It has to do with cleveland.com because you've asked how a capital expenditure is more important than an operation expense. Those aren't from the same budget. Those two things aren't interchangeable. The money for this park couldn't just be redirected into hiring police. These types of arguments are posed all the time on any development thread on Cleveland.com.

 

That seems like quite a stretch for an ad hominem.   

 

Leaving aside whether this is the best possible capital investment, could you explain more about mandatory capital spending?  Are cities really forced to build parks if, for example, they wanted to hire police instead?  Cities can't decide how to structure their budgets, or how to spend their own general funds?  That's the impression I get from your post, but it's not how I understand the budgeting process to work.  Certain specific grants may come with strings attached, but money is generally fungible-- are you citing any particular code to the contrary?

 

I didn't find Public Square to be especially ugly, unusable, or underutilized before.  Ideal?  No, but not awful.  Not in dire need of $50 million.

 

Capital expenditure and operating budgets are not one in the same. Money from one can't be moved to the other. This is why this line of argument is not only incredibly frustrating, but isn't rooted in reality.

 

But it still will. Last I checked the design still has Superior dividing Public Square. I am all for this design. I am just against the costs that keep rising. Th public deserved to know the truth prior to rushing  construction.  extra monetary requests for additional cafe seating is not a necessity for this development to ask of the State to cover

 

One of the two roads bisecting will be removed and the one that will remain will be greatly reduced and only open to transit. Attempting to compare the overall layout of the old Public Square to the new configuration is without merit.

It has to do with cleveland.com because you've asked how a capital expenditure is more important than an operation expense. Those aren't from the same budget. Those two things aren't interchangeable. The money for this park couldn't just be redirected into hiring police. These types of arguments are posed all the time on any development thread on Cleveland.com.

 

Just look to Cincinnati for an example of what redoing the city's most prominent public square can do for a city. Everything you've said can be found on articles about Fountain Square from circa 2003 or so when the plan to renovate it was getting started. Finding a person who has used the new Fountain Square who still holds those views is all but impossible.

 

Or Campus Martius in Detroit...

 

I am not impressed with Fountain Square. Campus Martius is a much better example I would like to see for Public Square.  More open and better public interaction with the space.

It has to do with cleveland.com because you've asked how a capital expenditure is more important than an operation expense. Those aren't from the same budget. Those two things aren't interchangeable. The money for this park couldn't just be redirected into hiring police. These types of arguments are posed all the time on any development thread on Cleveland.com.

 

Just look to Cincinnati for an example of what redoing the city's most prominent public square can do for a city. Everything you've said can be found on articles about Fountain Square from circa 2003 or so when the plan to renovate it was getting started. Finding a person who has used the new Fountain Square who still holds those views is all but impossible.

 

Or Campus Martius in Detroit...

 

I am not impressed with Fountain Square. Campus Martius is a much better example I would like to see for Public Square.  More open and better public interaction with the space.

 

It's hard to make great comparisons between Public Square and Campus Martius/Fountain Square as PS is massive compared to both of those. The thing I like about both of those parks in Detroit and Cincy is that the buildings create a sense of intimacy when you're on the square, especially in Cincy. PS will be different because all of the components will be much more spread out, so I think it might lose some of the things I like about FS and CM. But I also like the idea of a larger park type space in the center of the city. Public Square will finally actually function as a New England style "village green."

^Agreed. Coming from a maintenance managerial perspective, CAPEX and OPEX are NEVER to cross lines. The accounting nightmare this causes is unbelievable. If it is an absolute must, it is easier for operational expense money to be transferred to capital expenditure if the costs are great enough. However, moving money from CAPEX to OPEX is damn near impossible.

It has to do with cleveland.com because you've asked how a capital expenditure is more important than an operation expense. Those aren't from the same budget. Those two things aren't interchangeable. The money for this park couldn't just be redirected into hiring police. These types of arguments are posed all the time on any development thread on Cleveland.com.

 

Just look to Cincinnati for an example of what redoing the city's most prominent public square can do for a city. Everything you've said can be found on articles about Fountain Square from circa 2003 or so when the plan to renovate it was getting started. Finding a person who has used the new Fountain Square who still holds those views is all but impossible.

 

Or Campus Martius in Detroit...

 

I am not impressed with Fountain Square. Campus Martius is a much better example I would like to see for Public Square.  More open and better public interaction with the space.

 

It's hard to make great comparisons between Public Square and Campus Martius/Fountain Square as PS is massive compared to both of those. The thing I like about both of those parks in Detroit and Cincy is that the buildings create a sense of intimacy when you're on the square, especially in Cincy. PS will be different because all of the components will be much more spread out, so I think it might lose some of the things I like about FS and CM. But I also like the idea of a larger park type space in the center of the city. Public Square will finally actually function as a New England style "village green."

As a village green, yes.  The one issue that hurts, IMHO, PS is the fact that none of the buildings open up to the square as it's bound by roads all around it.  This is unlike FS in Cincy.  Not sure about Detroit.  In addition, almost the entire square is surrounded by office buildings with a Monday through Friday 9-5 work force.  Hopefully that changes as Jacobs develops plans on their lot.  Had a building opened up to the square, the need of the café in the corner would not have been necessary as restaurants or retail could have opened in the ground floor of one of the structures facing the square. 

^I totally agree with all of that. And it's not just an empty storefront issue that could be solved with subsidies to surrounding businesses/landlords. Half the square's building frontage is stuff that would be dead no matter how hot the downtown retail landscape ever gets. Most of that half was dead 100 years ago too (Fed Courthouse; Old Stone Church; Key Bank frontage). For PS to be lively, the part inside the ring road is going to need to be its own destination to some extent.

Agreed regarding the overall context of Public Square.  Its immediate surroundings are private 9-5 offices, so most of its foot traffic is always going to be pass through or bus related.  Apart from events, Public Square will still be the same thing it was before in functional terms.

 

The renovation will make it nicer for events, which might total 4 in a good month.  The recently renovated Mall is a large open event space, and how much has been happening there?  Not nothing but not a whole lot.  The org charged with making it a happening place decided to immediately tear up another park instead.  Improved event space isn't a bad thing, I just don't think it was a burning need worth $50 million.  Nothing was stopping us from closing the street more often and holding more events there before.  I'd rather see that $50 million spent on actual events! 

^Which is can't go towards. Again, capital expenditure vs. operational expense. Not interchangeable and not one in the same. This is the idea I mentioned upthread.

 

If they program it right and use each new aspect there is a ton more opportunity for nightly events than there was in the previous configuration. This is what has made Fountain Square such a success from an event standpoint. Yes, it has uses that front the square, but the majority of people coming for the nightly events are coming from elsewhere.

 

What if this results in the Jacobs Lot being more attractive to residential development? What if it makes that development happen quicker or increases demand and helps achieve a larger building? This is the point of public spaces being of a high quality. Something it wasn't before.

 

And again, outside image of cities is often enhanced greatly by nice public spaces. Think of the most touristy destinations in most cities. Many are large, well designed public spaces. This will be no different and Cleveland hired one of the best in the business to design it.

Agreed regarding the overall context of Public Square.  Its immediate surroundings are private 9-5 offices, so most of its foot traffic is always going to be pass through or bus related.  Apart from events, Public Square will still be the same thing it was before in functional terms.

 

The renovation will make it nicer for events, which might total 4 in a good month.  The recently renovated Mall is a large open event space, and how much has been happening there?  Not nothing but not a whole lot.  The org charged with making it a happening place decided to immediately tear up another park instead.  Improved event space isn't a bad thing, I just don't think it was a burning need worth $50 million.  Nothing was stopping us from closing the street more often and holding more events there before.  I'd rather see that $50 million spent on actual events! 

 

But Public Square was not an attractive place to be before. It was a place I actively avoided walking through unless I absolutely needed to, or if I needed to catch a bus. As a downtown resident, I can see myself walking the distance to go to the new Public Square just to be in an attractive green area, whether that be to read a book, eat lunch, just hang out, etc. I'm confident it will be a draw for people, even those who don't reside/work right adjacent to it. It also makes development around the square that much more attractive. And the eventual May Company conversion and Weston's WHD development will also put a lot more people in proximity of the square 24/7. Also, I can't imagine Jacobs' lot staying idle that much longer.

^Which is can't go towards. Again, capital expenditure vs. operational expense. Not interchangeable and not one in the same. This is the idea I mentioned upthread.

 

That's not relevant here.  First of all the city determines its own budget in the first place.  Aside from certain specific grants, nobody is telling it what to do with its general funds.  After the budget is set, yes it's set.  But we're talking about major long term planning decisions, not rearranging budgetary items on the fly.  As to this project, much of the funding comes from casino revenues and non-profit money.  None of that has anything to do with the budget distinctions you keep bringing up.  If the people who decided to spend these funds on this project had decided to do something else instead, they could have.

Your statement is fundamentally false. The city itself can't just say "x% goes towards operating expenses and x% goes towards capital expenditure this year." It's far more complicated than that and your two alternative suggestions are operational expenses (cops and events) which can't come from the same budget. That's all I'm saying. Could it go towards OTHER parks? Sure. But the benefit of those investments would be an entirely different story and discussion.

First of all the city determines its own budget in the first place.  Aside from certain specific grants, nobody is telling it what to do with its general funds.  After the budget is set, yes it's set.  But we're talking about major long term planning decisions, not rearranging budgetary items on the fly.  As to this project, much of the funding comes from casino revenues and non-profit money.  None of that has anything to do with the budget distinctions you keep bringing up.  If the people who decided to spend these funds on this project had decided to do something else instead, they could have.

 

I happen to think the public money going into PS is money well spent, but I agree with you that it's a perfectly valid criticism. I may start a new thread all about spending priorities, because the issue keeps coming up in various project-specific discussions. Our county in particuler has been awash in discretionary money over the past 10 years or so.

First of all the city determines its own budget in the first place.  Aside from certain specific grants, nobody is telling it what to do with its general funds.  After the budget is set, yes it's set.  But we're talking about major long term planning decisions, not rearranging budgetary items on the fly.  As to this project, much of the funding comes from casino revenues and non-profit money.  None of that has anything to do with the budget distinctions you keep bringing up.  If the people who decided to spend these funds on this project had decided to do something else instead, they could have.

 

I happen to think the public money going into PS is money well spent, but I agree with you that it's a perfectly valid criticism. I may start a new thread all about spending priorities, because the issue keeps coming up in various project-specific discussions. Our county in particuler has been awash in discretionary money over the past 10 years or so.

 

It's astounding that there's not a greater retail component to this project. This is prime real estate with unrivaled foot traffic; lease some of that damn space out as a revenue generator. It's hardly rocket science.

^Adding more retail would also attract more users, especially off-season. I'm still not a fan of devoting the entire northern half of the square to a lawn that will only be used for special events for 6 months of the year.

 

Would be great to finally hear more info about the cafe operator and its format.  From the web cam, looks like the foundation work is complete and the above-ground structure is ready to go anytime.

First of all the city determines its own budget in the first place.  Aside from certain specific grants, nobody is telling it what to do with its general funds.  After the budget is set, yes it's set.  But we're talking about major long term planning decisions, not rearranging budgetary items on the fly.  As to this project, much of the funding comes from casino revenues and non-profit money.  None of that has anything to do with the budget distinctions you keep bringing up.  If the people who decided to spend these funds on this project had decided to do something else instead, they could have.

 

I happen to think the public money going into PS is money well spent, but I agree with you that it's a perfectly valid criticism. I may start a new thread all about spending priorities, because the issue keeps coming up in various project-specific discussions. Our county in particuler has been awash in discretionary money over the past 10 years or so.

 

But... there's no such thing as discretionary!  Kidding.

 

I posted an article yesterday with details about how this project has been funded so far.  It still isn't fully funded and I hope that works out. 

Some details about project funding can be found at the link below, which also makes clear that I'm not the first to question these policy choices.  If the city wanted to use casino proceeds to improve public safety or invest in neighborhoods, it most certainly could have.  Same goes for the foundations, they can donate however they so choose.  No sense getting hung up on how everyone's hands are tied-- they aren't. 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2014/09/cleveland_city_council_approve_7.html

That article states the funds are redirected from the Public Square TIF area, not casino proceeds. If I understand it correctly, the funds are from expected real estate tax revenues from the casino for capital improvements to the property. All buildings around public square are in this district to encourage upkeep of the structures. If I understand it correctly.

Some details about project funding can be found at the link below, which also makes clear that I'm not the first to question these policy choices.  If the city wanted to use casino proceeds to improve public safety or invest in neighborhoods, it most certainly could have.  Same goes for the foundations, they can donate however they so choose.  No sense getting hung up on how everyone's hands are tied-- they aren't. 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2014/09/cleveland_city_council_approve_7.html

That article states the funds are redirected from the Public Square TIF area, not casino proceeds. If I understand it correctly, the funds are from expected real estate tax revenues from the casino for capital improvements to the property. All buildings around public square are in this district to encourage upkeep of the structures. If I understand it correctly.

 

You're right.  But what happens to those revenues otherwise? 

 

Any restrictions or diversions of money related to a TIF are self-imposed.  It's an agreement, not a law.  At some point the city gets to decide whether or not to establish that policy in the first place.  Drill down one level and everything's in special buckets, everyone's hands are tied and nobody has any discretion.  But drill down some more, and you find that local revenues are spent however local officials see fit.  There's really no good alternative to that. 

There are certainly better uses for $50 million in this town, and police staffing is prominent among them.  I tend to think that after so much was spent on the adjacent convention center and malls, that maybe a series of neighborhood investments would have been the more appropriate follow-up.  It's staggering how much money has been spent tearing up parks to replace them with slightly different parks.

 

Let's take care of Cleveland's front lawn 1st.  This is a first impression location for visitors and the past few decades has not helped.  Strong core will create tax dollars and opportunity for neighborhoods.  Cleveland's appeal as a place to visit and work is gaining ground.

 

What type of neighborhood investments are you thinking of besides the ubiquitous ''roads'' investment or ''job training'' programs which at one time were also known as public schools.

 

I certainly don't consider the new version of PS a replacement with a slightly different park.

 

Some details about project funding can be found at the link below, which also makes clear that I'm not the first to question these policy choices.  If the city wanted to use casino proceeds to improve public safety or invest in neighborhoods, it most certainly could have.  Same goes for the foundations, they can donate however they so choose.  No sense getting hung up on how everyone's hands are tied-- they aren't. 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2014/09/cleveland_city_council_approve_7.html

 

Let me correct a fairly large misunderstanding about the casino-related tax revenue being diverted to Public Square.  The City is not diverting casino revenue from its general fund to pay for public square. Here’s the story:

 

1. A few years ago, the City put a TIF on the Higbee Building so that it Rock Gaming could make improvements to it to create the casino and attract lots of jobs and revenue. This is completely separate from Public Square.

2. Because of this TIF, Rock Gaming and Dan Gilbert had the rights to millions of dollars that was created by the increased tax value of Higbee. This money could only be spent to make further improvements to Higbee.

3. In order to help fund the construction of Public Square, Rock Gaming and Gilbert agreed to release their rights to $10million of those funds. The City had no say in how this money gets spent.

 

In looking back at the PD article, the reporter did not clearly explain this. In summary, no city-controlled casino tax revenue is being put towards construction of Public Square.

 

Thank you for the explanation, 3231. That's helpful to know.

^^Actually, the TIF on the Higbee building (and all of lower Euclid Ave) goes back to 2002, before the casino was ever envisioned. Michelle very usefully clarified the arrangement for the Public Square project here: http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/03/public_square_makeover_hits_32.html

 

Basically, Gilbert gave up access to the TIF funds generated by a valuation of $79M, which is what the county needs to back the bonds it issued for the PS project, but the PS project will likely push his valuation significantly higher, so he'll be able to use the PILOTs from higher valuations for casino improvements. He's probably not giving anything up. But the main point is the same: this money couldn't have been used for anything else unless Gilbert signed off on it, and his willingness in this case was entirely due to what PS does for his property. So not at all discretionary money.

 

[Edited to tie it back to the main conversation here.]

A TIF is a voluntary diversion of general funds.  A city can bind itself to such an agreement, but no one can force a city do so.  I do not understand why it is so important to some here to absolve local officials of accountability in their spending decisions.  All of these technicalities are just different ways a city can exercise discretion over its revenues.  Ultimately the city is still making choices and the technicalities do not change that.

 

Regardless, there's other public money involved here beyond the TIF funds.  You can read more about it at a link within the one Strap posted.  Until we have the entire project budget laid out before us, we aren't going to know all the specifics.  And then the budget will change, because the project is not yet fully funded.  We're appealing to the state for financial help on this.  That suggests an emergency.  I think we need state help for a lot of things, maybe including this, but not principally including this.

Half the square's building frontage is stuff that would be dead no matter how hot the downtown retail landscape ever gets. Most of that half was dead 100 years ago too (Fed Courthouse; Old Stone Church; Key Bank frontage). For PS to be lively, the part inside the ring road is going to need to be its own destination to some extent.

 

Many European main squares have similar frontages (i.e. large cathedrals, etc), but do a nice job filling the surroundings spaces.  One idea to add life to these sections for at least one of the months is a month-long European-style Christmas Market.  Perhaps it can be sponsored by Old Stone Church if anyone objects to the term "Christmas" :)

 

For example:

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2015/12/09/germany-christmas-markets/77029632/

 

Combined with some sort of stand alone retail/café extensions. 

^ I absolutely love the Philadelphia Christmas market by the Love Statue. A Christmas market on Public Square would absolutely enliven the Square in the winter months (I know my coworkers would frequent it). Could be a great winter extension of the Cleveland Flea!

From a quick look at the web cam this morning, vertical construction of the cafe is now underway.  Unlike a lot of projects, doesn't look like this one will require much of a miracle to finish up on time.

From a quick look at the web cam this morning, vertical construction of the cafe is now underway.  Unlike a lot of projects, doesn't look like this one will require much of a miracle to finish up on time.

 

El Niño sure picked a good year to give us a warm winter (knocks on wood that it stays that way)

Public Square is on City Lab's "The Big U.S. Transportation Infrastructure Projects to Watch in 2016" list. I wish Cleveland had something in the transportation section, but oh well.

 

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/12/us-infrastructure-projects-2016-transportation/421431/

From a quick look at the web cam this morning, vertical construction of the cafe is now underway.  Unlike a lot of projects, doesn't look like this one will require much of a miracle to finish up on time.

 

El Niño sure picked a good year to give us a warm winter (knocks on wood that it stays that way)

 

 

Here's a screen shot from today of the Tower City Web Cam.  Lookin good!!!  :clap:  :clap:  :clap:

 

 

http://www.towercitycenter.com/info/publicsquare/

^ The Square is finally looking like...something!

I cant wait to see it with some grass and leaves on the trees!!!

From that vantage point I can't help but think that the surrounding buildings are, somehow, going to have to become something more in order for the Square to be a truly great place.

 

I'm not really sure what can be done architecturally. But there has to be a way to enliven the sidewalks while respecting the historic integrity. Right now the large, monolithic buildings just appear to be very standoffish.

There are changes in store for several of those buildings, all of which will help a bit.  May Company landing a major retailer would help a lot.  Public Square in its heyday hosted multiple department stores.

i wished the cafe design related better to the layout. The circular design enhanced all the rounded edges of the paths and planters.  Btw the bathrooms attached to the cafe should be non gender specific instead of designated male or female. It would send a message Cleveland is forward thinking

 

 

I'm not really sure what can be done architecturally. But there has to be a way to enliven the sidewalks while respecting the historic integrity. Right now the large, monolithic buildings just appear to be very standoffish.

 

Well there are some things happening and about to be happening with some of the properties around the square.

Just thinking about there is:

* The Southworth building currently under renovation with new residences.

* The May Co. building, with rumors of a retailer taking the ground floor/Also the hopeful conversion of the upper floors.

* Key tower always has good traffic around its perimeter.

* The Standard building currently being renovated into residences.

* 75 Public Square despite missing out on the tax credit will eventually move fwd. Also last year the group behind

  Lockeepers announced a new restaurant for the ground floor.

* Next door The John Q space had an operator but I haven't heard anything new on that.

* The Weston development  eventual build out.

* The Renaissance sale and renovation

* And Tower City usually has good foot traffic in and out.

So I think things are looking up for more activity down the road. Also here is a view from another angle from @EMSincle

 

 

is there space for retail at 55 public square?

Idk its current listing shows nothing available on the ground floor.

https://42floors.com/us/oh/cleveland/55-public-sq

Idk its current listing shows nothing available on the ground floor.

https://42floors.com/us/oh/cleveland/55-public-sq

I probably should have stated that more clearly. Is there space built on the ground floor of 55 public square that is designed for retail, or is it just lobby space?

 

Edit: Didn't dawn on me that John Q's had been apart of 55 P.S

What's in the old John Q's steakhouse spot in 55 PS.

What's in the old John Q's steakhouse spot in 55 PS.

 

Nothing. It's been vacant for a few years now. Loved that place.

Idk its current listing shows nothing available on the ground floor.

https://42floors.com/us/oh/cleveland/55-public-sq

I probably should have stated that more clearly. Is there space built on the ground floor of 55 public square that is designed for retail, or is it just lobby space?

 

Edit: Didn't dawn on me that John Q's had been apart of 55 P.S

 

There's a bank branch (FNB) on the first floor in the Southeast quadrant, facing the square. I think that's it for potential retail space, though.

There are also vacant retail floor spaces in the first floor of the Renaissance Hotel facing Public Square and Superior. The new owner recently stated an intent to fill those spaces...

I'm really surprised that John Q's hasn't had a new tenant, especially with this P.S momentum. Maybe we'll see one closer to the opening ceremony.

Also, I really hope the city can maintain the area and have it looking pristine. Perk park is still nice but could use some cleaning, hopefully there is a long term plan in place for it.

I just hope the City comes to its senses and closes off Superior to through traffic.  Having cars or buses go through there defeats the idea of creating a totally unified people-friendly public park.  Even though Public Square's a construction mess now, downtown is getting along just fine without having through traffic in any direction.  So if traffic can be blocked of now, why not keep it that way when the Square is finished, open and beautiful?  It just feels like we're bowing to rubber-tire interests once again.

^ It's only going to be open to buses, right? If that's the case, then I really don't have a problem with it. I'd rather it be a streetcar, but I guess that's a little too pie-in-the-sky ;)

Also, I really hope the city can maintain the area and have it looking pristine. Perk park is still nice but could use some cleaning, hopefully there is a long term plan in place for it.

 

Part of the Group Plan's fundraising efforts is for the upkeep of the square, which will be maintained by DCA.

^ It's only going to be open to buses, right? If that's the case, then I really don't have a problem with it. I'd rather it be a streetcar, but I guess that's a little too pie-in-the-sky ;)

 

Buses and I guess "special" vehicles, like cop cars.  Sorry, but I don't want any of them.  I was really hoping Public Square, as a giant bus depot, would become a thing of the past.  As long as there are any vehicles traveling though the center of PS it can never, truly be pedestrian friendly imho.

It's going to be the same way *nobody* ever drives in the bus lanes on Euclid...

 

 

Isn't Superior a national route or something so closing it would require federal approval? I'm pretty sure the city can't close it just because it wants to.

Cleveland Public Square construction on Dec. 23 as seen from an RTA bus.