I *am* Suzie Middleburg, quite literally, and I go downtown several times a month to eat and drink. I would definitely go to the movies downtown as well, as part of an evening out. I'd sure go there a lot more often than I would the bar or a kids' dance club.

I *am* Suzie Middleburg, quite literally, and I go downtown several times a month to eat and drink. I would definitely go to the movies downtown as well, as part of an evening out. I'd sure go there a lot more often than I would the bar or a kids' dance club.

I was wondering if that was a dig at you haha. Not every suburbanite is the same and I don't think that we should cater to those that are "scared" but having things that include them too makes a well rounded downtown. As long as the density is there, I don't see an issue.

Most likely.  And if it's not, who is the appropriate party to direct your ire to?  FEB for investing the money to build a theater or FCE for not investing money in theirs to stay competitive?

 

I know we're so desperate for development in this city that we cheer for basically anything that's proposed as long as it's built without a setback and isn't beige (for some reason), but that doesn't mean that everything that's proposed is good for the overall community.  Glad you have such a rosy view of what Downtown's capable of supporting, though.  That's definitely something we could use more of.

 

Also, have you walked from public square to the FEB?  It's like a 5 minute walk.

 

Have you walked it in February?  Or in the rain?

 

I *am* Suzie Middleburg, quite literally, and I go downtown several times a month to eat and drink. I would definitely go to the movies downtown as well, as part of an evening out. I'd sure go there a lot more often than I would the bar or a kids' dance club.

 

Sure, but it's still a tourist attraction then.  It's not your neighborhood theater, and it's not someplace you'd go spontaneously.  I'm not sure what kind of base that provides for the theater. 

 

I just honestly think that this is going to force TCC out of business (just saying- not making any excuses for FCE), and then if this place finds it doesn't get the traffic it needs and goes belly-up, we've lost an amenity downtown.  People on this board may not like the crowd at TCC, but they've been the ones supporting it for the last 20 years.

Cleveland is my neighborhood. When I go out, it is usually anywhere in a 15-20 mile radius of the SW side. I regularly dine downtown, Tremont, Westlake, North Olmsted, Brooklyn, Gordon Square, Asiatown. When I go to the movies, I might go to Crocker Park, which is 30 minutes away or AMC Westwood, which is the last place I saw a movie, which is a good 25 minutes away, or to Strongsville, 10 mins away. The movie theater in my actual town is probably my last choice of movie theaters. It's a dump.

 

I go nowhere spontaneously. I have custody of my son two weeks out of the month so the other two weeks are meticulously planned. I know exactly when I will have a night free to go out and plan accordingly. There is no spontaneous going out, like at all.

Most likely.  And if it's not, who is the appropriate party to direct your ire to?  FEB for investing the money to build a theater or FCE for not investing money in theirs to stay competitive?

 

I know we're so desperate for development in this city that we cheer for basically anything that's proposed as long as it's built without a setback and isn't beige (for some reason), but that doesn't mean that everything that's proposed is good for the overall community.  Glad you have such a rosy view of what Downtown's capable of supporting, though.  That's definitely something we could use more of.

 

Nice attempt to dodge my question.  :wink:  FCE is the best answer.

 

But more importantly - what community exactly and who defines what choices are good and for whom?

 

Have you walked it in February?  Or in the rain?

 

Yes to both.  C'mon, I thought you were a hearty city dweller!  But seriously, the FEB is not inaccessible or even out of the CBD.  For rail riders, it's on the waterfront line, if anyone remembers what that is...

Only took a few weeks, but Scene has finally caught up with us:

 

 

Early Plans for Phase 3 of Flats East Development Include a Movie Theater

 

Posted By Vince Grzegorek on Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:18 pm

 

The Flats East Bank development project website got a facelift recently, and with that facelift came a link to a Phase 3 for the project which hadn't been mentioned before. Phase 2, of course, is nearing completion and some of the businesses included in that portion of the development have already opened, including FWD Day and Night Club, with many more to open soon.

 

Read more

I guarantee there was public money that went into the FCE's TC renovation that produced the TC theater.  But for some reason that evades your critique.

 

There was, but not specifically for the theater portion of Tower City. FCE received many millions in Urban Development Action Grants (UDAGs), mostly for repairing the street bridges through the complex. For those who don't know, the streets of Prospect, Huron, and the short sections of West 2nd, West 3rd and West 6th, are all on bridges above and through the Union Terminal Group and were falling apart after nearly 60 years of Cleveland weather and road salt. Without those bridges getting replaced, there would be no Tower City Center.

 

Anyway.....

Early Plans for Phase 3 of Flats East Development Include a Movie Theater via @vincethepolack

http://t.co/ugcZXk9ePc http://t.co/OoY854Ejxa

 

We've been hearing those rumors for a while now, but still, what an awful idea.  Tower City Cinemas are much more accessible to moviegoers from both sides of the city as well as downtown residents.  Crocker on the Cuyahoga indeed.

 

Well away from the noisy teenagers that yell, text and laugh at Tower City movies.    I don't go there any more for that reason, as well as the theaters projection and audio were out of date.

 

Movie theaters themselves are close to being out of date.  It is a dated business model propped up by inertia and the residual clout of the theater chains. 

 

Disruptive kids are part of the reason why, and ironically a significant chunk of their current clientele.

 

Within five years at least one of the major studios is going to release a blockbuster direct to online video that can't have its image tainted by doing so.  That's going to open the floodgates.

 

Most likely it will be a kids' movie.  I would have said potentially one expected to trigger violence, but since Straight Outta Compton triggered none, I wonder if that's an issue anymore.

I would have said the same thing, had I not gone to AMC this year. With the full bar and the leather recliners, it's actually way better than watching a movie at home. It's gotten me back into the theaters and I can't wait to go back.

All good points, but we are straying away from topic of Flats East Bank

Early Plans for Phase 3 of Flats East Development Include a Movie Theater via @vincethepolack

http://t.co/ugcZXk9ePc http://t.co/OoY854Ejxa

 

We've been hearing those rumors for a while now, but still, what an awful idea.  Tower City Cinemas are much more accessible to moviegoers from both sides of the city as well as downtown residents.  Crocker on the Cuyahoga indeed.

 

Well away from the noisy teenagers that yell, text and laugh at Tower City movies.    I don't go there any more for that reason, as well as the theaters projection and audio were out of date.

 

Movie theaters themselves are close to being out of date.  It is a dated business model propped up by inertia and the residual clout of the theater chains. 

 

Disruptive kids are part of the reason why, and ironically a significant chunk of their current clientele.

 

Within five years at least one of the major studios is going to release a blockbuster direct to online video that can't have its image tainted by doing so.  That's going to open the floodgates.

 

Most likely it will be a kids' movie.  I would have said potentially one expected to trigger violence, but since Straight Outta Compton triggered none, I wonder if that's an issue anymore.

 

Personally you won't find me at a big movie theater anytime soon. I prefer not to be a target. Until gun control laws are reformed. It's sad.

^Seriously? How many movie theater shootings have there been ever?

 

I think a movie theater could be a great asset to FEB if it differentiates itself enough from the TC theater.

as was said upthread and is accurate, let's get back specifically to FEB topic.

The consumers shall evaluate the idea with their wallets.

 

You're right.  It'll undoubtedly be a success.  But it just cements the fact that we've created a place for people of a certain socioeconomic status to enjoy, paid for through everyone's taxes.

 

Yup, let's never build anything because not everyone in the world might be able to go. Although, last time I checked, anyone who wants to can go to a movie theater. I think it's strange that certain people are injecting class and socioeconomic issues into this development.  There is plenty of room for everyone.

http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cleveland/2015/08/21/flats-east-bank-phase-three/32162983/

 

WKYC interviewed Scott Wolstein, who shared some details about FEB I haven't seen elsewhere. Among them are:

 

- Phase Three could break ground in fall 2015 or early 2016, and will include restaurant/retail tenants currently on a waiting list for space.

- Wolstein hopes the site will contain upwards of 1,000 residential units (243 currently in Phase 2).

- As many as four additional vertical structures could be built on the project site.

1k residential units would be amazing! I also really like hearing that there's a waiting list for retail/restaurant space. I hope that kind of interest carries over to Stark with preleasing NuCLEus.

I'd love to see 1,000 residential units on the riverfront.  I'd really love some redevelopment spread south of the Main Avenue bridge.  There are some nice structures with what appears to be nice bones just itching to become lofts.

A thousand units divvied among four "vertical structure" buildings in an area the size of the proposed Phase 3 will make for a significant addition to the northern edge of the downtown skyline, that's for sure.

for sidebar comparison, just because i stayed there again recently, here is the minneapolis aloft in the mill district on the east side of downtown. it opened 8/7/08:

 

 

 

as far as streetside retail, there is a men's spa on one end of it, i think that is new since i was there 5yrs ago:

 

 

Hmm... I think Cleveland got the better deal...

i think so too - but i wish cle had the same amount of development around it the mpls aloft has. i know -- working on it!

Hmm... I think Cleveland got the better deal...

 

I've stayed at that Aloft on Washington in MSP recently.  The neighborhood is definitely booming--1,000's of apartments and more being built.  Hopefully FEB will follow suit shortly!

^ yeah you said it, the whole place is absolutely a-boomin -- i'll have photo threads as soon as i can wrangle them up!

This short video kind of gives you a better feel of the boardwalk if you haven't been down there yet.

(Sorry if the other subject matter gives you nightmares)

 

 

As someone who works in a restaurant in phase 1, the past month has completely blown expectations out of the water. Business was good before now, but it's hard to find enough staff to fill demand these days.

This short video kind of gives you a better feel of the boardwalk if you haven't been down there yet.

(Sorry if the other subject matter gives you nightmares)

 

 

 

That looks great.  When we visited, a Sat night, there was a buzz, and the upper deck of Alley Cat was jammed, but not much foot traffic on the boardwalk, and certainly no mimes.  What night was this (Friday or Sat)?  I understand Monday nights (and perhaps, other weekday nights) were pretty dead, so far.  But this is only the infancy of Phase II and there's a ton of construction still there -- we took the WFL down but Lyft-ed back to our car.  With all the construction still underway at the south end of the boardwalk, pedestrians can't easily access the area from the Rapid, but must walk all the way around through the parking lot or by the Phase I restaurants (more pleasant)... But all looks great.  Hopefully more pop-up activities, like mimes -- will come to the boardwalk to add to the fun.

 

That looks great.  When we visited, a Sat night, there was a buzz, and the upper deck of Alley Cat was jammed, but not much foot traffic on the boardwalk

 

The problem is that the boardwalk doesn't really go anywhere...yet.

 

Great boardwalks aren't just waterfront platforms; they take you places. And I don't believe we'll see the boardwalk reach its true potential until there is northern expansion. But it's very easy to imagine a ped bridge to Whiskey Island from there, and you would see a tremendous amount of foot traffic then.

Most likely.  And if it's not, who is the appropriate party to direct your ire to?  FEB for investing the money to build a theater or FCE for not investing money in theirs to stay competitive?

 

I know we're so desperate for development in this city that we cheer for basically anything that's proposed as long as it's built without a setback and isn't beige (for some reason), but that doesn't mean that everything that's proposed is good for the overall community.  Glad you have such a rosy view of what Downtown's capable of supporting, though.  That's definitely something we could use more of.

 

Also, have you walked from public square to the FEB?  It's like a 5 minute walk.

 

Have you walked it in February?  Or in the rain?

 

I *am* Suzie Middleburg, quite literally, and I go downtown several times a month to eat and drink. I would definitely go to the movies downtown as well, as part of an evening out. I'd sure go there a lot more often than I would the bar or a kids' dance club.

 

Sure, but it's still a tourist attraction then.  It's not your neighborhood theater, and it's not someplace you'd go spontaneously.  I'm not sure what kind of base that provides for the theater. 

 

I just honestly think that this is going to force TCC out of business (just saying- not making any excuses for FCE), and then if this place finds it doesn't get the traffic it needs and goes belly-up, we've lost an amenity downtown.  People on this board may not like the crowd at TCC, but they've been the ones supporting it for the last 20 years.

 

This is a ridiculous argument. Even though they've made improvements, TCC is an old and outdated theater. I know, because I was working with a film production company and attempted to bring a movie to Cleveland at TCC a couple of years ago and we couldn't do it because the theater was out of date when it comes to modern cinema technology. I deliberately tried to bring it to Cleveland itself because I wanted to have the premiere in the city and not in Cinemark. We should have another theater, and yes the market can handle both. TCC should step up and compete. You're trying to make a cheap class and race argument. I'm black (and more importantly I'm pro-black) and I don't want anything to do with TCC. Sometimes bad is just bad. Tell TCC to step their game up and compete instead of making cheap, intellectually dishonest comments basically calling everyone a bunch of racists and classists for wanting a decent movie theater in the center city.

^^It is easy to imagine a lot of things.  The more important question is who would pay for such a bridge?

And for the record, I do think that sometimes the UO group can be elitist. This is not one of those times

Hopefully more pop-up activities, like mimes -- will come to the boardwalk to add to the fun.

 

There are mimes on the boardwalk?? So that means the river is close enough to throw the mimes into it.....

^^It is easy to imagine a lot of things.  The more important question is who would pay for such a bridge?

 

I actually get paid to imagine things though :-)

 

In this case I'm not an engineer, but it's interesting to consider the existing railroad bridge. It could perhaps provide the infrastructure for pedestrians access.

^ I'm more concerned about at first extending the boardwalk to connect with Settler's Landing and Heritage Park

^ I'm more concerned about at first extending the boardwalk to connect with Settler's Landing and Heritage Park

 

It's all concerning, really. The boardwalk is a very very vital infrastructural project. Who is in charge of overseeing the design and routing of this?

^Not sure there is a "this." At least not publicly. The segment at FEB is privately owned* and was designed and paid for by the developers.  There is no publicly-controlled route to connect it to Settler's Landing. Someone would need to coordinate the private owners and convince them to link their rear decks, abstain from using them as revenue generating tables, and open them to the public. That, or the city would need to push a very expensive and likely ugly eminent domain program.

 

*EDIT: Forgot that the the developers conveyed the FEB boardwalk property to the city, so the built segment is now publicly owned.

^Strap I believe everything you state is very accurate which leads me to believe that a continuation of the board walk (no matter how appealing )is very unlikely, especially given the expense.

^Not sure there is a "this." At least not publicly. The segment at FEB is privately owned and was designed and paid for by the developers.  There is no publicly-controlled route to connect it to Settler's Landing. Someone would need to coordinate the private owners and convince them to link their rear decks, abstain from using them as revenue generating tables, and open them to the public. That, or the city would need to push a very expensive and likely ugly eminent domain program.

 

And this is precisely why the boardwalk here has the potential to become such a huge letdown.

 

[edit] Straps points are exactly why Plan B should be to steer the boardwalk along the public sidewalk. It's really the only way to ensure connectivity.

^ Why would the owners of the buildings be opposed to that? It would only be bringing more potential customers nearby, with a direct link to the patios of the restaurants/bars.

Because many business owners are incapable of seeing beyond their own fingers. The idea of giving up some of their private space for public use isn't one that will go over well, even if we all know that increased foot traffic would benefit all those businesses in the end.

 

Business owners have a way of thinking they operate within a bubble and that someone trying to encroach on that bubble is automatically bad and that they need to protect what's theirs.

There might also be liability, maintenance, and access control issues. For example, would bar owners need to hire a second bounder team to guard the back door? It's definitely knotty, though maybe not insurmountable.

 

Very long term, the boardwalk could perhaps be extended to the north, over the railroad tracks to tie into future development on the eastern side of the mouth of the river. That would require a shift in long term Port land use planning, though, so probably not in the cards for the next couple decades at least.

But would they even have to give up any of their private space? Couldn't the boardwalk simply be built off of their back patios, with a separation existing between the two? That way, we get the boardwalk, and the building owners still get to keep their patios (now with the added benefit of direct access to the new boardwalk).

I think that would fly even less. They'd lose their direct waterfront. It doesn't sound like much, but that would be a big deal for a lot of businesses.

 

That looks great.  When we visited, a Sat night, there was a buzz, and the upper deck of Alley Cat was jammed, but not much foot traffic on the boardwalk

 

The problem is that the boardwalk doesn't really go anywhere...yet.

 

Great boardwalks aren't just waterfront platforms; they take you places. And I don't believe we'll see the boardwalk reach its true potential until there is northern expansion. But it's very easy to imagine a ped bridge to Whiskey Island from there, and you would see a tremendous amount of foot traffic then.

 

... I'm sure you meant southern expansion ... north is the RR tracks, the salt piles then the Lake.  I get your point, though.  I like the idea of expanding the boardwalk south to Settlers' Landing. 

The boardwalk would have worked better and would see more foot traffic if Wolstein had built bars and restaurants fronting it-- think East Fourth but with water on one side. As it stands now it's more of a big deck.

 

Of course, having bars that close to the water would raise safety concerns as said above.

Forgive my pathetic, horrible graphic design skill. But this is a concept that could actually be done asap and at minimal cost.

 

A boardwalk HAS to take you someplace in order to work.

^Not sure there is a "this." At least not publicly. The segment at FEB is privately owned* and was designed and paid for by the developers.  There is no publicly-controlled route to connect it to Settler's Landing. Someone would need to coordinate the private owners and convince them to link their rear decks, abstain from using them as revenue generating tables, and open them to the public. That, or the city would need to push a very expensive and likely ugly eminent domain program.

 

*EDIT: Forgot that the the developers conveyed the FEB boardwalk property to the city, so the built segment is now publicly owned.

 

I wonder if the property owners adjacent (or non-adjacent, as in all FEB property owners) to the boardwalk could, or would want to, form a 501©(3) district to construct and maintain an extended boardwalk that would be deemed for "the public good," not unlike the Downtown Cleveland Alliance -- which has been visible and, indeed is protecting/guarding FEB's unbuilt areas.  There would be some overlap with the DCA, but seemingly could be created specifically to build, maintain and protect (or maybe this would be ceded to DCA) the expanded boardwalk... I'm also wondering it the City could enter into a P3 with the same goal of such a group.

Directing the Boardwalk along Old River Rd. ("ORR") and making ORR something like East 4th would be the best scenario.  A joint ownership venture for the building owners would likely be unpalatable for the owners and I totally don't fault them for that.  An eminent domain program would be amazingly costly, long, litigious, and exhausting.  ORR has a great historic streetwall on both sides of street.  Better work with whats in reach now.

^I agree with you and surf. The focus needn't be on a boardwalk per se, but on stringing together A+ pedestrian routes.

I think there's too much pessimism around extending the boardwalk south. Right now, NONE of those buildings have operating restaurants. Even if they're redeveloped, it's unlikely that all of them would turn into restaurants. But even if they did, whoever's redeveloping them would have to say "Would it be better to have private back porch seating or extend that boardwalk to potentially expose more people to the restaurant?"

 

Saying "Because many business owners are incapable of seeing beyond their own fingers. The idea of giving up some of their private space for public use isn't one that will go over well..." is a bit cynical. Fairmout and Wolstein didn't do that when they rebuilt the Flats East Bank project. Many business owners understand marketing and how a boardwalk like that crossing right in front of their property could be financially beneficial.

The boardwalk would have been a great anchor point for the Towpath Trail, had they not decided to extend it along the west side of the river.

 

Incorporating a stop for Metroparks' water taxi into the boardwalk might boost traffic as well.