i couldn't help but notice on the large-scale overhead view of "Pesht" near browns stadium, that that cool curve in the waterfront rapid line (or whatever you call it) is gone. i think that it would be a major flaw of stark's to just demolish that and make it straight again because it would be a major waste of A. taxpayers money and B. a cool design influence. i know that the pesht plan is just preliminary.. but any information on whether or not that curve is going to stay or go?

When that drawing was done, Stark didn't know how to incorporate the Waterfront Line in the scheme of things. I didn't ask him if there were any updates for this latest article because it was beyond the scope of the subject I was covering.

 

BTW, the check-cashing biz (and before that for a long time it was Hoty's restaurant) is the oldest structure still standing downtown. It was built around the same time as Dunham's Tavern on Euclid east of East 55th. But if you could imagine the front of Dunham's Tavern being torn off and replaced with a modernized facade, that's what you've got with this building. To make it worse, imagine putting in Dunham's Tavern a legalized loansharking business or some other piece of crap that makes money off residents who can't afford to be taken advantage of.

 

I told Stark: if you could save some bricks from the 1830s building and reincorporate them into one of your buildings, that would be cool.

 

BTW, the check-cashing biz (and before that for a long time it was Hoty's restaurant) is the oldest structure still standing downtown. It was built around the same time as Dunham's Tavern on Euclid east of East 55th. But if you could imagine the front of Dunham's Tavern being torn off and replaced with a modernized facade, that's what you've got with this building. To make it worse, imagine putting in Dunham's Tavern a legalized loansharking business or some other piece of crap that makes money off residents who can't afford to be taken advantage of.

 

I told Stark: if you could save some bricks from the 1830s building and reincorporate them into one of your buildings, that would be cool.

 

Plus adding a "Win Double Your Pay" scheme.

 

Yes, it would be very cool. Nothing has the look of 100+ year old brick.

The parking structure across the way may even be older

 

the little bar & grille used to be stables

"The parking structure across the way may even be older"

 

 

I'd guess that's not the case. My house (built 1900) has a hay loft in the garage and it was obviously built to house carriages, not Model T's.

the little bar & grille used to be stables

 

This explains so much about their burgers.

 

(Sorry, back on topic)

"The parking structure across the way may even be older"

 

 

I'd guess that's not the case. My house (built 1900) has a hay loft in the garage and it was obviously built to house carriages, not Model T's.

 

That sounds like a fabulous photo studio!

Photo studio? As in film? Surely you jest!

Back on Topic!

That's MY line, bee-otch!!!

 

Looking for this Crain's article - please to assist me:

 

(I think this is the thread this was discussed. If not, place wherever.)

 

 

Key could bolt May Co. location

The firm is angling for a new space for its operations and technology center, currently housed in the former department store building on Public Square.

Follow this link (thanks gotribe and KJP):

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=4266.msg218343#msg218343

Planning Commission Oks Warehouse District plan

 

Posted by Tom Breckenridge September 21, 2007 19:31PM

 

A hopping neighborhood downtown wants to green up and preserve its historic feel with a dozen projects in the public realm, from new parks to taxi stands.

^ I don't think Stark has anything to do with this.

Planning Commission Oks Warehouse District plan

 

A diversity of public space. The development group wants an overlook park, north of Front Street, along with a sprinkling of smaller, pocket parks near busy intersections.

 

An alley south of Lakeside Avenue, behind Pinnacle condos and the Cloak Factory dwellings, would transform to a tree-lined street with public art and unique lighting.

 

I assume they mean Front Avenue. 

 

Has anyone seen any renderings of these 2 ideas?  Who owns the land where they propose this overlook park?

Plans plans plans...

Pocket Parks, what a wonderful idea!  We all know that the Mall, Public Square, Chester Commons, etc are so overloaded with users that new parks really make a lot of sense!  And as an added bonus, they should make for wonderful places for the homeless to sleep!  Hurrah for "giving them what they want" planning.

yeah and an extra star on their foreheads for zeroing in on putting them at or near "busy intersections" instead of mid-block. now there's a peaceful and relaxing pocket park idea!

 

it will probably be as utilized as the pocket park behind the old mcdonald investments building, or that other one on E12th and superior? East 9th? my mind is blanking.

Yeah, the nerve ... incorporating small amounts of greenspace into one of the most pedestrian-heavy neighborhoods in Cleveland. Particularly in a city that was built to scale for twice as many people as it currently supports, is scarred with vacant lots and surface parking lots that don't have enough market demand to develop buildings on and is nationally ranked as one of the large U.S. municipalities with the least amount of greenspace within its boundaries.

 

I don't know that we really know whether pocket parks will be underutilized in the Warehouse District or not, as the other examples are not really in areas that have both substantial daytime populations and residents. But frankly I'd prefer underutilized greenspace to overutilized surface parking lots any day.

I don't know that we really know whether pocket parks will be underutilized in the Warehouse District or not, as the other examples are not really in areas that have both substantial daytime populations and residents. But frankly I'd prefer underutilized greenspace to overutilized surface parking lots any day.

 

i hope they at least consider some "green" technology / building practices for these, and other to-be-developed green spaces in the city.   permeable concrete, benches from recycled plastics, perhaps a design that routes some of the street/sidewalk water runoff through a filter area, solar lighting, etc.

 

that's one thing that is missing from the new euclid corridor, imo.  no recycling, no truly innovative approaches to public spaces or water runoff, no advanced traffic lights.

what are "truly advanced traffic lights"?

what are "truly advanced traffic lights"?

 

idk if i can describe it accurately, but i will try.

 

in california, colorado, florida, texas and a number of other states, the cities have adopted what i consider very advanced traffic lights, with multiple loop detecters buried in the concrete, sometime going back a 1/2 mile from an intersection.

 

these loop sensors actually activate the traffic light and can determine where there is traffic volume.  so for instance, if one car is waiting at a light and the sensors determine that there is no traffic close to the intersection in the opposite direction, the light will cycle for literally 5 or 10 seconds, and get the car through the intersection.

 

similarly, where there are protected turns, the sensors determine how long the turn arrow stays on.

 

most of cleveland has started to incorporate the loop detecters in the pavement, or via camera (euclid corridor) or radar.  however, these loops are not "smart" or "truly advanced" in that it only tells the light that there is traffic waiting and that whenever the timed cycle in the other direction is done, the light should display a turn arrow or green light.

 

on euclid, you can wait at a cross street (e40, for example) for the full cycle, even though there is no cross traffic.  i imagine the other technology is expensive, but seeing as we don't meet air quality standards for the region, reducing idling traffic at stop lights is a great place to start.

 

thanks for the explanation.

Why don't they just put up a dog park in the middle of the Warehouse District so that all the yuppies who live there and walk their dogs have a place for the poochies to shiite instead of on the sidewalk.

Why don't they just put up a dog park in the middle of the Warehouse District so that all the yuppies who live there and walk their dogs have a place for the poochies to shiite instead of on the sidewalk.

 

historic warehouse district people are aware of this and are actively working towards fixing it.

 

thank you, and watch your language.

^Not sure if that was supposed to sarcastic or not, but I think a dog run would do more for the district than pocket parks will.

 

I agree with 8shades that downtown is actually starved of quality green space (there's a lot of it on the fringes but not so much where the people actually are), but I don't think pocket parks are going to do much.  I'm hoping the final Pesht plans incorporate something a little more substantial in the way of street level greenspace than a couple benches at certain street corners.

^agreed. There is no outdoor place for people to gather in the warehouse district. A dog park would do a lot in helping form a sense of community.

I'm not a fan of the idea of a dog park in the WD.  It's a pretty noisy use, and would take up a lot of valuable land for a fairly limited set of users.

 

 

I agree with 8shades that downtown is actually starved of quality green space (there's a lot of it on the fringes but not so much where the people actually are), but I don't think pocket parks are going to do much.  I'm hoping the final Pesht plans incorporate something a little more substantial in the way of street level greenspace than a couple benches at certain street corners.

 

I don't see how we can say that the Mall, Public Square, Star Plaza, Perk Plaza, Medical Mutual Plaza, or all of the various private building courtyards are "peripheral" to Downtown.  Hell, Settler's Landing is a 5 minute walk from anywhere in the Warehouse District.  With the possible exception of Public Square, none of these open spaces gets more than a marginal amount of use, unless you count homeless people sleeping on the benches.

 

My biggest worry is that we are going to build public spaces just to appease the neverending call for more public space, without having a use or users for that space, and without regard to how that space fits into the overall physical and social scheme of the neighborhood.

I absolutely love dogs, but am I the only one who thinks that if you're gonna live in an urban environment like downtown, it miiiight not be the best place to own a dog that's so large it needs a dog-run sized patch of grass to get exercise? Also I was under the impression that there were dog-doo bag dispensers in the Warehouse District - if they are, then the doo-doo problem on the sidewalk won't be fixed by adding dog-designated greenspace.

I think I am the only person in my condo tower (I rent) that does not have a dog.

 

Makes the elevator rides lots of fun :|

 

My biggest worry is that we are going to build public spaces just to appease the neverending call for more public space, without having a use or users for that space, and without regard to how that space fits into the overall physical and social scheme of the neighborhood.

 

I couldn't agree more- which is why I'd prefer a real, well-thought out green space to what are likely going to be silly little pocket parks (though I'm gonna try to be open minded until I see something).

 

 

I agree with 8shades that downtown is actually starved of quality green space (there's a lot of it on the fringes but not so much where the people actually are), but I don't think pocket parks are going to do much.  I'm hoping the final Pesht plans incorporate something a little more substantial in the way of street level greenspace than a couple benches at certain street corners.

 

I don't see how we can say that the Mall, Public Square, Star Plaza, Perk Plaza, Medical Mutual Plaza, or all of the various private building courtyards are "peripheral" to Downtown.  Hell, Settler's Landing is a 5 minute walk from anywhere in the Warehouse District.  With the possible exception of Public Square, none of these open spaces gets more than a marginal amount of use, unless you count homeless people sleeping on the benches.

 

 

I'd argue that the Mall is fringe- it's the middle of nothing in any meaningful way, with the possible exception of the southernmost piece which is OK, I guess.  Overall, I 'd say the group plan doesn't really function so well for the city now and I wish the Burnham plan had not won out.  Public Square and Perk Park are central but certainly are not quality- they're disasters IMHO, as are most of the corporate plazas.  Not sure I know what Med Mutual plaza is- is that one of the bulges at 9th/Huron/Prospect?  Of the two i recall, one is completely privatized by the bar tables (nothing wrong with that), and the other is is in front of the abandoned Ameritrust complex- not sure it ever really had a chance.  Settler's landing is not a long walk from stuff but is definitely not quality (another disaster) and is definitely peripheral in the literal sense of the word, no?

 

I guess I'm with you on Star Plaza and don't know what to make of it.  Do people use it for lunch at least?  I think the use of the cool glass pavilion is kind of bizarre and certainly doesn't help.  And I'd add the CPL reading garden.  It's pretty sterile, but still pretty cool I think.  Do people use it?  I know people used the old one many years back.

 

X, I think I agree with you generally that there is a lot of unused green space now and we should not willy-nilly go adding more, I just think it's mostly crap right now.  I think a major redo of public square (including closing the cross streets) is the low-hanging fruit to correct this problem, but that's covered in another thread.  For the WHD district though, with its res population, I think it would be pretty cool to provide a visible outdoor space people might actually use (like a dog run).  They're social and fun (even for non dog people like me).  And per bizbiz, might help keep the sidewalks clean.

i couldnt agree more about a downtown dog run being an important city amenity to a city that is adding downtown residents at a fairly decent clip. it's such a great non-bar place to meet people.

 

also, to close off public square and make it one big for real public square instead of leaving it a car-crossed public quad.

You don't need a huge space for a dog park. There are some pretty small ones in NYC that work quite well. They are more of an amenity than they are a detriment.

Man, you people are rough on the parks downtown! I like most of the parks downtown, and I do think a dog park or two would do wonders for drawing more residents downtown. I would think a number of prospective downtown residents might be hesitant to move there because they can't envision where their pooches would do their doo-doo duties.

Wasn't there one plan to turn a strip of land next to the main ave. bridge across from Pinnacle into a dog park a few years back?

i love dogs, but dog parks are too funny.  I hope I never see one downtown.

^I'm gonna put one on public square just for you when I'm king.  Seriously, why so anti?  Some people have mentioned noise, but I've never noticed them to be particularly loud...at least not in comparison to buses, garbage trucks, sirens and the other elements of urban background noise.

plus, there are dog parks and then there are dog runs.  You can have a nice dog run in a quiet spot and keep it from getting out of control.  Union Square and Washington Squares in NYC each have one and Washington Square is in the heart of an old residential quarter.  If anything, the constant stream of people to the destination and the extra "eyes on the street" would be a boon for wherever we'd put one.

From the PD:

 

The Warehouse District is thriving. But is it as healthy as it could be?

Posted by Bill Lubinger September 30, 2007 06:00AM

Categories: Architecture

Joshua Gunter / The Plain Dealer

 

Bill Lubinger

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Cleveland was so desperate for signs of life downtown in the late 1970s and early 1980s that artists and photographers were allowed to live as squatters in the old garment district. Now, the Warehouse District on the northwest edge of downtown boasts 2,500 to 3,000 residents and million-dollar condos with more housing planned. Trendy clubs and restaurants draw thousands each weekend.

 

Rest of article is on Cleveland.com [link unknown].

?  Wow, do people really think the WHD lacks a sense of place?  I'm all for new street amenities...but not sure the WHD needs banners and such...

 

Agreed...to me the banners are unnecessary.  Sometimes, putting up banners when they aren't needed just screams "cheesy".

I don't and do either of you know what "type" of banners/signage they are talking about?  :?  :?  :?  I'm just asking before you turn it into a negative!

 

Most likely they are discussing "lightpol" indicators and eye/ground level indicators that tie into the architecture of the area.  That not cheesy. 

 

Now the lighting features/street signage around the houston galleria...thats cheeesy!

"The Warehouse District is thriving. But is it as healthy as it could be?"

 

Get a load of that headline! I'm no urban studies professor, but to me it's amazing that Cleveland neighborhoods like Ohio City, Tremont, Collinwood, etc. are doing so well despite the economic downtrend the city has been in for several generations. This is a testament to the creativity, passion and support of its residents.

 

This is a region that is urban to the core but for some reason it can't remember it. Like a bunch of Bluejays that live in holes in the ground rather than fly. If we had the economic growth and population growth of a place like Denver, these issues would work themselves out. Obviously you want a good plan in place to guide growth, but a guy like Bob Stark, his partners and the companies that will be opening shop in the WHD definitely don't have a slam dunk down there. If this area was growing, someone would already have planted something on those vacant lots.

 

The issue this story brings up to me is, will we be urban in the future or will we create everything according to our suburban view of the world? The complaint about "expensive" parking is ringing alarm bells, imo. This to me infers that people from outside the neighborhood want the neighborhood to be structured to accommodate them rather than the people who might live in it. We have revive neighborhoods for people to live in, otherwise their attractions are going to go up against all the damn lifestyle centers that keep getting built.

 

Anyway, what Cleveland needs is growth growth growth. This will create more small businesses, lure in outside investors, create tax revenue to hire more police to keep the streets safer, etc.

Sometimes, putting up banners when they aren't needed just screams "cheesy".

 

to me, cheesy bannering would be like the san diego little italy district.  every ten feet, there was a banner on a pole.  and they all had pictures of different italian american actors, ray romano or leonardo decraprio, and then it said, "san diego's little italy, brought to you by pepsi."  it seemed really unnecessary, I mean, wouldn't the FIVE italian restaurants tell me where I am?!

Sometimes, putting up banners when they aren't needed just screams "cheesy".

 

to me, cheesy bannering would be like the san diego little italy district.  every ten feet, there was a banner on a pole.  and they all had pictures of different italian american actors, ray romano or leonardo decraprio, and then it said, "san diego's little italy, brought to you by pepsi."  it seemed really unnecessary, I mean, wouldn't the FIVE italian restaurants tell me where I am?!

 

That is exactly what I was talking about.

 

Of course, if done right, the banners could be nice.  I'll have to see what the plans are.

Most likely they are discussing "lightpol" indicators and eye/ground level indicators that tie into the architecture of the area.  That not cheesy. 

 

I agree that's probably what they have in mind but disagree that it's not cheesy.  IMHO, banners are fine for advertising an event (like a CMA exhibit), but all this self conscious district-definition stuff is just a little too much for me.  Almost theme-parky.  I similarly get chills (the bad kind) from "gateway elements" like those E4th lighting thingys.  Subjective, I know.

i say put them all over the city! too many people just drive in and out to work and don't know that there is this new development. I think it truly defines a district when you know you are in it.. the light poles change and banners change etc... and i dont find it cheesy to advertise a newly restored and beautiful wearhouse district. if it is designed correctly i think its pretty much necessary to define where downtown and public square ends and where the homey nightlife district of the wearhouse district begins.

i say put them all over the city! too many people just drive in and out to work and don't know that there is this new development. I think it truly defines a district when you know you are in it.. the light poles change and banners change etc... and i dont find it cheesy to advertise a newly restored and beautiful wearhouse district. if it is designed correctly i think its pretty much necessary to define where downtown and public square ends and where the homey nightlife district of the wearhouse district begins.

 

Yes, I too want to know where the wearhouse district begins.  :wink:

^ Good eye!  Everyone KNOWS it is wherehouse...

Cleveland--downtown and its neighborhoods--will be much more lively and successful if we look at the big picture and stop defining every 4 block radius in the city as some new district.  It's corny!  Let the storefronts and the people on the streets define the neighborhood.  The city isn't that big we'd confuse people by telling them that every other block is in a different neighborhood.