Dan, why don't you take the same attitude with the DC Public Schools system or DC Public Works, both pretty much a joke inside and outside DC. I have no problems with standards, I just think using DC or it's surrounding area as an example of a "success", is setting the bar WAY to low. Sorry, man.

Did I ever once say that DC was the model for everything?  Absolutely not.  The schools here are terrible, as are the libraries.  Parks and Rec could use a little work, although they're improving.  Public Works, in my opinion, has been very good.  None of that excuses Cleveland for its crimes against urbanity.  What's next--implode May Company for a drive-through liquor store, just to have *something* on the site?

 

I guess it's easier to attack someone personally than address the issue at hand, though. 

I'm sorry dan....but you are calling out Cleveland for SYC when DC DID THE EXACT SAME THING on Brentwood Rd. NE and advertised it IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER. Public Services are improving, they're still not at the level Cleveland is now. Same with Parks and Rec. Do you remember the snowstorm of '94 and how it took DC TWO WEEKS to plow sidestreets? Or in '98 when garbage wasn't picked up for a week and a half couldn't pay it's employees? So yeah they're improving....but that isn't saying much. And you're living in DC and calling Cleveland out for liquor stores? That's half of DC's new businesses! Those blinders must be awfully strong.

Welcome aboard, willyboy. Please post more often. We'd be glad to have you back in cTown.

It became this way because you were attacking Cleveland so I figured that I would comment on DC. 

 

   

 

DaninDC, I would hate to see this development right downtown, but where it is being put is perfect.  There is no Big box retail in the vacinity of where it is going.  There was a shuttered steel mill on the site along with other closed small industrial facilities.  This is a great fit for it.  High end retail and housing on a massive scale could not work down there too well because of its imagine.  I don't know of a better idea for the site.  The retail was needed somewhere in that area, and why not put it in an eyesore along a major freeway that people look at everyday.  Again, it is not like they are building a big box development on e 14 and Euclid. 

High end retail and housing on a massive scale could not work down there too well because of its imagine.  I don't know of a better idea for the site.  The retail was needed somewhere in that area, and why not put it in an eyesore along a major freeway that people look at everyday. 

 

Again, it's building something just to build *something*.  Has anyone in the City ever analyzed the negative impact this shopping center will have on existing neighborhood businesses? 

 

Personally, I'd rather see a park built on the site, connecting with the towpath trail.  Retail belongs in neighborhoods--not in out-of-the-way locations.

Dan,

 

How is it 'building something just to build something'? A developer acquired the land and proposed the shopping center. The city tried to block the project by proposing legislation that would effectively keep Walmart out. Walmart pulled out, the city lost the urgency to pass the legislation and SYC was all but forgotten. With the window now open again, the developer secured its building permit and Walmart jumped on. Once the permit was secured, the developer had all legal right to build SYC. You inaccurately portray this project as the unanimous will of all Cleveland's citizenry and elected officials.

Unless gas gets a lot more expensive soon, the choice seems to be (i) encourage our city government try to squelch SYC-development to keep the land fallow for when there is demand for more urban-friendly development or (ii) to go ahead and allow SYC which provides the shopping amenities that middle class shoppers trust and seek out (unlike DC, Cleveland's hope lies in luring the middle class back; we don't have enough yuppies).

 

But I certainly take Dan's point and think it's interesting in light of gotribe's: of course no-one wants a SYC style development at Playhouse Square but would it be so bad to have some big box stores brought up to the curb with parking on the roof or even at rear on one of the city's main thoroughfares?  Is there really no hybrid between big city parking-less development and Streetsboro-style big box center?  I really wonder if the SYC is going to happen because that's the only type of development lenders will get behind or if it's because there are so few skilled developers with Cleveland on their radar and very little creativity among them.

I understand that, wimwar, but the City didn't help matters by giving the site suburban-style zoning and failing to develop any sort of architectural standard.  The developer doesn't build anything there if the City doesn't issue a permit! 

 

I guess you would have me believe it's acceptable to let developers run roughshod over the City, huh? 

 

 

I guess you would have me believe it's acceptable to let developers run roughshod over the City, huh? 

 

 

Don't put words in my mouth.  I was pointing out how you oversimplified the evolution of SYC. 

 

Your words would have more merit if you paid more attention to the facts and took into consideration any other points of view. 

What facts did I miss, exactly?

 

I think I've considered the other points of view expressed here, but I fail to see how creating a slew of poverty-wage jobs helps the City of Cleveland--especially if you want to attract the middle class (which does include white collar folks as well). 

 

If you feel like I put words in your mouth, wimwar, I apologize.  I think the City blew an opportunity here.  In all reality, what's going to stop the next developer from putting a Wal Mart (with requisite enormous parking lot) right on Euclid Avenue in the future?  Developers are only going to build whatever the law and the regs allow....

In all reality, what's going to stop the next developer from putting a Wal Mart (with requisite enormous parking lot) right on Euclid Avenue in the future?

 

The form-based zoning code that recently went into effect along Euclid, Chester and Carnegie avenues in conjunction with the Euclid Corridor Project, for one thing. Which you might know about if you ever read anything beside this thread.

Just a piece of advise from a new guy on the board.

 

I received a PM from DaninDC and lets just say I think he's a little upset about me questioning the greatness of DC. Anything that's starts with "You obviously can't read..." and calling me an idiot by the end tells me the 'debate' is over. You know my thoughts on SYC, but I'm steering clear of old Dan there. My humble advice is to do the same with him as well. You'll never win those types of folks. It's not worth the energy, when so many good things are happening in Cleveland he chooses to ignore.

So when are they going to plop a Costco on the Muny Parking Lot?

 

so? there are costcos all over nyc. heck there is a home depot and a best buy and a chipotel and all that under a huge new building in chelsea just a few blocks from me. it's all about mixed use. now full on mixed use in a historically residential area is one thing and on an isolated former steel plant property quite another. it's not about selling short on urbanism, it's about being realistic. besides, don't discount the towpath trade-off section, although in cloked in stealth mode currently, that's going to have an impressive commuter rail service one day.

 

^the home depot in chelsea caught me off guard and impressed me.  isnt there a CVS nearby too heh seemed like the one on Euclid in Cleveland. 

 

i still dont get the big issue here, its not like with this development that Cleveland has turned over a new leaf to making every new development in the city like this... to jab back and say when are we gonna add a big-box plus a surface parking lot in the middle of downtown is so damn extreme-negative-FreeTimes. 

Forgot about the form-based zoning, blinker.  Thanks for getting me back up to speed.

 

Mrnyc, I understand what you're saying.  We've got a fair amount of "big box" ourselves, albeit more in mixed-use urban context than SYC. 

 

I'm naturally very skeptical and cynical, which is probably why I'm an engineer.  Aside from the goings-on in the WHD, though, the City of Cleveland isn't doing a whole lot to convince anyone that they understand what it takes to create a quality urban environment.  SYC doesn't help that perception.

 

The way I see it, if you focus on restoring retail in neighborhoods, and creating actual places with character, then you might have a chance of gaining residents who are tired of the suburban lifestyle.  If your city looks just like the suburbs, though, you have zero chance at best. 

 

Man, I'm a wound up guy, and I know Clevelanders tend to have a chip on their shoulder, but that's no reason to make things personal.  Can we agree to move on, and think about better ways for the City to approach something like this in the future?

 

I'd also like to add, without addressing DaninDC specifically, that it's inaccurate to imply (or outright state) that Cleveland gives no consideration to design. That's a complaint I hear a lot, and yes we've dropped the ball A LOT in the past. In cases where it really matters, though, we are doing better. Consider Battery Park, another brownfield site in Detroit-Shoreway, where the developer is building a dense community of townhouses and lofts that will extend the existing city street grid. Or the Triangle development in University Circle, where MOCA has selected six of the world's best architecture firms to design a new building that will be incorporated into a mixed use development of office, retail and residential. Or CSU's master plan, which brings all future buildings to the sidewalk and calls for dense student housing on surface lots. Or Stark's Pesht, which calls for something similarly urban on the lots near Public Square. Or the growing movement to improve Public Square itself.

 

There's a lot to be encouraged by.

^ actually zace that home depot opening was disturbing as it closed up probably a dozen small mom&pop lumber yards and hardware stores nearby. for one example, the old garbers hardware store (since 1888) in the west village by me closed up and moved. however, that old garbers shop is now divided into s'nice coffee shop, gioia pizza restaurant and crumpler backpacks. because of the nyc economy none of these spaces remained empty, they filled up with other stuff immediately. of course this is not the case for a polluted old cleveland steel mill grounds. not exactly the same thing is it? nore the same gogogo economy and population surrounding it. and that's the point dan.

 

I think a lot of my frustration stems from the "silver bullet" approach, or what I call the "Monty Python Economic Development Strategy" that Cleveland embraced in the 1990s.  For a while, it seemed like it was expected that the next big Project would rejuvenate the city--Galleria, Tower City, RRHoF, Jacobs Field, Gund Arena (refuse to call it by that atrocious corporate name), and so on.  This almost seems like an extension of that.

 

The stuff going on downtown is largely great, but SYC doesn't look much different than the POS at I-480 and Tiedeman, or on top of the landfill in Garfield Heights.  It just drive-in, drive-out dehumanizing parking lot architecture with no regard for the surrounding context.  Let's just say it doesn't inspire confidence.

 

AND, I have to add that if there is enough retail demand close to downtown to fill that much square footage, there isn't any reason why it can't be in real neighborhoods

"Man, I'm a wound up guy, and I know Clevelanders tend to have a chip on their shoulder, but that's no reason to make things personal."

 

This coming from someone who uses PMs to lambast someone as an "idiot" who "obviously can't read". Also the same person who apologized if someone FELT that he put words in their mouth, rather than owning up to his caustic demeanor. Also the same person who routinely makes demeaning comments about an entire city's population based on a development that he doesn't like. Now who is making things personal?

 

As far as "the City of Cleveland isn't doing a whole lot to convince anyone that they understand what it takes to create a quality urban environment." - check blinker12's post, along with some of the other posts in Projects and Construction and you might actually learn something.

of course this is not the case for a polluted old cleveland steel mill grounds. not exactly the same thing is it? nore the same gogogo economy and population surrounding it.

 

Which, I think, makes it even more ridiculous to invite huge box retail into a city in Cleveland's position.  Does Cleveland really need more empty mom-and-pop storefronts in the neighborhoods?  Or do we just expect everyone in the city to drive to SYC for all their shopping needs?

 

I don't buy the commonly-held notion that it takes a lot of money to build a decent-looking urban place. 

not at all. its good to be able to put that land to some kind of public use at all. this is serious brownfield dan like dc would know nothing about. you cannot be so cavalier about residential there. who says this will make more empty storefronts? i think thats why the city courted it in the first place, because the strorefront were already empty. and who says everyone will drive? rta will route busses there.

 

well as for demand give the developers a break here too. i mean, there 'was' that much retail around and in downtown....but of course much is gone from those days. and don't forget the population has dropped off too from downtown's retail heyday.

 

so from the developers point of view i bet syc is kind of a gamble in some ways at this point. dan i have an idea, why don't you try to think of it as a test case for city retail for now? if it's warranted they'll get to the mixed use stuff. it's not like there is that kind of land parcel available anyway next time. if pesht or the avenue get going soon retail and mixed use are a whole new ball game.

 

 

There are few mom-and-pop stores left in the neighborhoods left to compete with what is going in at SYC.  SYC will mostly compete with the retail in Parma, Garfield Hts, and Cleveland Hts.  And unfortunately, I don't think that anywhere in the US is creating new mom-and-pop grocers, hardware stores, or general good stores to fill their old retail strips.  The chains are too entrenched, the old building stock no longer meets modern "requirements" for those types of businesses.  The strategy for neighborhood retail revitalization needs to be niche identification to find new businesses that can find a market in the city and use those smaller spaces.

without wading into the whole DC vs. Cleveland debate...

 

The arguments against SYC seem to fall into 2 categories:

1) That Wal-mart, Target, Home Depot are fundamentally evil and thus building them anywhere is bad.  I have little patience for this argument.  jamie's post a few pages back pretty much sums it up for me - they've found a more cost-effective way to deliver goods that people want and have done it in a way such that many people would rather shop there than at their other alternatives.  Additionally, in this situation, many of the products offered by these stores simply aren't available at other retail locations in the city.  To me, SYC makes living in Tremont/OC/etc. more attractive since rather than driving to a suburb, you can easily get to SYC instead while still living in a vibrant, urban environment.  Most of the retail in those neighborhoods (w/the exception of Dave's and Family Dollar) are likely to be little affected since they don't offer the same kinds of things (e.g. art galleries, ethnic restaurants, etc.)

 

2) The second type of argument is more compelling - that the retail planned for SYC would have been better placed within the neighborhoods or, failing that, designed in a more urban way at the SYC site to essentially turn that into something of a neighborhood (potentially with mixed use, etc.)  This first half seems desirable but unlikely - where would you have put all that retail and would those retailers have gone in without having the HD or WMT next door to help draw traffic?  I agree w/the 2nd, but as many have pointed out, mixed use seems unlikely for that site given its proximity to the industrial valley.  So, perhaps the design is changeded a bit with more parking garages and a denser, more "main street" feeling and we create a Crocker Park version of it.  Seems like tweaking at that point that changes little.

Honestly, i don't really mind that SYC is not going to be new urban. Why?  For me, it would feel a bit too contrived if they tried to turn it into a quaint little shopping district, a la Crocker Park.

 

There is no existing urban fabric in place that it would disrupt. The site is unsuitable/cost prohibitive for residential development.  It is separated from any neighborhood by highways, steel factories and hill sides. 

 

J73,

 

i would add in an argument that this development will provide many jobs that are suitable for many of the residents in the surrounding neighborhoods.  This will also add income and real estate taxes to the city coffers that would normally go to the suburbs. Additionally, this project could do more for the real estate values of downtown, Ohio City and Tremont due to the extension of the Towpath. 

There is really little use in doing a mixed use, "new urban" development on that site.  It isn't a part of a larger neighborhood and thus wouldn't help to act as a catalyst for a neighborhood in need of revitalization.  Conversely it wouldn't benefit from the draw of being a part of any desirable neighborhood.  Nor does it make sense to create such a neighborhood in an isolated area with poor transit and pedestrian connection.

 

Ideally, I would have preferred for that land to become a part of an expanded Cuyahoga Valley National Park- one that reaches all the way up to the southern end of Downtown. 

And unfortunately, I don't think that anywhere in the US is creating new mom-and-pop grocers, hardware stores, or general good stores to fill their old retail strips.  The chains are too entrenched, the old building stock no longer meets modern "requirements" for those types of businesses.  The strategy for neighborhood retail revitalization needs to be niche identification to find new businesses that can find a market in the city and use those smaller spaces.

 

Actually, that is not quite true: cities with large immigrant populations still produce mom-and-pop stores just as they always have (and like Cleveland used to).  In many ways these cities are the last small town in the US in that there are still corner bakeries, butchers, grocers, hardware stores, etc.  Even in Cleveland, I think it's safe to say that the remaining non-chain retail and restaurants are disproportionately immigrant owned and operated.  I mean seriously, didn't Sutton have to personally recruit a dry-cleaner to Tremont and help open another coffee shop because he thought they were lacking from his project/neighborhood?  I think it says a little something about the dearth of retail entrepreneurs in the city.  Good thing Ohio is so welcoming to immigrants...but that's another thread.

And unfortunately, I don't think that anywhere in the US is creating new mom-and-pop grocers, hardware stores, or general good stores to fill their old retail strips.  The chains are too entrenched, the old building stock no longer meets modern "requirements" for those types of businesses.  The strategy for neighborhood retail revitalization needs to be niche identification to find new businesses that can find a market in the city and use those smaller spaces.

 

At risk of getting jumped all over again...

 

My neighborhood has plenty of places like this--hardware store, grocer, a couple clothing shops, a bookstore, and niche specialty shops.  These are basic-needs kind of things, so it really doesn't have anything to do with the wealth of the neighborhood.  Most of these businesses are able to survive, though, specifically because the neighborhood generally spurns chains (although there are a couple chain coffee shops, the local ones still do good business). 

 

I think that the question of retail is a self-fulfilling prophecy.  If you only pursue the large chain stores, you get large chain stores.  If you nurture neighborhood retail, you'll get neighborhood retail.  This isn't to say that Cleveland should necessarily become its own developer and spell out the specific businesses that should open in each location--that's for the free market to decide.  What small business-oriented entreprenurial programs does the City of Cleveland offer, though, to encourage neighborhood retail? 

 

Again, I'm not against the chain stores as much as I am against the architecture and location, but I don't see why Cleveland can't have a mix.   

I disagree about the nurture argument.  Chain stores will try and locate in a neighborhood if they feel that they can make $$.

 

As part of the TIF that was done by city council for SYC, a portion of it will go for loans and grants for neighborhood retail.

Chain stores will try and locate in a neighborhood if they feel that they can make $$.

 

And since large corporate behemoths aren't often familiar with individual neighborhoods, they way they determine they can make money in a particular location is if other people are already making money in that location.

With all the new living spaces going in, parking could be a good use for the site, too, Wiederhold said.

"Our hope would be to maintain the buildings," he said. "When you lose a piece of architecture and a piece of history, it's gone."

 

Aren't those two contradictory statements? The first one doesn't sound much like Matt.

Chain stores will try and locate in a neighborhood if they feel that they can make $$.

 

And since large corporate behemoths aren't often familiar with individual neighborhoods, they way they determine they can make money in a particular location is if other people are already making money in that location.

 

I'm pretty sure that they do simple market studies to determine the buying power in the market area.  For example, as Ohio City continues to add wealthier residents, I'm sure that some chains will start to take notice and want to locate in the area.  It will be hard for landlords to turn down the higher rents that chains often pay.  I am not excited about this, but I view it as the natural economic progression of an area.

Ah yes, mall-ification!

 

 

Dan, I'm not saying that those stores don't exist anymore, I am saying that they aren't making NEW mom and pop grocers, hardware stores, bookstores, etc.  And "Niche specialty" shops is exactly what I am saying is the opportunity for revitalizing Cleveland's retail areas. 

 

Straphanger- I would include most businesses owned, and usually targeted towards, an immigrant market segment as "Niche Specialty".

X,

 

I agree with you. The retail landscape is radically different than it was in the 1920s. If Ohio City, Tremont and Detroit-Shoreway see a huge influx of new construction and residents, you will not see a return of the old cornerstore grocers. I know that many may yearn for those days, but I really think that they are gone for good. Specialty stores, coffee shops, bookstores and galleries will fill those old storefronts. I know how I would like it to be, but the larger retailers of the world will continue to dominate (offering convenience, selection and low cost).

""Niche specialty" shops is exactly what I am saying is the opportunity for revitalizing Cleveland's retail areas."

 

Amen. My S.O. and I are regulars at South Side and Lava Lounge - we're not about to go to a fricking Ruby Tuesday in SYC even though it would be closer to his place. We like La Tortilla Feliz and Chipotle/Taco Hell just ain't gonna cut it. Neither of us will ever buy anything from Wal-Mart and we'll continue to make our grocery runs to Dave's in Ohio City (though trips to Trader Joes are an evil necessity). And even though I drink Starbucks during the workweek (until some GOOD local places open downtown), we routinely buy coffee beans from Civilization. We could get everything cheaper in the big chain places but like many have said - there's a definite market for people who loathe the mega-conglomerates and prefer smaller independents. Unfortunately, it's not the majority of the consumer market  :|

 

What the existing mom-and-pops need to do is do a little pre-emptive strike against their competition in SYC. Whether it's a marketing blitz to remind them of the personal service, or discounts on selected items, or building a website so people can browse ahead of time. I know it's an uphill battle but I know too many small business people who have managed to thrive in similar situations.

Dan, I'm not saying that those stores don't exist anymore, I am saying that they aren't making NEW mom and pop grocers, hardware stores, bookstores, etc.   And "Niche specialty" shops is exactly what I am saying is the opportunity for revitalizing Cleveland's retail areas. 

 

Straphanger- I would include most businesses owned, and usually targeted towards, an immigrant market segment as "Niche Specialty".

 

Still don't think I'm on board.  I'm not speaking solely about immigrant-targeted businesses.  The countless Korean-owned bodegas and dry-cleaners in NYC are about as mom and pop as they come and new ones still pop us as needed- as do local pet stores, nail salons, barbers, bakeries, pizza-places, houseware stores, etc.  It's not some sociological relic just holding on.  This is not a "my city is better than Cleveland" thing, it's just a correction to the "old-fashoned neighborhood retail is dead or just hanging on everywhere" claim. 

 

Clearly the fact that everyone in Cleveland with money to spend owns a car (MayDay excepted) makes it tougher for a mom&pop to compete on convenience alone, but I think the lack of entrepreneurs is partly to blame too.

 

This belongs more on the rant page, but at risk of generalizing, why must the many Cleveland corner stores (of which there are still dozens...thanks to immigrant entrepreneurs) all look like ass, dingy and covered with cigarette adds?  Even in the heart of Tremont.

^i agree. the heart of the matter there is profound population loss in the city and a lack of significant new immigration. those niche retail gaps are not being filled very fast.

 

this is why a livlied up 24/7 downtown is so vitally important right now, it will be attractive to outsiders and burbites. new business will follow. a guy from sinaloa or caracas or everett, wash for that matter may not even know about cleveland, he needs more reasons to hear about it. sure in the past a guy from dubrovnick would know clev, but he or she ain't coming anymore...the dalmation coast is hot stuff these days. syc may help stem a little outward flow, but ya still gotta get more new blood in town somehow.

 

But again, what can you build on SYC besides big-box retail? Look at the location of the place. How many of you would be willing to live down by the Mittal Steel Mills if it had $200,000 condos? On one side you'd have a blast furnace on the other the overpass from hell. And as for the argument that big-box drives away mom-and-pop stores...a whole helluva alot of immigrants work at big box stores where I live.  A fair amount of these folks get promoted, learn managerial skills and in turn dump the store to try a business on their own usually in the same city. Immigrants move to cities where there is employment...a blank piece of land wont get them a job. This brings jobs to the city, maybe not high-tech ones...but it's a start and honestly who wants a city half full of rich folks and the other half unemployed.

^Exactly. Nobody thinks this project is going to "save" Cleveland. Right now it is just filling a void. A void in this type of retail near downtown and a void in jobs.The jobs aren't high paying (unless you are a store manager), but are jobs none the less. As many have said you can't really do much with the land unless it was extensively cleaned and even then it would still be an island amongst freeways and brownfields.

I'm not going to argue with the desirability of more shopping options in the city.  And I don't see the small retail filling in anyway (see earlier comments about lack of entrepreneurs).  But if the city finds it worth while to run an industrial land bank I'm sure there are viable uses for this site other than SYC or straw man $200k condos.

 

Anyone else think it's weird that there's a denser, better designed big box center in University Heights than there is on this site?  I guess not that weird, just a little depressing.

But what's the average income of people in University Heights vs. someone who lives on Denison Ave./Jennings Rd. area? And lets not play up this land...this isn't some plot of land in Brecksville overlooking the Valley Park. Who would honestly live there?...Even low income folks can have better views and healthier living by being in the new Riverview properties on W. 25th. I think some of you folks wouldn't be happy unless Starbucks or Williams & Sonoma had an investment there. They pay the same crap wages as well.

The big box center you're describing in UH is surrounded by residential and other retail.  This big box center is surrounded by highway on three sides and steel mill on the fourth.  Yes, SYC could be built up to street right of ways, with parking in garages, etc.  But why would a developer go to those lengths on this site?  Where are the people going to walk from to get there?  Who the hell is going to take a nice evening stroll to get to this site?  In light of that, even if SYC is held to a higher design standard than it is, does that do anything to make its impact on the rest of the city any more positive?

Ehh, doesn't really matter because I'm not about to throw myself in front of the backhoe on this project but I think you're missing my points.  The University Square development in University Heights has a similar tenant list (Target, etc.) but doesn't look like it's in Streetsboro.  I think it's more a function of land there being more valuable and other development limitations but it still stinks for Clevo.  And I'm not saying residential works on the site- I agree it doesn't and don't know who really thinks it would, but the site is certainly viable for industrial development which is something the city is still keen on nurturing- it's not like it has to stay an empty brownfield.

 

I want Costco- it doesn't pay the same crap wages.  And I want min. wage to be $9 an hour to help lift some of those crap wages.  And if this is about jobs I want KJP's great ideas about on-site child care, etc. to make the jobs real stepping stones.  And I want the Yankees pitching to suck again.

Don't get me wrong, I think industry would be preferable to retail at this site as well.  I'm hardly an SYC cheerleader here.  But I don't think that the design is really going to make much of a difference in how this thing functions as a part of the region.  It is, and can pretty much only be, an isolated site accessible primarily by auto.

 

And yes, the difference in the design between SYC and University Square is a function of land value, and more importantly, land availability.  The University Square site was very tight- they couldn't have fit all that retail on that site in the standard suburban manner no matter how much money they had.  SYC has a huge amount of land to play with.  The constraint just isn't there.

^and btw, while I like the look of the University square building from the street, have you ever actually shopped there?  It's a complete pain in the ass.  We go b/c it's the nearest Target, but it's one of the least usable shopping centers I've ever seen.  The parking garage in the middle sounds like a great idea, but just works really poorly.  A better design probably could have kept it urban and made it usable, but oh well... a topic for another thread.

^ exactly.  university square looks urban, but it is designed so that you almost have to park multiple times or wander through the garage to get to another store if you plan more than 1 trip.  there needs to be better internal walkways here. 

I don't consider the area is as isolated as some do. There will be a bicycle/walking path coming down the hill from Tremont at the north end. And, a walkway built over I-71 from MetroHealth on the west end would improve access to/from its 6,000 workers, plus the neighborhood.

 

As for residential, I also don't think it's as bad a site as some suggest. Keep in mind that the remaining steel mills are to the east of SYC. Rarely is there an east wind in this city and when it does happen, it's in winter when most are indoors. Brownfield contaminants are a concern, but why aren't they a concern for retail workers who will spend eight hours a day at SYC? I think some subsidized housing, live-work, day care, business incubators, and a tech college/continuing education would make for a nice welfare-to-work economic engine at that site.

Brownfield contaminants are a concern, but why aren't they a concern for retail workers who will spend eight hours a day at SYC?

 

There is a more expensive and thorough remediation process that must be followed for residential uses.

(Slightly off-topic, but interesting nonetheless. From the Wall Street Journal http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/07/06/wal-mart-warms-to-gore/

 

Wal-Mart Warms to Al Gore

 

Former Vice President and environmental activist Al Gore is planning to address Wal-Mart Stores Inc. executives next week at the retailer’s quarterly conference on sustainability, part of the company’s recent efforts to become an environmental leader, a Wal-Mart spokesman confirmed.

 

Gore will speak on global warming, the subject of his recently released documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.” The conference is an outgrowth of Wal-Mart’s mission, outlined by Chief Executive Lee Scott last November, to minimize its negative impact on the environment. At the time, Wal-Mart committed to, among other things, reduce energy use in its stores, improve the fuel efficiency of its truck fleet and substantially cut down on solid waste produced by its stores.

 

Wal-Mart has seized on the issue of sustainability in an effort to bolster positive public relations at a time when its various business practices have been heavily criticized, from its worker pay and health benefits to its effect on smaller retailers. Still, the company has attempted to make changes. For example, it outfitted its trucks with an alternative power unit that uses 90% less fuel than its engines do while idling. The company created 14 internal networks to explore and implement more environmentally sound business practices. The 14 groups, made up of both Wal-Mart executives and outside experts, focus on different business areas, including operations and logistics, food and agriculture, textiles, global greenhouse gas and jewelry and mining.

 

This is one month after hiring the Rocky Mountain Institute as a consulatant. From the Benton County Daily Record in Arkansas.

http://nwanews.com/bcdr/News/35568/

 

BENTONVILLE — As the world’s largest retailer embarks on a mission to go green, the company has recognized a need to call in the professionals.

 

The Rocky Mountain Institute, a research and consulting organization based in Snowmass, Colo., has a consulting contract with Wal-Mart on two primary areas, according to Cory Lowe, RMI’s outreach coordinator. The company primarily provides consulting work to large companies and government entities.

 

In logistics, Wal-Mart is seeking to double the efficiency of its trucking fleet. "They have one of the largest trucking fleets in the country," Lowe said. "The best truck in their fleet gets roughly eight miles per gallon. We’re going to help them double it."

 

One month before this, Walmart CEO Lee Scott met with the Seventh Generation CEO Jeffrey Hollender.

You can read Hollenders account here (it is rather long) http://www.seventhgeneration.com/making_difference/newsletter_article.php?article=462&issue=71

 

Does this mean Walmart has decided to take a more sustainable approach to it business philosophy, or are they just concerned with the bottom line?

Maybe both.