I am fine if this area fills up with townhouses.  It could be a cool mix of industrial buildings and townhomes. 

Cleveland Technology Center. It has been bought, sold and expanded within its existing walls multiple times in the past 10 years...

 

superior is a weird street.  talking about scale, it is one to four story buildings from east 12th all the way to east Cleveland.  most buildings have setbacks and parking lots.  a lot of warehouses and light industrial.  it'll never be a 'neighborhood street', so im fine with this development.  im cool if east 12th north of superior and 13th becomes a spine for residential developments/townhomes and have st clair and euclid be the hubs of retail.

Edited February 14, 20196 yr by Whipjacka

Believe or not, we're all kinda saying the same thing, regarding this Avenue District Phase I and Phase II project.  

 

16 hours ago, viscomi said:

...this is a pretty crucial pivot point right here though, for downtown. It's Not a huge area being considered... but in context its a full block in a very important place.

 

13 hours ago, Oxford19 said:

This area will eventually be an integrated part of downtown that people will work and live.  The Knez townhomes project isn't designed to bring this area into scale.  It's a piecemeal project yet is only one component of development in this area with tons of potential; the potential is happening.

 

That said, would I want to live in a town home fronting Superior Avenue?  No. 

 

Looking at this project, it further cements in a tone for the area all the way to the highway (btw which is how Downtown is defined by the city http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/2010census/downloads/All_SPAs_2014.pdf).  Agreed it is both weird with being the wide Avenue and having industrial buildings, and also ripe for development. 

 

My whole point of seeking retail is not that I personally want retail, but recognize it as a missed opportunity for Downtown and the city to continue to build out its urban fabric.  It reminds me in a way of what Lake South Union, north end of Downtown Seattle, looked like 10 years ago, before it's mind-blowing transformation from light industrial to full mixed-use neighborhood:  https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/data/amazons-south-lake-union-turf-do-you-recognize-this-place/

 

How it related to a townhome project -- simply having the streetscape and potential amenities in place raises residential property value. 

 

--- 

 

With all this said, will be happy if this project gets built as is?  Of course. ?

 

But I feel it's fair to criticize a small, surprising pivot point on how the area gets developed in the short term, against how it will look and function 5 to 10 to 20  years from now. 

Edited February 14, 20196 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

Interesting that you use Seattle's Lake South Union as a model. It has a streetcar. Ours almost had an extension of the Waterfront Line amto create a downtown loop. And Forest City Enterprises planned a major development along it that never saw the light of day. But if cell phones had cameras in 1996, I would have snuck a picture or three of thise plans when I met with Hunter Morrison at Cleveland Planning Commission on an unrelated matter.

19 hours ago, Oxford19 said:

 

That said, would I want to live in a town home fronting Superior Avenue?  No. 

 

It would be interesting if the developer could create a London-style private park for the use of the residents - carve out a central square on Lindazzo, giving up six houses, and have the remaining townhouses face it.   A place for young parents and toddlers to enjoy until they move somewhere else would probably be worth a good hike in rents plus you could sell memberships in the park to the existing houses north of Lindazzo.

 

Edit:  The "backs" of the houses, facing Superior and the numbered streets wouldn't HAVE to be pedestrian unfriendly.

How are those other units doing there. I am not talking about Zaremba BUT i believe they were called MILTON. 

11 minutes ago, simplythis said:

How are those other units doing there. I am not talking about Zaremba BUT i believe they were called MILTON. 

 

All leased up with one operating as an AirBnB.

37 minutes ago, Mov2Ohio said:

 

All leased up with one operating as an AirBnB.

How Many units are in the Milton. Were those for sale or For lease. And is there a second phase to the Milton?

22 minutes ago, simplythis said:

How Many units are in the Milton. Were those for sale or For lease. And is there a second phase to the Milton?

 

16. For rent. No.

21 hours ago, Dougal said:

 

It would be interesting if the developer could create a London-style private park for the use of the residents - carve out a central square on Lindazzo, giving up six houses, and have the remaining townhouses face it.   A place for young parents and toddlers to enjoy until they move somewhere else would probably be worth a good hike in rents plus you could sell memberships in the park to the existing houses north of Lindazzo.

 

Edit:  The "backs" of the houses, facing Superior and the numbered streets wouldn't HAVE to be pedestrian unfriendly.

I think a private park would come across as exclusionary in this day and age but I like the idea. It's a chicken/egg scenario with the population of downtown though in do you build it and they will come or do you wait and build it when the number of families warrant it. I'd hate to have an empty jungle gym in the middle of a neighborhood that consists of empty-nesters and childless millennials but if it brings in families that can afford the price tag of the neighborhood, that'd be awesome!

 

I think we'd all be looking at this area differently if the empty lots and surface lots were filled with the same type of town homes that are there now. A big part of a walkable neighborhood is people in the yards and on the front porches. I love walking down Literary in Tremont past the row houses and down tree lined streets just as much as I love walking down Professor but for much different reasons. Its proximity to downtown makes it walkable to businesses but it's density makes it more like a neighborhood. May be a road diet in that area down Superior makes sense with some bump-outs at crosswalks to add safety and a more intimate feel. I don't know if the number of lanes it has now are necessary for what's planned for that area.

This kind of town home development would be ideal next to the old cemetery just east of Progressive stadium. I hope that gets developed some day. Lots of surface lots there.

2 hours ago, Sammy Voz said:

I think a private park would come across as exclusionary in this day and age but I like the idea.

Perhaps, but it would be on private property and really is different only in elevation from a roof garden open to tenants only.  The suggestion was an attempt to 'compensate' the developer for giving up 6 houses to build it.

Looks like the area is now lightly fenced off and there is a lone piece of equipment on site. 

Hmmmm

More activity today!

 

 

Phase 1:  Knez website says 8 out of 12 are so are sold

Has any additional work began on the townhouses, since the 4/15/19 pics?

Great question!!  What's holding Knez up?

If it wasn't raining, I'd walk over and take a pic.  They're working.  Last I saw last week they were doing foundation work.

Here it is from a few minutes ago ...

 

Finishing that townhouse development will be pretty good for the area. Eastern Downtown north of CSU has a lot of progress to be made. Similar scale projects: townhouses and low-rise apartment complexes similar to what's being done in Ohio City really make sense for the area. 

^I have always thought townhouses on these lots were ridiculous from day one.  I cannot imagine who is buying them when they have so many other attractive options.  Mid rise buildings (apartments or condos) made more sense for these lots.

I think an NRP-style urban apartment building would do well around here (below from San Antonio)

 

Vertical condos seem to be almost impossible to develop in CLE for various reasons, but yeah, it is sort of surprising the cheap midrise developers weren't interested. I don't really have any complaints about the the townhouses, though. They are a product that does well in Cleveland and probably good to diversify the types of stakeholders downtown.

42 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

^I have always thought townhouses on these lots were ridiculous from day one.  I cannot imagine who is buying them when they have so many other attractive options.  Mid rise buildings (apartments or condos) made more sense for these lots.

 

My dad is interested in them, 55, white collar executive that works Downtown a few blocks away. He's been looking at housing the past few years in and around Downtown, and these sparked his interest the most. How is it any different than townhouses in Manhattan?

I hope to buy one of these in about 2 years after student loans are paid off and have enough for a down payment. My wife and I both work downtown, place a premium on walking to work, and want to own. These are exactly what we're looking for. 

17 minutes ago, imjustinjk said:

 

My dad is interested in them, 55, white collar executive that works Downtown a few blocks away. He's been looking at housing the past few years in and around Downtown, and these sparked his interest the most. How is it any different than townhouses in Manhattan?

Quite frankly very different.

7 minutes ago, smimes said:

I hope to buy one of these in about 2 years after student loans are paid off and have enough for a down payment. My wife and I both work downtown, place a premium on walking to work, and want to own. These are exactly what we're looking for. 

 

Downtown proper really has a missing market for townhouses that other city cores have. Can’t just be high rise apartments. Hoping this area builds more, mixed in with some low-mid rise apartments and condos we’d be like a real city. 

 

1 minute ago, Htsguy said:

Quite frankly very different.

 

Im just saying, look at many city cores and you’ll see townhouses sprinkled through. Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Chicago, etc. all have townhouses in their downtowns. 

I think there's room enough east of 13th for all sizes of building. I'd love to see an OTR like neighborhood pop up around here with 2-3 story buildings (although they won't have that beautiful Italianate look). Businesses on the 1st floor along the more main roads and possibly at intersections. It can become a very strong and desirable neighborhood as young professionals who love downtown start to settle down and need more room for families. You can still build high rises along St Clair, Superior, and Euclid to continue momentum out of downtown and convert old factories and warehouses into mid size apartments, if demand stays strong. The only way this little area this might be an oddity is if it doesn't expand past it's current borders and gets surrounded by high rises. Even then it may still look ok...

8 minutes ago, imjustinjk said:

 

Downtown proper really has a missing market for townhouses that other city cores have. Can’t just be high rise apartments. Hoping this area builds more, mixed in with some low-mid rise apartments and condos we’d be like a real city. 

 

 

Im just saying, look at many city cores and you’ll see townhouses sprinkled through. Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Chicago, etc. all have townhouses in their downtowns. 

I am certainly not suggesting that downtown townhouses are not desirable in Cleveland.  I am just questioning this site.  I think they would work better in more intimate areas or around natural resources.  I think townhouses would be great on the west side of the Flats or Scranton Peninsula, along more narrow streets off of Prospect and would be great on the Lakeside bluffs.

 

 

Edited June 6, 20196 yr by Htsguy

16 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I am certainly not suggesting that downtown townhouses are not desirable in downtown Cleveland.  I am just questioning this site.  I think they would work better in more intimate areas or around natural resources.  I think townhouses would be great on the west side or the Flats or Scranton Peninsula, along more narrow streets off of Prospect and would be great on the Lakeside bluffs.

 

 

 

Townhouses are great in that they provide a good change in density for different areas. Townhouses are a step up in density for suburban or less dense areas of cities. They can also be a nice step down in density in super dense areas. Townhouses can be in more “intimate areas” or they can be squashed between mid and high rise buildings. Chicago’s South Loop is very dense, but not as dense as the main financial district. There’s still high rise buildings, a lot of mid rise buildings and also townhouses. Once you get out of the main business district of Cleveland’s downtown there’s an almost immediate drop in density and building heights, which is really normal for cities. Renovating the warehouses into apartments, building 5-10 story apartments, and adding townhouse developments would really make downtown diverse in housing options. 

Edited June 6, 20196 yr by imjustinjk

It's been a while, but I believe that in the downtown area of Toronto there are townhomes as well.

29 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I am certainly not suggesting that downtown townhouses are not desirable in Cleveland.  I am just questioning this site.  I think they would work better in more intimate areas or around natural resources.  I think townhouses would be great on the west side of the Flats or Scranton Peninsula, along more narrow streets off of Prospect and would be great on the Lakeside bluffs.

 

 

So basically you don’t want townhouses in downtown Cleveland.  Some people want to live in a townhouse and not a rental building or even in a condo, the few that exist downtown.  Maybe you want a more intimate setting...where would that be downtown? A variety is good so I say build these townhomes there for the people that want them.

Also, the townhouses are fairly on scale to the buildings around them. 

 

37 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I am certainly not suggesting that downtown townhouses are not desirable in Cleveland.  I am just questioning this site.  I think they would work better in more intimate areas or around natural resources.  I think townhouses would be great on the west side of the Flats or Scranton Peninsula, along more narrow streets off of Prospect and would be great on the Lakeside bluffs.

 

 

Just because a greenspace doesn't exist, doesn't mean a developer and or the city can't create some. I'd venture to guess a lot of the now intimate areas in a lot of our comparable cities were surface lots and useless areas previously. We need more (well designed) pocket parks, and recreation areas (basketball, tennis, etc.) close to/in the city core. And for the time being if that means a private courtyard, so be it, but community greenspace/gathering areas should be part of the tax abatement requirements in some way.

9 minutes ago, imjustinjk said:

Also, the townhouses are fairly on scale to the buildings around them. 

 

Superior will shape up to be quite the residential area (and development target) once the Midway pilot gets built - anyone familiar with where the City / NOACA are in terms of funding the rollout? 

 

Don't worry, more may be coming. Not on Superior, though. ?

1 hour ago, ASP1984 said:

 

Superior will shape up to be quite the residential area (and development target) once the Midway pilot gets built - anyone familiar with where the City / NOACA are in terms of funding the rollout? 

 

What  is the Midway Pilot ?

3 minutes ago, simplythis said:

What  is the Midway Pilot ?

 

Google "Superior Midway Cleveland" It's a pilot (aka introductory) project.

 

 

 

Edited June 6, 20196 yr by KJP

Would love to see this type of development and Cleveland State grow towards each other. 

39 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Google "Superior Midway Cleveland" It's a pilot (aka introductory) project.

 

 

 

Been wondering when this project was going to start...looking forward to it.

Based on some Twitter traffic a few weeks ago, I believe the Midway pilot is mostly funded, but not schedule to actually break ground for a year or two.

30 minutes ago, marty15 said:

Would love to see this type of development and Cleveland State grow towards each other. 

 

I 'd also love to see CSU and Asia Town grow toward each other too.  

1 hour ago, simplythis said:

What  is the Midway Pilot ?

 

Here's a presentation from ODOT dated July 2018 - interesting to see how Superior stacked up against other thoroughfares in terms of public preferences for implementing the Midway. 

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/Conference/2018 Transportation Planning Conference Presentati/B/Tuesday/1) 10.30 AM/Lyon-Stadler_Collier_1B_OTPC2018.pdf

 

When all is said and done, Cleveland's got the chance to replicate some of the streetscape / feel / vibe of what the Lower East Side in NYC has had for the last few years (among my favorite streetscape approaches of any major US city).

 

Edited June 6, 20196 yr by ASP1984

How far out on superior is this to go? Innerbelt? E.55?

East 55th

Wow. Is this truly going to happen

Don't know. The Lorain Avenue cycletrack is funded too but RTA is fighting it because they want to have enough room for their buses, possibly dedicated bus lanes someday. I don't think that's an issue on Superior, however. It's a much wider street.

4 hours ago, imjustinjk said:

 

Downtown proper really has a missing market for townhouses that other city cores have. Can’t just be high rise apartments. Hoping this area builds more, mixed in with some low-mid rise apartments and condos we’d be like a real city. 

 

 

Im just saying, look at many city cores and you’ll see townhouses sprinkled through. Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Chicago, etc. all have townhouses in their downtowns. 

Boston's Back Bay is another good example where townhouses work well in a downtown area. I think over by Gray's Armory near Bolivar  on both sides of the old cemetery next to Progressive field would be ideal for these kind of homes imo.