The large corner space at Walker and Farnsleigh is being built out. There's a sign up saying its going to be The Beauty Shoppe, which is a co-working space with a number of locations around the midwest, including in Ohio City across from Quarter. This is by far the largest vacant space left in the development (the others being directly across from this next to Stump, and on the corner of Warrensville and Farnsleigh). I remember KJP hinting about some upcoming big news, so hopefully this is a good sign leading up to that...

There is a podcast called “Hey Shaker!” and their February episode featured a representative from RMS. It sounded like there were plans for all of the vacant space and they said the next phase would include developing the RTA parking lot into condo’s/apartments. The rep also mentioned something about a partnership with one of the adjacent condo buildings.  However, this  was pre-covid and since Sawyers closed and work on the co-working space has stalled. On the bright side, I was driving home last night and the district looked to be packed.

I believe the Phase 2 plan for quite some time has been a residential building on the RTA lot at Farnsleigh and Van Aken.  I would prefer that they focus more attention towards the intersection of Warrensville and Chagrin but I can see whey they are more interested in developing the Farnsleigh lot as it is probably more marketable.

43 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

I believe the Phase 2 plan for quite some time has been a residential building on the RTA lot at Farnsleigh and Van Aken.  I would prefer that they focus more attention towards the intersection of Warrensville and Chagrin but I can see whey they are more interested in developing the Farnsleigh lot as it is probably more marketable.

I’d prefer they stay away from Warrensville/Chagrin so they don’t take the rail extension RoW.  I hope that RTA eventually improves to the point where expansion is possible, and I dislike things that would make that harder. So I really like the idea of building housing on the RTA parking lot - I hope it is the first of MANY RTA lots to be upgraded as ToD. 

Four new tenants in the Market Hall.  Was there for lunch today, and by my count, only two stalls remain vacant.  Old Brooklyn Cheese is the only tenant in this article left to open:

 

https://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/news/local_news/van-aken-district-market-hall-welcomes-four-restaurants/article_53e8adbe-9f62-11ea-be45-e3648a2a33ee.html

 

I also found some more info on the new co-working space The Beauty Shoppe.  This will take up 7,680 sq. feet:

 

https://www.shakeronline.com/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/1629?fileID=4214

Redirected from the random Cleveland development thread...

 

3 hours ago, X said:

 

Any chance they're going to leave a cut out through their building to allow for a possible future rail expansion?

 

I seem to recall that RTA's new general manager, India Birdsong, had communicated to Shaker Heights that they want the Van Aken District to accommodate a future extension of the Blue Line. But I cannot find any citings of it anywhere.

3 hours ago, KJP said:

Redirected from the random Cleveland development thread...

 

 

I seem to recall that RTA's new general manager, India Birdsong, had communicated to Shaker Heights that they want the Van Aken District to accommodate a future extension of the Blue Line. But I cannot find any citings of it anywhere.

It's nice that they've asked!

4 hours ago, KJP said:

Redirected from the random Cleveland development thread...

 

 

I seem to recall that RTA's new general manager, India Birdsong, had communicated to Shaker Heights that they want the Van Aken District to accommodate a future extension of the Blue Line. But I cannot find any citings of it anywhere.

 

I posted this response to another thread before seeing this, but it is very applicable here:

 

Perhaps that proposed office building could be built with provisions for the Blue Line to run under it?  That whole Warrensville-Chagrin intersection was redesigned to eliminate the diagonal Van Aken-Northfield component.  To introduce a diagonal crossing for a rail line would sort of undo the improvements, though rail traffic would be far more manageable than the myriad of rubber-tired vehicles that passed through it. The potential location of the ramp to go under the building and intersection is the site of the former substation to the southwest of the station and storage track.  Of course, tunneling would add substantially to the cost of an extension.  

 

However the line is extended, to have a rail station incorporated into the whole redevelopment project, especially one that would attract riders from two directions, would be a tremendous asset.  

 

RTA needs to have forward thinkers in the agency to look beyond the Blue/Green ending points that were established in the early-mid 1930's.  The same holds true for the Red Line's eastern end from 1955 (and really, the east side of the former CTS rapid transit line was no more than the completion of the Van Sweringen project that was started in the early 1930's as well).

 

Perhaps Ms. Birdsong is the forward thinker that RTA needs.  With her history of being involved with Chicago's system, she may see the benefit of having a vibrant rail component, especially since the base is already there.  If Calabrese would have continued on, it would have further withered away.  

16 hours ago, KJP said:

Redirected from the random Cleveland development thread...

 

 

I seem to recall that RTA's new general manager, India Birdsong, had communicated to Shaker Heights that they want the Van Aken District to accommodate a future extension of the Blue Line. But I cannot find any citings of it anywhere.

At the RTA community meeting on Transit Oriented Development a few months back I specifically asked about the Van Aken RoW at Chagrin / Warrensville. The RTA rep said explicitly that the RoW still exists and could theoretically have the rail extension. (She was some type of planning director.). She said the only RoW that has been sold off is the Shaker median through Beachwood that is now the park. (And quite frankly, if that extension was ever going to happen, it could be run right on the road anyway since it has two lanes each direction.)

 

Maybe @GISguy could check that RoW on whatever systems he has access to. 

I was just thinking on what I'd like to see done with the existing Van Aken station. I could see a future phase of the development partnering with RTA to build directly over the existing station, or perhaps a new station in the proposed office tower site. Biggest benefit I see to this is that the station will then be completely enclosed.  I see that as a good way to attract more "fair weather" users of choice if they don't have to wait outside in bad weather. Using myself as an example, I'll sometimes ride the Blue line all the way to Tower City just to switch on to an eastbound Red Line train to get to Little Italy so I don't have to wait outside. Make it easier and more comfortable to people to want to use the trains, instead of taking their cars. Turn Van Aken into a major hub station, and promote it as such. We already know there is going to be plenty of free parking here.

11 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

At the RTA community meeting on Transit Oriented Development a few months back I specifically asked about the Van Aken RoW at Chagrin / Warrensville. The RTA rep said explicitly that the RoW still exists and could theoretically have the rail extension. (She was some type of planning director.). She said the only RoW that has been sold off is the Shaker median through Beachwood that is now the park. (And quite frankly, if that extension was ever going to happen, it could be run right on the road anyway since it has two lanes each direction.)

 

Maybe @GISguy could check that RoW on whatever systems he has access to. 

 

If any sort of extension of the Green Line is ever desired, there is still ample space to provide for a 2-track line through the Shaker Blvd median.  That median is nearly 500 feet wide.  It was designed to have 4 tracks plus two highway-type lanes on either side of of the 4 center tracks, not to mention the embankments that go up to Shaker Blvd.  Shaker Blvd was intended to be a "marginal" type roadway.  No more than 50 feet would be required for the two tracks and they could be shifted to be right next to one of roadways.  I am curious what kind of usage that Beachwood park space sees.

 

On 11/29/2020 at 10:48 AM, Boomerang_Brian said:

At the RTA community meeting on Transit Oriented Development a few months back I specifically asked about the Van Aken RoW at Chagrin / Warrensville. The RTA rep said explicitly that the RoW still exists and could theoretically have the rail extension. (She was some type of planning director.). She said the only RoW that has been sold off is the Shaker median through Beachwood that is now the park. (And quite frankly, if that extension was ever going to happen, it could be run right on the road anyway since it has two lanes each direction.)

 

Maybe @GISguy could check that RoW on whatever systems he has access to. 

For some reason I can't find some documents that solidify this but I'm almost positive that last time I looked this up what RTA is saying was true. I want to say last time this was in the mix was a year and some ago when folks saw renderings of another building potentially being put on that lot (736-10-011). Hopefully I'll be able to dig something up, until then I trust the RTA haha

On 11/29/2020 at 10:37 PM, LifeLongClevelander said:

.  I am curious what kind of usage that Beachwood park space sees.

 

People walk or bike they paths all day everyday 

Edited December 16, 20204 yr by MrR

28 minutes ago, MrR said:

People walk or bike they paths all day everyday (as does my family)... I worked in the median In my highschool environmental class cutting the stems down on invasive species (the deer eat only the stems) - and learning about some of the endangered species of plants that thrive there because it is a very unique man made (protected) wetland. Not to mention there’s a sledding hill, a gazebo with picnic tables, and a giant retention pod... the chances that the green line extends to Richmond is probably zero. There’s no demand for it to extend another block or two  and green road has a massive parking lot anyways. The last time I saw it full was for the cavs championship parade, and shaker heights fireworks (which were canceled nearly a decade ago)

 

I responded here:

 

On 11/30/2020 at 8:26 PM, KJP said:

 

I responded here:

 

If the Green Line is ever extended, at least the space is there to do so.  It is owned by a governmental entity, not by a private developer.  It will never be built out for some other purposes.  Using no more than 50 feet out of median that is nearly 500 feet wide will still provide ample park space, recreational facilities, trails and wetlands in the unused area.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cleveland.com/community/2021/01/rising-to-the-occasion-van-aken-district-developers-seek-more-skyline-with-proposed-17-story-apartment-complex.html%3foutputType=amp

 

This would be at the top-left of the image shown as "Future Phase Residential)....

 

 

Looks great. Here's a direct link

 

https://www.cleveland.com/community/2021/01/rising-to-the-occasion-van-aken-district-developers-seek-more-skyline-with-proposed-17-story-apartment-complex.html

Hm. I'm not sure. I like the materials and love the height, but I don't really like the shape. Square glass boxes just seem dated to me. From reading the article, it sounds like it was originally planned to be one presumably rectangular building, before being redesigned based on city feedback. I think I would have liked that better. Glad they pointed out that the shorter one will be the same height at Tower East. That should help quell some of the inevitable massive nimby backlash. Guarantee they will come out in force to oppose this, just like they did the first phase. I think the success of the first phase will help push back against them too. Despite not being a 100% Tudor design, Van Aken has been very popular.

 

I'm also just noticing the footprint labeled "bank" near this on the site plan too. I wonder if they plan on courting Key to move from their massive parcel on the corner with Warrensville. That building is massively out of size for the bank now, and I'm sure key would jump at the chance to downsize/modernize just like they did in Ohio City with the Market Square development.

KJP, was Gates Mills Blvd originally supposed to be a light rail ROW?

6 hours ago, FerrariEnzo said:

was Gates Mills Blvd originally supposed to be a light rail ROW?

Not KJP responding, but to answer your question: yes it was.  The Green Line of RTA was originally slated to continue eastward to the traffic circle for Shaker Blvd, Gates Mills Blvd and Brainard Road.  At the traffic circle the line would have continued to the northeast in the median of Gates Mills Blvd.  In one of the local transit history books, near the end of Gates Mills Blvd, there is a picture of an overgrown bridged culvert for that never-built rail line.  I have an old Forman-Bassett Map (eventually became the Commercial Survey Company) which has another branch heading to the southeast from the Shaker/Gates Mills/Brainard traffic circle.  There was a plan for a "mirror" of Gates Mills Blvd called Chagrin Falls Blvd.  It would have been halfway between Shaker Blvd East and Brainard that headed to the southeast and the median would have had a rail line as well.  That rail line would have connected with an extension of the now-Blue Line that would have been on from Warrensville on South Moreland Blvd in a median as well (before that section was renamed Chagrin) at Lander.  That map booklet refers to extension along Shaker Blvd, the branch along Gates Mills Blvd, the branch in Chagrin Falls Blvd and the extension on South Moreland Blvd all as "proposed rapid transit".

Edited January 19, 20214 yr by LifeLongClevelander

^ Wow. All those rail lines sure would have been something. And with ready made rights of way it would seem a lot of the cost of building rail would have been accounted for. We could have had a mini version of Philadelphia's Main Line. 

 

I recently read an article on why it costs so much to construct a mile of rail in the US vs. other countries and red tape/regulations was by far the biggest reason. Progress doesn't come cheap in America. 

7 hours ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

Not KJP responding, but to answer your question: yes it was.  The Green Line of RTA was originally slated to continue eastward to the traffic circle for Shaker Blvd, Gates Mills Blvd and Brainard Road.  At the traffic circle the line would have continued to the northeast in the median of Gates Mills Blvd.  In one of the local transit history books, near the end of Gates Mills Blvd, there is a picture of an overgrown bridged culvert for that never-built rail line.  I have an old Forman-Bassett Map (eventually became the Commercial Survey Company) which has another branch heading to the southeast from the Shaker/Gates Mills/Brainard traffic circle.  There was a plan for a "mirror" of Gates Mills Blvd called Chagrin Falls Blvd.  It would have been halfway between Shaker Blvd East and Brainard that headed to the southeast and the median would have had a rail line as well.  That rail line would have connected with an extension of the now-Blue Line that would have been on from Warrensville on South Moreland Blvd in a median as well (before that section was renamed Chagrin) at Lander.  That map booklet refers to extension along Shaker Blvd, the branch along Gates Mills Blvd, the branch in Chagrin Falls Blvd and the extension on South Moreland Blvd all as "proposed rapid transit".

 

And, back in the 1920s, there were still electric interurbans to connect with at the Gates Mills Oval near Mayfield, heading east into Geauga County as well as the Blue Line connecting to the existing interurban to Chagrin Falls and beyond, to Hiram and Garrettsville. Both lines were owned and operated by the Eastern Ohio Traction Co., later the Cleveland & Eastern Traction Co. (aka The Maple Leaf Route). In the 1910s, the goal of today's Blue Line was to ultimately become a four-track electrified railroad between the booming cities of Cleveland and Youngstown.

 

Anyway, here's some better graphics of the two towers, courtesy of Michelle Jarboe and RMS:

 

 

 

10 hours ago, KJP said:

 

And, back in the 1920s, there were still electric interurbans to connect with at the Gates Mills Oval near Mayfield, heading east into Geauga County as well as the Blue Line connecting to the existing interurban to Chagrin Falls and beyond, to Hiram and Garrettsville. Both lines were owned and operated by the Eastern Ohio Traction Co., later the Cleveland & Eastern Traction Co. (aka The Maple Leaf Route). In the 1910s, the goal of today's Blue Line was to ultimately become a four-track electrified railroad between the booming cities of Cleveland and Youngstown.

 

Anyway, here's some better graphics of the two towers, courtesy of Michelle Jarboe and RMS:

 

 

 

 

Can these architects design the SHW headquarters? lol.

^ lol

 

verrrry nice renders. and even a bit funkaay even. 

On 1/18/2021 at 1:03 PM, PoshSteve said:

I'm also just noticing the footprint labeled "bank" near this on the site plan too. I wonder if they plan on courting Key to move from their massive parcel on the corner with Warrensville. That building is massively out of size for the bank now, and I'm sure key would jump at the chance to downsize/modernize just like they did in Ohio City with the Market Square development.

That site plan was old. Currently the apartments will take up that entire corner as well.

 

Wow, I love it. My only critique is I wish there was something like this downtown!

I don't think this has any new information, but the mayor released a video today (transcript) in support of the proposed 17 story Van Aken apartment building. He also touted plans for single home construction from Knez Homes, Keystate Homes and the County Land Bank.

The Van Aken apartments are up for review by the Architectural Board of Review on Monday and Board of Zoning Appeals & City Planning Commission on Tuesday. There's already a lot of anger towards the project on the local FB group, so if you're a local who supports it it'd probably be a good idea to reach out to these boards and let them know. 

^Any news re: Design Review and Zoning Appeals for the Van Aken apartment project?

2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

^Any news re: Design Review and Zoning Appeals for the Van Aken apartment project?

The mayor/council seem to strongly support it and they spent a significant amount of time reading emails from the public and a surprising majority are in favor, including a ton of Van Aken businesses.
Some complaints about shadows from the buildings but the developers came prepared with renders from various times of day and year that show a relatively small impact.
I didn't stay for the whole meeting because it ran very long but they said there would be further opportunities for public comment before final approval


 

Edited April 7, 20214 yr by bikemail

3 hours ago, bikemail said:

The mayor/council seem to strongly support it and they spent a significant amount of time reading emails from the public and a surprising majority are in favor, including a ton of Van Aken businesses.
Some complaints about shadows from the buildings but the developers came prepared with renders from various times of day and year that show a relatively small impact.
I didn't stay for the whole meeting because it ran very long but they said there would be further opportunities for public comment before final approval


 

Thanks Bikemail as I wasn’t able to make it. Was there anything (model or rendering) showing the buildings in relation to the other buildings around them?   
Funny I had gotten from the LISH Facebook page that there would be a large contingent of resistance.  
also, from what I understand, this size was only proposed due to the new transformational tax credit opportunity.  Was that acknowledged at all? 

8 minutes ago, willyboy said:

Thanks Bikemail as I wasn’t able to make it. Was there anything (model or rendering) showing the buildings in relation to the other buildings around them?   
Funny I had gotten from the LISH Facebook page that there would be a large contingent of resistance.  
also, from what I understand, this size was only proposed due to the new transformational tax credit opportunity.  Was that acknowledged at all? 

Yeah they had slides like that, but I don't know if they're publicly available. The agenda links to this 88 page doc but it's definitely missing a lot of the graphics the developers showed.

A few of the pre-meeting comments mentioned the height, but since they were reading all the comments straight through without stopping the height question wasn't brought up again, at least while I was there. 

Should this go back into the Van Aken thread :)?  I was trying to refresh myself on what the development looked like and the initial discussion on it was and realized that the original posts about the project where in the other thread.

On 4/7/2021 at 3:23 PM, willyboy said:

Thanks Bikemail as I wasn’t able to make it. Was there anything (model or rendering) showing the buildings in relation to the other buildings around them?   
Funny I had gotten from the LISH Facebook page that there would be a large contingent of resistance.  
also, from what I understand, this size was only proposed due to the new transformational tax credit opportunity.  Was that acknowledged at all? 

Here's the presentation RMS went through at the meeting, including the shadow renders with the neighboring buildings starting at slide 20: https://shakeronline.com/DocumentCenter/View/4818/RMS-Presentation-to-BZA-PDF?bidId=

Good write up on the most recent revisions / discussion: Shaker Planning Commission will continue public hearing on Van Aken ‘Phase 2’

 

https://www.cleveland.com/community/2021/04/shaker-planning-commission-will-continue-public-hearing-on-phase-2-of-the-van-aken-district.html

 

“SHAKER HEIGHTS, Ohio -- After further architectural review by the city, developers continue to tweak the design of the proposed “Phase 2” double-tower apartment building in the Van Aken District.

Those adjustments include adding a floor and nearly 10 feet to the taller tower on the eastern side of the Farnsleigh Road parking lot, now 18 stories at over 199 feet in height.

At the same time, RMS Investment Group has removed one story from the companion building to the immediate west, now proposed with 15 floors at over 165 feet, with the towers connected by bridges that have also been refined with more of a wood-like accent on the undersides and elsewhere on the structures.”

 

I lol’d at the owner of the rock climbing gym in the other side of Warrensville Center expressing concern about shadows from this building. Overall though it sounds like they got a bunch of positive comments about the project. 

 

 

Why are concerns about shadows a LOL?  
While I love the people this would bring to the area, this does seem like an island the way this is proposed and out of context for this spot (if only some of this height could have been added within VAD).  It doesn’t seem like it engages the street well and there is so much  open pavement that would exist between this and the bank. 
would much rather see something lower and wider that doesn’t have so much pavement to the east. 
This is an example of something being planned specifically to cater to the transformational tax credit first and foremost. 

Edited April 13, 20214 yr by willyboy

I think the two banks east of the two towers are not long for this world, especially if the towers lease out pretty quickly.

 

BTW, why are we still discussing this in this thread when we have a Van Aken District thread?

45 minutes ago, KJP said:

BTW, why are we still discussing this in this thread when we have a Van Aken District thread?

I didn't realize there was a Van Aken specific thread until cle_guy90 and you brought it up, I think I assumed Shaker Heights was sleepy enough development-wise that it wouldn't warrant multiple threads and I saw this one first.
I'll post all future Van Aken-related news and comments in that other thread

1 hour ago, willyboy said:

Why are concerns about shadows a LOL?  
While I love the people this would bring to the area, this does seem like an island the way this is proposed and out of context for this spot (if only some of this height could have been added within VAD).  It doesn’t seem like it engages the street well and there is so much  open pavement that would exist between this and the bank. 
would much rather see something lower and wider that doesn’t have so much pavement to the east. 
This is an example of something being planned specifically to cater to the transformational tax credit first and foremost. 

Generally I wouldn't say concerns over shadows are laughable. In this instance though, the rock climbing gym is like a quarter mile to the east, and also located further north than the site for this. It will be close to sunset (and only in the winter)by time any shadows reach them, if they do at all. By then, their building will be in the shadow from the buildings directly across the street from them. 

 

I'm still not a complete fan of this (too boxy to my eye), but I like the height adjustment, lowering one and raising the other, to provide some distinction between them. The height isn't out of place currently for the area, being similar to Tower East on the other side of VAD, and there's an 8 story condo building located to the northeast, just out of shot in the photo above. I think we will end up seeing some height on the corner of Warrensville and Chagrin too. I really wish that site was being developed now though. It's such a desolate gateway into the city.

I'm a Shaker resident and sent my wholehearted support to Mayor Weiss for this project to go forward. Would love to see 2,000 - 3,000 units ultimately developed at the Chagrin & Warrensville Center intersection area. Got to justify eventually extending the Blue Line beyond its current terminus.

Love this design - wish it was plopped down at the site of Lakewood hospital... 

I can't believe Shaker Heights is actually building something that tall! Most suburbs would never even consider allowing that to be built. I think Shaker has great potential to mimic what Dublin, OH has done with Bridge Park but with Van Aken. Still though, I do sympathize with the concerns of it being out of place - but rather than denying it, I'd say we should fix that problem by building one or two more mid-rises in the Van Aken District!

 

I don't know a whole lot about Shaker, but I've always thought it hasn't fully tapped into its potential despite all the good bones it has. I think it's long overdue to make Van Aken into a big town center like this, especially since it sits at the terminus of the blue line. I hope Shaker Heights also tries to improve their other business districts such as the one around Chagrin & Lee while they're at it! Also, I know it's not technically in Shaker Heights, but it would be amazing to see some new TOD projects along the blue line in Shaker Square as well! I know if I ever moved to Cleveland, that would be a really desirable location for me.

32 minutes ago, Dblcut3 said:

Still though, I do sympathize with the concerns of it being out of place - but rather than denying it, I'd say we should fix that problem by building one or two more mid-rises in the Van Aken District!

 

It's not that out of place.  There's a 12 story office building and 8 story condo building within stone's throw of where it will be built.

@Dblcut3 There's the Avalon Station condos with the new HarborChase senior living next door, plus The Townhomes of Van Aken/Transit Village at Onaway station.

 

But I was really hoping to see this happen:

 

 

But fortunately, this project farther west up the light-rail line in Cleveland is moving forward with hopefully the second phase to follow soon thereafter....

 

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/08/woodhill-station-transit-oriented.html

 

^A few additional / better renderings of Woodhill Station West - Phase I of that multi-phased redevelopment that@KJP mentioned.

 

http://www.cityarch.com/architecture#/woodhill-station-west/

 

 

4 hours ago, KJP said:

But I was really hoping to see this happen:

You might see that happen soon enough. 

I have been wondering lately if a City Target couldn't succeed in Shaker Square, such as on that stretch of Van Aken between Shaker and Drexmore. I could see a more vertical one with multiple floors like the UH one. I got to believe there's enough population density there to justify one. Plus, being on the intersection of two train lines, many more could access it.

40 minutes ago, tykaps said:

You might see that happen soon enough. 

New owner of the square?  I’ve been hoping as this spot is pivotal.  I have a couple ideas but holding out to see how things pan out

31 minutes ago, willyboy said:

New owner of the square?  I’ve been hoping as this spot is pivotal.  I have a couple ideas but holding out to see how things pan out

New owner of the square seems extremely likely at this point. Though that's aside the point of this. That building proposal in the image is on separately owned land.