I don't mind a parking garage solution either.  Fact is that most people want a car so they need to build a place for these people to store them.  This development isn't right on a main public transit line so I don't think it's reasonable to expect most residents to utilize public transit for their daily trips. 

 

A small parking garage might be the best option for this kind of development in this location.  I certainly prefer it over surface lots.

Glad to see the parking garage. Without it, that's a lot of ground covered with impervious surfaces, which means more stormwater runoff, which mean more sewers backing up into people's homes nearby. And the roof could even be a green roof to make all of the parking something capable of absorbing the water runoff. BTW, the exterior of the garage, which probably won't be very tall anyway, can be designed to look like a regular building.

 

 

Or a kinetic facade:

 

Here's a facade that looks like an apartment complex at first glance:

 

Parking garage for the Kansas City library:

 

 

 

And if that's not enough neighborhood activity for you, here's some more.......

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2015/crr01-26-2015.pdf

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

JANUARY 26, 2015

9:30

Calendar No. 14-248: 3219 Detroit Avenue Ward 3

Joe Cimperman

17 Notices

3219 Detroit LLC, owner, proposes to erect a new 60 unit apartment building in a B1 and D2 Local

Retail Business District and a Pedestrian Overlay District. The owner appeals for relief from the

following sections of the Cleveland Codified Ordinances:

1. Section 325.03 which states that the minimum area required for an off-street parking space is

180 square feet.

2. Section 343.23(g)(1) which states that no building shall be setback more than 5 feet in a

Pedestrian Retail Overlay District.

3. Section 355.04 which states that in a ‘B’ Area District the maximum floor area shall not exceed

½ the total lot area; in this case 15,437 square feet. In a ‘D’ Area District the maximum floor

area shall not exceed the total lot area; in this case 30,875 square feet. The proposed total

floor area is 77,525 square feet.

4. Section 357.05 which states that a five foot side yard is required.

5. Section 357.08(b)(2) which states that the rear yard shall not be less than 20 feet nor less

than ½ the height of the main building. (Filed December 11, 2014)

 

Isn't that this project in Ohio City?

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2492.msg737998.html#msg737998

 

Oops, you're right! That's what I get for posting so late at night.....

I don't mind a parking garage solution either.  Fact is that most people want a car so they need to build a place for these people to store them.  This development isn't right on a main public transit line so I don't think it's reasonable to expect most residents to utilize public transit for their daily trips. 

 

A small parking garage might be the best option for this kind of development in this location.  I certainly prefer it over surface lots.

 

Although I'd like the #55 buses to come off the Shoreway and stop at the bottom of the ramps for Edgewater-West 73rd. But that's a conversation for the GCRTA thread.

I don't completely oppose a garage.

 

but the whole way this is changing is not great in my opinion.

 

if you look at the original plan.  The developtment interacted with breakwater.  the new plan is a wall along the whole stretch...except where there is a surface parking lot at the corner of 58th that will be fenced off.  So you can see it, you just cant use it.

 

NOW if the put a parking garage where parking court 2 is---interior to the development where it meets the southwest corner of the westinghouse builidng I can be happy with that.  If they put all their living space on the inside, and these blank walls/parking garage on the outside I want nothing to do with it.

 

It looks to me like they are trying to "gate" off their area...they get the lake/city view..the rest of the neighborhood gets to look at their parking garage and trash bins.

 

 

I don't completely oppose a garage.

 

but the whole way this is changing is not great in my opinion.

 

if you look at the original plan.  The developtment interacted with breakwater.  the new plan is a wall along the whole stretch...except where there is a surface parking lot at the corner of 58th that will be fenced off.  So you can see it, you just cant use it.

 

NOW if the put a parking garage where parking court 2 is---interior to the development where it meets the southwest corner of the westinghouse builidng I can be happy with that.  If they put all their living space on the inside, and these blank walls/parking garage on the outside I want nothing to do with it.

 

It looks to me like they are trying to "gate" off their area...they get the lake/city view..the rest of the neighborhood gets to look at their parking garage and trash bins.

 

Where are you getting this information about the area being walled off?

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,653.msg712175.html#msg712175

 

that takes you to the "original" plan.

 

right below that is the "current" plan (without the garage)

 

Now instead of a entrance/driveway off of breakwater 1/2 way down.  there is a wall of buildings.

 

old plan from 65th to 58th

3 story townhomes

space

3 story townhomes

space

side of 4 story apartment building.

driveway/road

side/front of 4 story apartment builidng

 

new

3 story townhomes

space

3 story townhomes

space

back of  4 story apartment building.

parking lot

 

And it becomes much worse if they turn that parking lot into the garage they are asking for.

 

it will be a "wall" along breakwater...exactly what is there now.

 

 

 

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,653.msg712175.html#msg712175

 

that takes you to the "original" plan.

 

right below that is the "current" plan (without the garage)

 

Now instead of a entrance/driveway off of breakwater 1/2 way down.  there is a wall of buildings.

 

old plan from 65th to 58th

3 story townhomes

space

3 story townhomes

space

side of 4 story apartment building.

driveway/road

side/front of 4 story apartment builidng

 

new

3 story townhomes

space

3 story townhomes

space

back of  4 story apartment building.

parking lot

 

And it becomes much worse if they turn that parking lot into the garage they are asking for.

 

it will be a "wall" along breakwater...exactly what is there now.

 

Honestly, I'm not trying to be snarky, but I don't really understand your criticisms. Is it that you think there's too much density for the area? That's an argument I could certainly understand, although I would tend to disagree. But the idea that this is some sort of inward facing bunker that doesn't interact with the street or the surrounding area just seems wrong to me. There are a bunch of Breakwater-fronting townhomes on the western side of the development. Then an apartment building in the center with entrances, balconies, etc. that front and, to my eye, seem to interact perfectly well with Breakwater. Unless I am looking at these plans completely wrong, it doesn't have its back to Breakwater. Then on the eastern side, potentially, a parking garage.

 

Whether the parking garage is a good thing or a bad thing is an open question that will depend a lot on the execution. Right now we have no idea what they plan it to look like, so it's just too soon pass judgment. But theoretically, I'm all in favor of consolidating parking in a condensed area and getting rid of the need for more neighborhood killing surface parking. 

 

But ultimately, it's a city. Cities have buildings. Cities have density.  And too much density isn't exactly one of Cleveland's most pressing problems.

I still don't see how it's a "gated community." But what design changes would you suggest to make it less so and alleviate your concerns? Or is it simply that you don't think anything other than single-family style housing is appropriate for the area?

Its funny to me that folks get so fired up about views and fences and such.  What's there now is a monstrosity of warehouses and old factory buildings blocking any view or access.  Been that way for decades.  Two blocks over to the east on Herman avenue, is some amazing lake views that are obstructed by overgrown brush and weeds...  but nobody is concerned about that.  But a developer wants to build something new and people get up in arms about having views blocked!!!

No it is not simply that I don't think anything other than single-family style housing is appropriate for the area.  I had little bad to say about the original plan.  which had 3 stories on the corners and then the sides of 2 4 story bulidings separated by the entrance  across the street from the existing wall of industrial buildings south of Breakwater.  The access routes bisected the parcel and connected into the surrounding street grid. 

 

I am not even opposed to a parking garage if  they place it in the interior of their parcel ( parking court 2, at the southwest corner of the Westinghouse building) and not at the corner I fully expect them to--58th and Breakwater.

 

I was at the meetings.  I asked zone about retail space...because I thought having a bit would be good. dry cleaner, pizza place...something. 

 

NOW it will completely dominate and "Hulk" over the street, and then at the end instead of a nice transition to more 3 story townhomes, at best a complete drop to a fenced in surface parking lot or even worse a parking garage.

 

I have walked that street many times.  The original wasn't 1/2 bad the new is terrible. 

 

It is the "easiest best" way for the developer to maximize his room count.  It is something that north ridgeville would rubber stamp.  Cleveland deserves better.

 

 

 

 

I do agree that a parking garage at the center of the site and wrapped by housing would be a better design for the neighborhood.

It is the "easiest best" way for the developer to maximize his room count.  It is something that north ridgeville would rubber stamp.  Cleveland deserves better.

 

 

I agree, but reality is that it's very hard to do brown-field redevelopment in Cleveland and make any sort of profit.  Rental rates don't justify new construction.  And a parking structure is 10x more expensive than surface parking.  But you already know all that.

It is the "easiest best" way for the developer to maximize his room count.  It is something that north ridgeville would rubber stamp.  Cleveland deserves better.

 

 

I agree, but reality is that it's very hard to do brown-field redevelopment in Cleveland and make any sort of profit.  Rental rates don't justify new construction.  And a parking structure is 10x more expensive than surface parking.  But you already know all that.

 

Mariner's watch, The Shoreway building, Temple Bradley, whatever they are calling what they are putting in where the old bath house is.  All brown field Development, and that is just rental, all within 2 miles of this development.  New townhome developments Battery park, Tillman, Herman, Father Caruso, 67th 69th.

 

They are doing Brown field and infill development in this neighborhood at a record pace.  It selling/renting out like nobodies business..

 

Everybody is salivating over the Max Hayes property.

 

They "sold" us integrated into the neighborhood, they "sold" us that it would open up views to the lake.  They "sold" us lots of things.

 

What they are delivering is the back of a 4 story building. 

 

Instead of views of Edgewater/the Lake, there will be views of the back of a 4 story apartment building, a fence, a parking lot (or a garage)  and dumpsters.  Instead of opening up that 7 Block long of wall/fence they are making it higher.  And removing 1 of the 3 access points.  Those 300+ new people will be driving on all of the other streets in the neighborhood, while they make theirs as painful as possible for any of their neighbors to travel.

 

I care about Cleveland, they care about $$.  They won't live there.  I do.

 

 

I took Urban planning and regional design classes.  I am familiar with Olmsted, Le Corbusier, Leavitt, Burnham, Moses, etc etc ad naseum.  I have been to all the great cities in Europe...London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Olso, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Dublin etc etc ad naseum . And the US/canada..Chicago, NY, New Orleans, Montreal, Quebec, Philadelphia, Boston, San Fransisco.  I wish there was an ad naseum here, but sorry Phoenix, LA and Charlotte but you just aren't "great"

 

I actually go to the community meetings for these proposals.

 

I love this place for it's information...but good lord the smug superiority complex that gets displayed here---I really try not to be that guy, but I am sure some take me that way..  Anybody who doesn't share the same opinion as you (the royal you)  is at best uniformed or at worse stupid, is so demoralizing. 

 

We all appear to be on the same side, why are people treated so shabbily? 

 

Cleveland deserves better, the best.  NOT the quickest cheapest way for Some REIT or Developer to pad their bottom line.  They WANT to build here, nobody is begging them to.  Lets have some standards. 

 

And no I am not using that as some cover for NIMBYism.  I want more/better density, I want my neighborhood to have more people walking to more things. 

 

I actually ride the bus.  I would like to see more people on it who are riding it because it is convenient and not their only possible form of transport.  I would like enough density to support a Heinen's/giant Eagle in Detroit Shoreway.  I actually walk the walk.  I lived in Tremont long before it was Tremont.  I looked for 2.5 years before I bought my current home because I was going to buy in Cleveland and I wanted to be part of the Next Tremont, to help make Cleveland better.

 

 

 

 

kennybabes[/member] - Well said. I agree with you, I think the former plan was much better. And what if the city/CPC actually told a developer no? What would they do? Just leave town, forget their investment? I think not. The city can call their bluff and have the developer propose something that is designed well and fits in with the community.

kennybabes[/member] - Well said. I agree with you, I think the former plan was much better. And what if the city/CPC actually told a developer no? What would they do? Just leave town, forget their investment? I think not. The city can call their bluff and have the developer propose something that is designed well and fits in with the community.

 

For sure. The "beggars can't be choosers" mentality has to end some time.

^Especially on prime site and with regard to realistic demands.

Have they shown the new site plan in the neighborhood meetings? There is a lot of gnashing of teeth but I haven't seen where the garage will be and what it will look like.

^same question I have

So far the only plan I have seen presented to any group I was a part of was the original.

 

I know someone on the dsdco and have forewarned them my concerns about the way the plan is "evolving"

Dscdo and the city are most of the problem.  Dscdo "partners" on some of these deals so they get a development fee.  They are not going to turn away or drive a hard bargain.  Ditto for the city.  They have no form requirements on parking, building facades, materials, etc

The project received zoning approval.  It's not a new parking garage, they are actually using a large piece of the existing warehouse to the south of the Westinghouse building as a parking garage.  Basically renovating the existing warehouse building that they were planning on tearing down and creating a parking lot, and undeveloped land.  The warehouse will be cleaned up, decorative exterior lighting added to it to accent the brick columns and decorative brick work, and entry points, with storefront and canopies, created across from each new apartment building for access.  It received unanimous approval, and city design review committee applauded the reuse of existing warehouse construction rather than creating a parking lot.   

^ Welp, that sounds like a pretty awesome solution that should keep most people happy!

Win Win Win. I know sometimes environmental issues get in the way, but I really like when we renovate our old warehouses. It's something that makes cleveland special.

FYI, Local West (74th and Detroit) and Graffiti Social Kitchen (old reddstone) both open next Wednesday in the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood.  Both places have done really impressive upgrades to the previous space.  Local West SOMEHOW made the old Nikos look like a respectable place to get a meal. 

Gordon Square Arts District looks to future after completing $30m capital campaign

 

JACQUELINE BON | THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2015

Fresh Water Cleveland

 

The Gordon Square Arts District is a success story 40 years in the making. At one critical juncture in the neighborhood’s history in the mid 1970's, a massive chunk of the facade of the Gordon Square arcade building actually fell onto the sidewalk. City officials contemplated demolishing the historic structure, but fortunately the Detroit Shoreway Community Development Organization (DCSDO) was formed to help to save it.

 

Today, Gordon Square is a unique arts and retail district at West 65th and Detroit Avenue within the larger Detroit Shoreway neighborhood. It consists of theatres, restaurants, boutiques, a slew of art galleries and a bookstore. The group has a unique story -- two arts organizations and a CDC led a collaborative campaign over the past decade to remake this block as a pedestrian-friendly arts district.

 

The three organizations involved in GSAD are Cleveland Public Theatre, Near West Theatre and DSCDO, which owns the Capitol Theatre. Leaders here completed the multi-year, $30 million capital campaign in September, then launched directly into the area’s new master plan. The city has committed nearly two million dollars to expand the streetscape that will be available in July 2016.

 

Read more: http://www.freshwatercleveland.com/features/gordonsquare032615.aspx

Michelle J. McFee mjarboe[/member]  ·  6m 6 minutes ago

 

@portofcleveland board OKs bond deal for NRP's Breakwater Bluffs in #CLE's @DetroitShoreway. Rounds out $200M in financing discussed today.

 

 

NRP hopes to start vertical construction on Breakwater Bluffs apartments, w/ 297 units, as early as August in #CLE's @DetroitShoreway. #CRE

 

 

Now up: Discussion of potential @portofcleveland financing role for NRP's Breakwater Bluffs apartments in #CLE's @DetroitShoreway. #CRE

Full story from Cleveland.com:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/03/detroit_shoreway_apartments_in.html

 

 

The parts that were new (to me) from the proposal were the "resort-style" swimming pool and the 425 parking spots.

I saw yesterday that they have started demolition of some of the existing structures.

Had to bite my tongue on this one for a month until the lease was signed, but it is and the sign is up in the window.  Superelectric Pinball Parlor is coming to Gordon Square in the old yellowcake spot.  This concept is heavily endorsed by Sean Watterson from Happy Dog and says it will be the only thing of its kind between NY and LA.  It should bring good energy to that corner spot.  Actually happy that Valerie bolted once DSCDO asked for rent, I think this will be better for that corner.  Next step is to get Councilman Zones old office filled and that corner will be hopping.

 

http://superelectric.tv/pinball/

 

I Heart Pinball. I will definitely be there!!!

Very cool- sounds like restoring those machines was a real labor of love.

Great news!

 

Also, I noticed the other day that there is finally a little more progress on that building across from Gypsy Bean (it was covered with plywood for the longest time). Does anyone know what is going in there?

^ http://www.thearcadiancle.com/

 

It should be opening soon.

^ I don't really like what they did to the building, but it will be nice to have another bar there.

 

 

Bridge for the RR tracks is done. 

 

 

The pic doesn't show it but on the North side facing the lake where traffic will come up from the Shoreway the stone is cut with big block letters reading "GORDON SQUARE" .  A nice welcome. :)

Also noted trucks hauling away loads of dirt/fill coming out form the W. 70th service entrance of the factory at 70th and Fr. Caruso. Not sure what the timetable for building demo is.

Looks like they built the railroad bridge with enough room for three tracks. There are currently two main tracks and a nearby industrial siding that may be restored through here to keep the local traffic off the main tracks. I am surprised it's only three tracks though. West of Hopkins Airport where another line switches in, NS has been requiring all new overpasses and underpasses to leave enough room for four main tracks, even where there are only two tracks now. NS traffic has risen from 70 to 100 trains a day on this line in the last 20 years and they expect more growth.

 

 

Here's the bridge from the Shoreway at Edgewater park.  Matt Zone says "wait 'til you see it with a splash of color!"

Looks like a standard ODOT overpass bridge to me.  Hope this touch of color Zone mentioned makes it interesting.

I didn't see the "GOrdon square" lettering on the bridge when I first saw the picture, but I do now. I like that touch

I really wished they would have buried the utilites.

 

At LEAST along the area they dug up to bury new fiber optic...as well as those lines that cross the tracks and then head down into the park.

 

Never get this chance again.  INSTEAD they put up higher poles on either side of the bridge.  which makes sense in what universe?  the train is parallel to the poles 10 feet away.  the road is going under the bridge not over it.

 

dumb.

 

and it's not like this wasn't in the works for 15 years.

 

There are 9 utility poles (and 1 cell tower) in that picture.  ALL of them could have been removed (except the cell tower) with this project, at a very marginal cost.  There are probably 20 - 30 poles that could have been removed.  Some of those poles have actually been taken down...instead of burying the wires they are bringing in brand new poles.  My neighbor works at CPP.. this cluster is squarely on them.

 

 

Whose wires are those?

how's the mud on the roads been this season from all the trucking?  Last year it was a mess...

Whose wires are those?

 

As far as I understand it.  CPP. 

 

1 of the 9 might be CEI.  They each run poles down 70th on either side of the street.  CPP goes over and down into the park, over into battery park (on the south side of the tracks) and parallel to the tracks (on the north)  CEI ends at the industrial building at 70th and Caruso.  Battery park is served by CPP on a single loop.  Both us (Dergon and I live in the same complex) and BP are at the end of the CPP line/circut (we are not tapped in to the lines on the north of the track) that starts at the substaion at 65th and Franklin.  Anything that happens between us and that substation takes us down.

 

Our line at least completes a loop (down 65th then around and back up 70th) .  The BP, circut is unlooped ... it is a "stub" from 70th and Fr. Caruso.  So in theory they could send the current down either side for us. 

 

I know little about electricity.  This is all hearsay.  My neighbor says this is really bad (for BP).

 

I appolize for the terminology and my less than expert grasp of the material.

 

 

 

 

how's the mud on the roads been this season from all the trucking?  Last year it was a mess...

 

They finished the sewer work so the mud should be minimal on 65th, 67th, 69th---there is currently no Fr. Caruso so it will be tough to get from the site to anything other than 70th...and 70th has the Mt. Carmel school.  I would imagine that they would minimize dump trucks on this road.

 

I would guess they will be taking the spoil from under the bridge up 73rd  since this is the road they are extending it is a straight shot, that is also where there is enough "landing area" to hold piles of dirt.  That will be gawd awful once they start.

 

The did put a permanent (ish) fence around the whole site.  The main gate is at 73rd as is the construction doublewide.

 

All of this is really going to end up as a big bag of suck for people who live on 73rd.  Besides the construction 73rd will be straight shot from Detroit down into the shoreway...no stop sign, no light at detroit with a pretty significant slope.

 

They will be living on a really long entrance ramp.

 

 

 

All of this is really going to end up as a big bag of suck for people who live on 73rd.  Besides the construction 73rd will be straight shot from Detroit down into the shoreway...no stop sign, no light at detroit with a pretty significant slope.

 

They will be living on a really long entrance ramp.

 

 

We recognized that as a problem years ago.  Councilman Zone promised some improvements to 73rd to try & calm the traffic but short of traffic cameras I don't think it will help much. 

Yes...I was at the meetings.

 

My favorite answer.

 

As relayed by Zone from our Traffic Engineer (whom I believe is the same person who was demoted over the snowplowing debacle this past winter)

 

this is a paraphrase.

 

It is best to allow traffic to control itself..it will find it's own optimal speed.

 

I did not say, but thought to myself....then what are we paying you for?

 

He wasn't there or I would have actually asked the question, zone was relaying the "stock answer" the guy gives so he doesn't have to actually do any work.  Makes sense from both a city of Cleveland worker perspective as well as somebody in charge of moving cars around and efficiently as possible.  Forget people.  Cars are much more important to a traffic engineer.

 

The best hope is that once the shoreway is a "boulevard"  it will be as quick to keep going down Detroit all the way to down town or get on the shoreway at either lake or 45th.  The shoreway is a long way from Detroit at 73rd.

 

That or I would be looking to buy a beater car (invite the neighbors to participate) to leave parked on the street.  Nothing quite like parked cars for do it yourself traffic calming.

 

 

Is it really so hard for the city to install some raised sidewalks or speed bumps to keep drivers honest?