I had to read the title over and then read the article and then read the title again... haha I think it’s just poorly worded. He meant strikes a blow in favor of and in support of a promenade and better access. But it’s an odd choice of wording.

I think it makes a lot of sense to extend the boardwalk along the water as far south as reasonable but many of those old buildings are built right up to the water's edge... I don't see that changing anytime soon.  Most sense probably to move the headwall out into the river by about 10-12'.  Which won't be cheap.

I think it makes a lot of sense to extend the boardwalk along the water as far south as reasonable but many of those old buildings are built right up to the water's edge... I don't see that changing anytime soon.  Most sense probably to move the headwall out into the river by about 10-12'.  Which won't be cheap.

 

I am assuming moving the headway is a non-starter.  They could always route the walkway out to the sidewalk around the buildings the back to the river.  Not ideal but probably the easiest way to do it.

I think it makes a lot of sense to extend the boardwalk along the water as far south as reasonable but many of those old buildings are built right up to the water's edge... I don't see that changing anytime soon.  Most sense probably to move the headwall out into the river by about 10-12'.  Which won't be cheap.

 

I am assuming moving the headway is a non-starter.  They could always route the walkway out to the sidewalk around the buildings the back to the river.  Not ideal but probably the easiest way to do it.

 

Yep, route the walkway out to the sidewalk!

 

I’ve actually mocked this idea up on here - terribly. But the idea is a good one. Extending the boardwalk past the front doors of those businesses would draw a lot of potential customers. The key is getting people out of their cars and giving them a reason to want to walk.

Or just require the lowest level of the establishments to be open to public, sort of a breezeway under the upper decks.

The existing buildings are built practically on the water already. Would that require a variance just to redevelop one of the empty buildings? I get what the city is trying to accomplish, but they shouldn't be creating rules that are contrary to the built form, IMO.

What are we referring to with headway? The bulkhead? If so, what if instead of extending the bulkhead out, construct a boardwalk on pylons to make the needed connections in front of the existing structures already built up to the waters edge . Still expensive but might make it more feasible.

I thought this might happen when I first saw the boardwalk concept in FEB's plans.  Any historic building stock that was missed in the first rampage would soon be viewed as a threat to "access," which is the new "vibrancy."  It's like, who put these stupid buildings right in the middle of our boardwalk?  Access/vibrancy requires lots of setbacks and promenades. 

is phase three still on track to break ground sometime this spring?

 

https://articles.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/09/scott_wolstein_eyes_flats_east.amp

 

Doubtful. Nothing has come before the planning commission for approval.

Scott Wolstein eyes Flats East Bank phase three, other ventures after 5 years at Starwood Retail

 

By Michelle Jarboe, The Plain Dealer

Email the author | Follow on Twitter

on September 29, 2017 at 1:22 PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Sitting on a patio in the Flats on a surprisingly sweaty late-summer afternoon, Scott Wolstein seemed relaxed despite the nearby bustle of valets, trains and boats.

 

...He hopes to break ground in the spring for a third wave of development, which will include a high-end movie theater, restaurants and an apartment tower.

 

If that timeline holds, new buildings could open by late 2019, joining the existing Ernst & Young Tower, the Aloft hotel, waterfront apartments, dining and entertainment venues.

 

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2017/09/scott_wolstein_eyes_flats_east.html

 

Spring is here-I'm hoping the third phase is close to becoming a reality.

Not being a downer... Because I hope it does too...

 

But the vibe at the East Bank changed last year. The nights I was there beyond midnight it felt outright dangerous at times - and I'm not some suburban prude (I often make the walk from my work on 9th to Asiatown for dinner in the summer and live in the city as well). Further, a few of the newly opened spots are struggling right now (granted Summer can easily change that).

^ yeah i always thought they jumped the gun with all that at once before phase 3 was built out and more residential was in there. i know the restaurants are not geared toward east bank area residents exclusively, but really more people need to be living around there to keep it vibrant and safe in slow times of the year.

Not being a downer... Because I hope it does too...

 

But the vibe at the East Bank changed last year. The nights I was there beyond midnight it felt outright dangerous at times - and I'm not some suburban prude (I often make the walk from my work on 9th to Asiatown for dinner in the summer and live in the city as well). Further, a few of the newly opened spots are struggling right now (granted Summer can easily change that).

 

Like a college-y, drunk and fighting kind of unsafe?

 

I haven’t been down there in a while, although I’m sure I will be once it breaks 40deg.

Can you elaborate? Where do you feel unsafe? Inside the establishments or on the street?

 

I live just up the hill in the warehouse district and I find my high school friends who live in the suburbs always want to go to the Flats when they come downtown. I would rather go elsewhere but I go because they're my friends. I've never really felt unsafe though, even when I walk back up the hill underneath the shoreway.

Seems Mike Tricarichi is having some problems with the city regarding his Flats properties....

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/bbs/agenda/2018/AGENDA04182018.pdf

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-40-18 1204 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Two

Story Frame Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLATION—INTERIOR MAIN-TENANCE,

dated January 14, 2018; appellant appeals for the reason that the actions of the City are without

merit. The property is currently vacant, and no changes have been made to the property;

accordingly, the Board should reverse the City on the violations contained in the Violation

Notice.

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-41-18 1198 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Two

Story Masonry Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLATION—UNAU-THORIZED/ILLEGAL

USE, dated January 06, 2018; appellant states that the actions of the City violates Ohio law to the

extent that the City has alleged a violation relative to the second

floor dwelling that was properly permitted by the City at the time of construction, but the City

cannot now locate the record of such; no changes have been made to the second floor since it

was constructed in 1989. The second floor has been used continuously as a residence for almost

30 years; and that bad record-keeping on the part of the City does not allow the City to cite such a

use violation.

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-42-18 1220 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Three

Story Masonry Walls/Wood Floors Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLA-TION—INTERIOR

MAINTENANCE, dated January 16, 2018; appellant appeals for the reason that the actions of the

City are without merit. The property is currently vacant, and no changes have been made to the

building since the occupancy permit was issued in 2009; stating that the City’s finding that “reestablishment

of use of a bar, which has been vacant for several years” is unlawful, and as an

initial matter, that statement is factually inaccurate, stating that this property has been vacant for

a few months, having closed in mid-2017; and that City will cause irreparable harm to TAC and its

business operations.

Can you elaborate? Where do you feel unsafe? Inside the establishments or on the street?

 

I live just up the hill in the warehouse district and I find my high school friends who live in the suburbs always want to go to the Flats when they come downtown. I would rather go elsewhere but I go because they're my friends. I've never really felt unsafe though, even when I walk back up the hill underneath the shoreway.

 

Yeah, no problem. After I took the bar exam last summer, I came back to town looking to imbibe.

 

I sat out on the patio at Beerhead with some friends and had drinks and pizza until about 1am. At 1, a group of guys ripped past the patio and onto the boardwalk on ATVs. Shortly thereafter, a group of about 15-20 started filming what I presume to be a rap video in front of the spot that is now Dante's new restaurant (was vacant at the time) - from this came a fight between 5-8 guys that got shoved up against the railing to Beerhead.

 

When we decided to call it a night, a group of 5 of us walked back to Stonebridge and (I know this isn't technically FEB) the two women in our group were stopped by a group outside of East End, forcing us to intervene. The guys did not like that we were intervening, which led to another 3-5 guys coming out of the bar - at that exact time, a cop came by and everyone walked away. We were followed, however, until we got past the pump station down the river.

 

I'm 6'3" 215 lbs - myself and my other two male friends all played college football. I see that night going in a significantly worse place for the girls in our group if we weren't in a position to step in, which to be honest, was terrifying as is.

I'm glad there was a cop!

ATVs on the boardwalk?  You gotta be $hitting me!  This has to stop. 

This bike problem has been relentless.  Is it possible to lay down semi-permanent spike strips?

ATVs on the boardwalk?  You gotta be $hitting me!  This has to stop. 

 

And I'm by no means a prude when it comes to partying. I'm usually okay with whatever and am of the "more the merrier" philosophy when everyone is having a good time.

 

But it was really out of hand towards the end of last summer. For the city's sake, since that's the tourist spot for bar hopping, the security really just needs to be better.

Preach YABO....the ATV's and Bikes down there last summer was out of hand. 

Interesting. The city applying pressure to get him to sell or renovate?

 

Seems Mike Tricarichi is having some problems with the city regarding his Flats properties....

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/bbs/agenda/2018/AGENDA04182018.pdf

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-40-18 1204 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Two

Story Frame Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLATION—INTERIOR MAIN-TENANCE,

dated January 14, 2018; appellant appeals for the reason that the actions of the City are without

merit. The property is currently vacant, and no changes have been made to the property;

accordingly, the Board should reverse the City on the violations contained in the Violation

Notice.

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-41-18 1198 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Two

Story Masonry Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLATION—UNAU-THORIZED/ILLEGAL

USE, dated January 06, 2018; appellant states that the actions of the City violates Ohio law to the

extent that the City has alleged a violation relative to the second

floor dwelling that was properly permitted by the City at the time of construction, but the City

cannot now locate the record of such; no changes have been made to the second floor since it

was constructed in 1989. The second floor has been used continuously as a residence for almost

30 years; and that bad record-keeping on the part of the City does not allow the City to cite such a

use violation.

 

-POSTPONED- (Rescheduled for May 02, 2018)

Docket A-42-18 1220 Old River Road WARD: 3

(Kerry McCormack)

Telecom Acquisition Corp. I, Inc., Owner of the A-2 Assembly – Nite Clubs, Restau-rants Three

Story Masonry Walls/Wood Floors Property appeals from a NOTICE OF VIOLA-TION—INTERIOR

MAINTENANCE, dated January 16, 2018; appellant appeals for the reason that the actions of the

City are without merit. The property is currently vacant, and no changes have been made to the

building since the occupancy permit was issued in 2009; stating that the City’s finding that “reestablishment

of use of a bar, which has been vacant for several years” is unlawful, and as an

initial matter, that statement is factually inaccurate, stating that this property has been vacant for

a few months, having closed in mid-2017; and that City will cause irreparable harm to TAC and its

business operations.

This is directly from the Plain Dealer from the comments section of today's article:

 

"Reply to @TheNogMachine:

Thanks for commenting. Scott Wolstein says initial plans for the third phase (two sites) should be on city design-review committee agendas within weeks. He's still hoping to break ground before the end of the year, but that timeline hinges on discussions with the city about financing.

Michelle"

And for those, like me, who did not know at first what "today's article" referred to:

 

Wolstein family, Fairmount Properties part ways on Flats East Bank project in Cleveland

 

...

In a news release Tuesday, Cleveland-based Fairmount said it sold its ownership interest in the Flats East Bank to the Wolstein Group. Terms of the deal weren't disclosed by either party.

...

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2018/05/wolstein_family_fairmount_prop.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

Sounds like the main elements of the originally discussed third phase are still on tap, which is great to hear. According the article, the only big hurdle left to clear is the public handout, naturally.

ATVs on the boardwalk?  You gotta be $hitting me!  This has to stop. 

 

And I'm by no means a prude when it comes to partying. I'm usually okay with whatever and am of the "more the merrier" philosophy when everyone is having a good time.

 

But it was really out of hand towards the end of last summer. For the city's sake, since that's the tourist spot for bar hopping, the security really just needs to be better.

 

My head is spinning a little at the idea of dirt bikes/ATV's making it all the way to the board walk.  I'm trying to think how damn far they must've come from a residential area to make it to the FEB....?  Regardless my wife & I come down to FEB regularly - never had a problem but never stayed out till 1 either

And for those, like me, who did not know at first what "today's article" referred to:

 

Wolstein family, Fairmount Properties part ways on Flats East Bank project in Cleveland

 

...

In a news release Tuesday, Cleveland-based Fairmount said it sold its ownership interest in the Flats East Bank to the Wolstein Group. Terms of the deal weren't disclosed by either party.

...

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2018/05/wolstein_family_fairmount_prop.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

Sounds like the main elements of the originally discussed third phase are still on tap, which is great to hear. According the article, the only big hurdle left to clear is the public handout, naturally.

 

I'm hoping that the change results in buildings that are a bit more urban. 

Which parking lot is she referring to as the site of phase iii? the main lot across from punch bowl social?

Very encouraging comment in bold below....

 

The Wolstein Group could bring other developers on board at the Flats East Bank, but only as expert partners on specific components of the project. There won't be another broad joint venture like the Fairmount arrangement, Wolstein said.

 

He expects the first round of plans for phase three, a potential $150 million undertaking, to crop up at city design-review committee meetings within weeks. New buildings would rise in two locations - on a grassy area near the river between FWD Day and Nightclub and Alley Cat Oyster Bar and in place of a parking lot behind the apartment building that bears an illuminated "Flats East Bank" sign.

 

Wolstein wouldn't get into details about the buildings, tenants or funding, beyond saying that "the only piece that needs to be closed is the public piece. The private financing isn't a problem."

 

He hopes to secure public approvals and start construction by the end of the year.

 

The two building sites are shown below. I'll bet that a parking deck gets added to the surface lot next to the tracks and "building one". It will also help shield the development from the noise of passing trains. Remember that, the last we heard, Wolstein was upping his floor estimate for "building two" on the parking lot next to the Waterfront Line, from 11 to 20+. But there was no news about a second building. Perhaps he's gone back to 11 stories for building two and planning a 4- to 6-story residential building for building one?

Very encouraging comment in bold below....

 

The Wolstein Group could bring other developers on board at the Flats East Bank, but only as expert partners on specific components of the project. There won't be another broad joint venture like the Fairmount arrangement, Wolstein said.

 

He expects the first round of plans for phase three, a potential $150 million undertaking, to crop up at city design-review committee meetings within weeks. New buildings would rise in two locations - on a grassy area near the river between FWD Day and Nightclub and Alley Cat Oyster Bar and in place of a parking lot behind the apartment building that bears an illuminated "Flats East Bank" sign.

 

Wolstein wouldn't get into details about the buildings, tenants or funding, beyond saying that "the only piece that needs to be closed is the public piece. The private financing isn't a problem."

 

He hopes to secure public approvals and start construction by the end of the year.

 

The two building sites are shown below. I'll bet that a parking deck gets added to the surface lot next to the tracks and "building one". It will also help shield the development from the noise of passing trains. Remember that, the last we heard, Wolstein was upping his floor estimate for "building two" on the parking lot next to the Waterfront Line, from 11 to 20+. But there was no news about a second building. Perhaps he's gone back to 11 stories for building two and planning a 4- to 6-story residential building for building one?

 

Excited for "Building Two". That large lot is a huge eyesore. I hope that the cinema is constructed in there, and can replace the awful Tower City cinema. I currently venture out to Valley View from Downtown to watch movies. I'm also for the building being as tall as it can be. a 20 story complex would be amazing, but 11 seems more probable with the current 7-8 story building.

Excited for "Building Two". That large lot is a huge eyesore. I hope that the cinema is constructed in there, and can replace the awful Tower City cinema. I currently venture out to Valley View from Downtown to watch movies. I'm also for the building being as tall as it can be. a 20 story complex would be amazing, but 11 seems more probable with the current 7-8 story building.

 

I'm not as high on the cinema idea. I'd rather see Tower City get renovated. The hassle with getting down into the Flats on a weekend night could be a deterrent. I hate missing the coming attractions lol.

 

Anyhow, looking forward to some renderings we can all critique!

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

I would assume more demand for residential...? Retail, especially bars and restaurants, is always volatile.

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

 

FEB seems to be a house of cards IMHO.

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

 

There's only two very small spots available to lease in all of phase I and II.  There's definitely demand for the next phase of development.  Attached is updated leasing info...

FEB-Leasing.pdf

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

 

FEB seems to be a house of cards IMHO.

 

Really?  The apartment building is over 90% full and so is the office tower...

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

 

FEB seems to be a house of cards IMHO.

 

Really?  The apartment building is over 90% full and so is the office tower...

 

Just a little inside info on the financing that I'd rather not go into specifically. Perhaps the recent "changes" are rectifying the situation. 

^Wolstein is quoted in the recent article relating to the buyout of Fairmount that "the private financing is not a problem".  Apparently just trying to work out the usual public subsidies with the city.

^Wolstein is quoted in the recent article relating to the buyout of Fairmount that "the private financing is not a problem".  Apparently just trying to work out the usual public subsidies with the city.

 

Developers are always more optimistic than what is actually occurring.

Banks aren't though!

Banks aren't though!

 

that's what I am speaking to.  We shall see.

^Wolstein is quoted in the recent article relating to the buyout of Fairmount that "the private financing is not a problem".  Apparently just trying to work out the usual public subsidies with the city.

 

Developers are always more optimistic than what is actually occurring.

 

That might be true with many developers but that is not my observation when it comes to Wolstein.

^Wolstein is quoted in the recent article relating to the buyout of Fairmount that "the private financing is not a problem".  Apparently just trying to work out the usual public subsidies with the city.

 

Developers are always more optimistic than what is actually occurring.

 

That might be true with many developers but that is not my observation when it comes to Wolstein.

 

I think Wolstein is doing just fine.  I know a couple other acquisitions he's running down so he's not cash strapped with FEB...

^Wolstein is quoted in the recent article relating to the buyout of Fairmount that "the private financing is not a problem".  Apparently just trying to work out the usual public subsidies with the city.

 

Developers are always more optimistic than what is actually occurring.

 

That might be true with many developers but that is not my observation when it comes to Wolstein.

 

I think Wolstein is doing just fine.  I know a couple other acquisitions he's running down so he's not cash strapped with FEB...

 

Perhaps the issue was with with Fairmount and they are out of FEB now. So maybe we'll see some movement on this.

Excited for "Building Two". That large lot is a huge eyesore. I hope that the cinema is constructed in there, and can replace the awful Tower City cinema. I currently venture out to Valley View from Downtown to watch movies. I'm also for the building being as tall as it can be. a 20 story complex would be amazing, but 11 seems more probable with the current 7-8 story building.

 

I'm not as high on the cinema idea. I'd rather see Tower City get renovated. The hassle with getting down into the Flats on a weekend night could be a deterrent. I hate missing the coming attractions lol.

 

Anyhow, looking forward to some renderings we can all critique!

 

Is the cinema part of the Avenue, and if so would Bedrock want to redevelop the cinema? The flats really isn't too difficult to get down to with the trolley running until 11 and there's plenty of parking + ride share.

 

I promise I'm not trying to be a debbie downer... but why Phase II when there are several spots within phase one that are unable to maintain tenants?

 

For better or worse Margaritville and Rascal Flatts should draw in some suburban $. I've never been in an empty Punch Bowl, Beerhead, etc. on the weekend. The current tenants seem to be doing well.

Excited for "Building Two". That large lot is a huge eyesore. I hope that the cinema is constructed in there, and can replace the awful Tower City cinema. I currently venture out to Valley View from Downtown to watch movies. I'm also for the building being as tall as it can be. a 20 story complex would be amazing, but 11 seems more probable with the current 7-8 story building.

 

I'm not as high on the cinema idea. I'd rather see Tower City get renovated. The hassle with getting down into the Flats on a weekend night could be a deterrent. I hate missing the coming attractions lol.

 

Anyhow, looking forward to some renderings we can all critique!

 

To me, it depends on how they deal with the cinema itself.  If it's just a regular old multi-screen cinema, then there is no need.  If it's more of a "destination" cinema, then there's viability, in my opinion.  If this was a high-end cinema, with a different type of service, then perhaps there could be more of a draw.  I traveled to San Diego some years ago, and a friend took me to a really nice theater (I forget the name of it) that had really nice seats, a full bar, a restaurant and other amenities.  I'd pay a little extra and make the journey downtown to go to a place like that.

 

If they don't do it there, then if the Greyhound station ever moves, that building should be repurposed as a movie theater in the Playhouse Square area.

Is the cinema part of the Avenue, and if so would Bedrock want to redevelop the cinema? The flats really isn't too difficult to get down to with the trolley running until 11 and there's plenty of parking + ride share.

 

As far as I know the cinema is part of the Avenue. The Tower City location shines during the Cleveland International Film Festival. Even with the sad state of retail in Tower City the venue has been a great location with record crowds to show for it.

 

I'm usually on the west side of town so I could take the RTA and waterfront line to a FEB theater. Truth is it would be a lot less time consuming driving to Westlake.

Is the cinema part of the Avenue, and if so would Bedrock want to redevelop the cinema? The flats really isn't too difficult to get down to with the trolley running until 11 and there's plenty of parking + ride share.

 

As far as I know the cinema is part of the Avenue. The Tower City location shines during the Cleveland International Film Festival. Even with the sad state of retail in Tower City the venue has been a great location with record crowds to show for it.

 

I'm usually on the west side of town so I could take the RTA and waterfront line to a FEB theater. Truth is it would be a lot less time consuming driving to Westlake.

 

The Avenue needs a complete overhaul. I'm not sure if or when Tower City could be an attraction - besides the film fest and Casino. I'm not sure if the film festival would want to be located in the FEB? However, making the development a regional draw is important. There's not many good cinemas around. Shaker and Euclid's are both terrible. Valley View, Richmond Hts, Mayfield, Ridge Park, and Rocky River all have decent cinemas. Pulling people who live between these cinemas and Downtown to the FEB could result in higher traffic for the bars and restaurants. It could have a wider suburban draw too. Watching a movie is generally accompanied with dinners. Having a cinema combined with Margaritaville and Rascall Flatts FEB could have a wider draw than the largely younger crowd that the FEB seemingly draws.

The Arena District in Cbus had a theater that struggled and closed. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2017/01/04/studio-movie-grill-closes-in-arena-district.html

 

Thing with movie theaters these days is that Netflix is doing to them what Amazon is doing to retail.

 

Not that I'm against a new theater or a renovated Tower City Cinemas, but it could be a tough sell. The area might have too many theaters already.

Is the cinema part of the Avenue, and if so would Bedrock want to redevelop the cinema? The flats really isn't too difficult to get down to with the trolley running until 11 and there's plenty of parking + ride share.

 

As far as I know the cinema is part of the Avenue. The Tower City location shines during the Cleveland International Film Festival. Even with the sad state of retail in Tower City the venue has been a great location with record crowds to show for it.

 

I'm usually on the west side of town so I could take the RTA and waterfront line to a FEB theater. Truth is it would be a lot less time consuming driving to Westlake.

 

The Avenue needs a complete overhaul. I'm not sure if or when Tower City could be an attraction - besides the film fest and Casino. I'm not sure if the film festival would want to be located in the FEB? However, making the development a regional draw is important. There's not many good cinemas around. Shaker and Euclid's are both terrible. Valley View, Richmond Hts, Mayfield, Ridge Park, and Rocky River all have decent cinemas. Pulling people who live between these cinemas and Downtown to the FEB could result in higher traffic for the bars and restaurants. It could have a wider suburban draw too. Watching a movie is generally accompanied with dinners. Having a cinema combined with Margaritaville and Rascall Flatts FEB could have a wider draw than the largely younger crowd that the FEB seemingly draws.

 

I don't disagree with this at all. It's just that I'd like to see something novel suggested for FEB. A new theater at FEB just creates another void in Tower City, robbing Peter to pay Paul if you will.