Jump to content

PittsburgoDelendaEst

Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Before I go all wet blanket, let me say this excites me to no end. However, 2 points. 1.) Whether or not the charter says the HQ needs to be within a mile or even inside the city of Cleveland, I suspect 2/3rds vote of the shareholders would not be particularly difficult to obtain. If the board proposes a move to Brecksville because it will save the company X number of dollars over Y years, the shareholders aren't going to say, "Nah, man you gotta stay in Cleveland." It's a mild obstacle and really the bigger key is do key decision makers have an inclination to stay in Cleveland because that's what Sherwin Williams is. 2.) The building being on Public Square will do wonders for the square, by closing the visual gap and making it feel more like a "room", but I am not totally sold that it will necessarily do anything for the other WHD lots. It will raise the premium for parking which is what the lots already are used for, and Key Tower is pretty closed off and doesn't interact that well with its surroundings at street level. That would be important for a Public Square tower, even more so than Key which abuts a dead zone that will always be dead (thanks Mr. Burnham). Filling in the gaps from the Square to the WHD and doing it well is the #1 thing that will promote a better urban feel in downtown Cleveland. We all know the current state is a joke. Let's end that.
  2. These redesign concepts and surveys strike me as a complete waste of time. It should be obvious that the outcome of these will be "something in between". If there is an argument that says the RTA service is necessarily a Mr. Miyagi "Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later, get squish like grape", then put it forward. They should be laser focused on improving their funding source. Maybe this absurd alternatives discussion is meant to be step 1 of that, because both show dramatic cuts (the WFL is closed! The Trolleys are canceled), and that sends a louder message than the repeated minor cuts they've been making. But guess what? Per Litt's article, their survey in February showed 1000 response that were split between 42% saying increase frequency, and 42% wanting more coverage. To which I say, "no shit". They can't please everyone with what they've got. What's really needed is what KJP is saying, which is the funding to do both, better. "What we want, is for people to understand the tradeoff," says the consulting firm. This is a lot of effort being spent to make people aware of a fact that should be obvious on its face..
  3. Why? Because Ubers/Lyfts, and free trolleys, ride on the surface streets, which during peak times in the flats are prone to gridlock even without the site completely built out. Think of the cars that could be taken off the streets and out of downtown lots if drivers coming in for an evening of entertainment were encouraged to park in the city-owned lots, and given an RTA pass for the night. That's not just Flats parking, which is at a premium but every lot in the city which loses value if we actually use the infrastructure we built and encourage its use. If I'm going to an sporting event at Gateway, a show at Playhouse Square, etc, and I can pay, say, $10 to park in a lot directly off the highway and ride into downtown for free? This opens up every Flats establishment as an option for after-event patrons who wouldn't dream of trying to get down there in a car. W. 25th is also viable. This is not an exercise in making things harder for drivers. We need to crawl before we can walk. And part of crawling has to include changing the mindset. "RTA: Yes, the train goes somewhere!"
  4. Can we run our WFL trains to/from the muny lots to Public Square only? Til 2 on Friday/Saturday nights in season only?
  5. 490 to close May 29, for 2 years, for construction of the absurd E. 55th underpass. https://expo.cleveland.com/news/g66l-2019/04/000da435f39804/odot-will-close-part-of-i490-in-cleveland-for-2-years-learn-why-and-see-detours.html
  6. Is "You can have your new construction in either Bland or Ugly, or both," really not a false choice?
  7. Just how does this "Marty" character know what's going to happen and who is his source?
  8. As the transit hub for a cold-weather city, Tower City really ought to have some retail; aspirationally speaking, if this project can bring in a good number of good paying jobs into the hub, it could drive a reimagining and upgrading of the retail aspect that will raise the level of the entire center to make it a destination again. Not a regional destination, but the destination for downtown residents and people living along transit. The retail cold be cut to a third or a quarter of its existing square footage, but if that included a small-format Target, retention of some of the other desirable retailers, etc, you'd have a viable mix that makes Tower City active 7 days a week. I want people living in the development at W.25th to take the Red Line downtown to shop, not their cars to Steelyard Commons. My biggest fear with this is plan is that it eliminates so much retail that the interior becomes totally dead on weekends. The counterpoint to that is that it already kind of is.
  9. I agree. 185th is a highly underrated and underappreciated corridor.
  10. It came from the above-linked Cleveland.com article database search. I have the data in a spreadsheet here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1h3QeeK1LWwgurB9-D2J7n6I4v8SBYlLI8qQtJ15-cww/edit?usp=drivesdk
  11. Updated the map and took the 3 year average, to smooth out the small sample a little: Here is the change in median price by neighborhood, the most recent 3 years vs the 3 years prior:
  12. The article stated at the very end, "Note: These are the neighborhoods historically used for statistical purposes in Cleveland until 2014. The newer lines are not used here, to allow for longer-term comparisons."
  13. I couldn't resist whipping up another view showing a more graduated color scale of this data. If I have time I'll post a proper version.
  14. We are getting bogged down in misinformation and confusion because people are talking about cranes. The building on this site was originally slated to be 5 stories, after originally being just 2 stories. (https://forum.urbanohio.com/topic/583-cleveland-lakefront-development-and-news/?do=findComment&comment=747885) Not so much taller that we'd have seen a big beautiful crane in the sky, but we have Pace quoted as saying it would have required deeper foundations which caused construction costs to be "too high". The article stated the cost of the project was $10-12 million dollars. Not sure what the cost on the original 5-story version was going to be. We also have @Enginerd paraphrasing Pace saying he had problems dealing with the FAA at the Nuevo project due to the volleyball courts and trees. Nuevo is further up the pier and right in line with the Burke runways so that might have had something to do with those issues. There's tons we don't know about why this was scaled up and then back down. Financing certainly was an issue but I don't get the mentality that if the banks say we can't have 40 units, we shouldn't build 16. There is a ton of space north of the stadium to build big. The city has acres and acres of muni lot space that should be developed on as TOD.
  15. Someone was filming on St. Clair tonight, between E. 65 and 70 or thereabouts. Police had the road totally closed off. Anyone know what's going on there?
×
×
  • Create New...