated by the FAA.  Townhomes or a low rise would be plagued by noise pollution being just feet from a highway.

 

An outlet mall makes sense.  3 million+ reside under an hour from the location, visitors are likely to spend time eating out or visiting attractions in the city and there would be hundreds of jobs created.

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by Sapper Daddy

10 hours ago, WhatUp said:

As long as the developers aren't asking for kickbacks and handouts to construct this outlet mall, let them put their vision to the test and risk their investment. Cleveland has nothing to lose?

The article quoted the developer directly on this:

“We’ve never built an outlet center that didn’t get government assistance for the reason that it really is different than other retail,”

 

Claims of job creation are also a bit spurious. New retail just moves around money and jobs that already exist in the region. Unless everyone who shops here is from out of state, no “new” money is being generated. 

What other developers are even remotely inquiring about this land?  

Right but Cleveland has the right and responsibility to attract jobs from within the region, even if it is moving them in from Lodi and Aurora.  The worst you might say for this is that it might cannibalize Steelyard retail a bit.

 

I would prefer a site plan that was a bit more favorable to future TOD on the WFL but that's kind of pie in the sky thinking.

7 hours ago, Sapper Daddy said:

I think there’s plenty of room to accommodate residential growth downtown south of Lakeside and north of Route 2.  Residential on the muni lot, if vertical, would be regulated by the FAA.  Townhomes or a low rise would be plagued by noise pollution being just feet from a highway.

 

FYI developers are building other residential along the Shoreway. 

 

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2019/12/shoreline-apartments-owner-closes-167-million-land-deal-for-next-phase.html

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/real-estate/downtown-shoreway-housing-plans-are-delayed

It's been mentioned before but it warrants repeating. The developer's target audience are those living within the NEO region. That means mostly, not exclusively, suburban and exurban residents. They want the same thing they're used to in the suburbs; free parking and easy access. These shoppers are not going to pay to park on Euclid or in Tower City, then battle traffic to get back to their suburban hamlets. This location provides easy access and may also provide the City of Cleveland with additional, drastically needed revenue and jobs.

Edited February 23, 20205 yr by Frmr CLEder

41 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

It's been mentioned before but it warrants repeating. The developer's target audience are those living within the NEO region. That means mostly, not exclusively, suburban and exurban residents. They want the same thing they're used to in the suburbs; free parking and easy access. These shoppers are not going to pay to park on Euclid or in Tower City, then battle traffic to get back to their suburban hamlets. This location provides easy access and may also provide the City of Cleveland with additional, drastically needed revenue and jobs.

Simple as that

Folks, the lakefront proposal is the topic here.

The City has done little with the Cleveland lakefront since the Great Lakes Exposition in the 30's. Now the possibility of this development on the muni lot is a contentious "lakefront" project.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/02/is-cleveland-owned-property-along-the-shoreway-a-good-site-for-an-outlet-mall-some-members-of-city-council-are-wary.html?utm_campaign=clevelanddotcom_sf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yQ5Je2Y4-kHNGovzE5agH99eg_9TFHJ4yVMhwnAiqjlwPbvLKsyG_5AM

Edited February 25, 20205 yr by Frmr CLEder

Is Cleveland-owned property along the Shoreway a good site for an outlet mall? Some members of City Council are wary

Robert Higgs - Mon. Feb. 24, 2020

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/02/is-cleveland-owned-property-along-the-shoreway-a-good-site-for-an-outlet-mall-some-members-of-city-council-are-wary.html

Edited February 25, 20205 yr by NorthShore647

Brought to you by the TJ Dow camp of corrupt logic.

2 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

The City has done little with the Cleveland lakefront since the Great Lakes Exposition in the 30's. Now the possibility of this development on the muni lot is a contentious "lakefront" project.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/02/is-cleveland-owned-property-along-the-shoreway-a-good-site-for-an-outlet-mall-some-members-of-city-council-are-wary.html?utm_campaign=clevelanddotcom_sf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yQ5Je2Y4-kHNGovzE5agH99eg_9TFHJ4yVMhwnAiqjlwPbvLKsyG_5AM

But this isn't on the Lakefront. The biggest impediment of Lakefront development is the shoreway.

7 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

But this isn't on the Lakefront. The biggest impediment of Lakefront development is the shoreway.

Agreed. The Shoreway and the railway tracks that aren't going anywhere, anytime soon. Part of the city council's rationale for why this project should not move forward is "for the future of lakefront development."  I continue to be amazed at how the City leadership cannot get out of it's own way for the sake of progress. They'd prefer to leave the parcel as a parking lot in the "hope" that it will eventually be part of a bigger lakefront development.

Edited February 25, 20205 yr by Frmr CLEder

9 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

The City has done little with the Cleveland lakefront since the Great Lakes Exposition in the 30's. Now the possibility of this development on the muni lot is a contentious "lakefront" project.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/02/is-cleveland-owned-property-along-the-shoreway-a-good-site-for-an-outlet-mall-some-members-of-city-council-are-wary.html?utm_campaign=clevelanddotcom_sf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yQ5Je2Y4-kHNGovzE5agH99eg_9TFHJ4yVMhwnAiqjlwPbvLKsyG_5AM

 

6 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

But this isn't on the Lakefront. The biggest impediment of Lakefront development is the shoreway.

Idk if I've ever been a NIMBY in my life.... 

 

But it seems foolish to commit such a sizable structure to a retail model that will be extinct in 15 years

10 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

The City has done little with the Cleveland lakefront since the Great Lakes Exposition in the 30's. Now the possibility of this development on the muni lot is a contentious "lakefront" project.

 

https://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/2020/02/is-cleveland-owned-property-along-the-shoreway-a-good-site-for-an-outlet-mall-some-members-of-city-council-are-wary.html?utm_campaign=clevelanddotcom_sf&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2yQ5Je2Y4-kHNGovzE5agH99eg_9TFHJ4yVMhwnAiqjlwPbvLKsyG_5AM

Cleveland has done an ENORMOUS amount with the lakefront since the Exposition, particularly in the past 25 years, but it should do more!

What, the area around what was the East 9th Street pier?

MOST of the lakefront has been, and continues to be undeveloped and as stated above, the Muni Lot isn't even on the lakefront.

Edited February 25, 20205 yr by Frmr CLEder