Jump to content
Guest KJP

Cleveland: Scranton Peninsula: Development and News

Recommended Posts

He said that a Scranton Peninsula production facility would include a consumer-facing component, such as a taproom, given the high-profile, waterfront location.

 

And he said that Great Lakes plans to maintain its Ohio City operations regardless of where the company lands on a new building. Adding capacity in the Flats would relieve some pressure in Ohio City, where the brewery is maxed out during the run-up to Christmas.

 

Per the above Cleveland. Com article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas Stickney, president of Scranton Averell Trust, said that the sale process released it from its plans for a joint venture with Forest City to develop their sites together that's been in place since 1988.

 

"We were holding everything in short-term leases because Forest City and the city have always had plans for the peninsula," Stickney said. "It will be easier to find long-term tenants that will fit into (buildings) for a longer period of time. We will have a nicer looking area because not everything is temporary."

 

He declined to specify how long the short-term leases were. However, other prospects already are knocking on the door about land controlled by the trust, which traces its ownership of property back more than a century, including a corporate headquarters he refused to identify.

 

Per the above Crain's Cleveland article.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats to GLBC. Hopefully this can be the start of big things on the peninsula. Here is a snippet from the above article.

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Great Lakes Brewing Co. has ended its years-long real estate search by purchasing eight acres on Scranton Peninsula for a potential expansion project.

 

Property records show that Great Lakes bought the land Friday for an undisclosed price.

 

The site is an inland one, near the base of the peninsula along Carter Road. But the deal also provides the homegrown brewery the opportunity to use - and an option to buy - adjacent property along the west bank of the Cuyahoga River.

 

The acquisition is a titanic step for Great Lakes, said Bill Boor, the chief executive officer. But there's no guarantee, yet, that the company will push ahead with construction of a second production facility to supplement its landlocked, longtime operations in nearby Ohio City.

 

"We still have a ways to go before we can tell people that we're doing a project," he said, declining to speculate on the cost, size and other details of the possible development.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Lakes Brewing Co. buys Scranton Peninsula land for potential expansion

 

http://realestate.cleveland.com/realestate-news/2018/03/great_lakes_brewing_co_buys_sc.html

 

^ There is a lot of good info and quotes from that GLBC article...especially regarding a new Cleveland urban neighborhood:

 

The Geis-Grant-Weiner property, across the river from Tower City, is vacant and overgrown. But the developers envision a mixed-use transformation that's heavy on housing and light on retail. The Great Lakes facilities would go beyond manufacturing to include a consumer-facing component, such as a taproom.

 

"I think our approach to the site is substantially similar to what it always has been," said Grant, who works in real estate in Cleveland and is shepherding planning aspects of the project. "But now, with the Great Lakes transfer, we're able to have a more dedicated focus. ... There's a significant portion of the site that's going to be taken up by their future operations. Our goal is to kind of work hand-in-hand, with that as the initial kickoff as the whole."

 

Grant said the developers might be able to say more about their overall vision for the peninsula within a few months. They're expecting the development to incorporate a park or trails and to connect to the surrounding trail network and existing and planned green spaces.

 

"We have aspirations to make this a modern, urban neighborhood that does the site justice," he said.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading about this and thinking about the potential of what could be makes me think of the Pearl Brewery neighborhood in San Antonio.  It's a neighborhood built around the brewery, right on the river as well, although not as great of a location as the Scranton site.  I think this could be huge.

 

Check it out: http://atpearl.com/about/maps/food

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my idea du jour -- the best place for an aerial tram to be built in or near downtown Cleveland. The length of this proposed tram would be slightly shorter than that of the Portland Aerial Tram (less than a half-mile) and its climb gradient would be less, too (about 20 percent), from the low station to the top of the first and only tower. In the map below, the ascent portion is shown as a yellow line with flat portion in green. A 150-foot-tall tower would be where the two lines meet. The flat portion is relatively speaking -- as it would actually descend about 50 feet to the Avenue's food court (or whatever Bedrock will make of it). That would allow it to clear the Cuyahoga River by about 100 feet.

 

Not only would this be a great link between downtown, Tower City, the RTA network and Scranton Peninsula, thereby aiding in its development. But it would also provide a pedestrian/bike link to the Towpath Trail to reach Tremont, Steelyard Commons and points south.

 

39780287785_e987e54102_b.jpgSkylift-to-ScrantonPen by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not only would this be a great link between downtown, Tower City, the RTA network and Scranton Peninsula, thereby aiding in its development. But it would also provide a pedestrian/bike link to the Towpath Trail to reach Tremont, Steelyard Commons and points south.

 

It would be good to see the RTA operate such a tramway themselves. It might actually be close to the Cleveland "icon" that Mayor Jackson has been looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd honestly rather see an El-style station for the Red Line at either Carter Road, or even better at French if pedestrian access could be added across the river at that point.  It could serve Scranton Peninsula, Cleveland Center, and the West Bank/Stonebridge area while strengthening the position of the Red Line as an important transportation artery.

 

edit- I also wouldn't mind seeing a stop around Stone's Levee to support development planned for that area.  If the Eagle Road Bridge could be reopened it could also support the eastern half of Scranton Peninsula.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It would be good to see the RTA operate such a tramway themselves. It might actually be close to the Cleveland "icon" that Mayor Jackson has been looking for.

 

RTA can't afford it unless someone else sponsors it, much like the downtown trolleys. But RTA has no expertise with aerial trams, so I'd prefer that it not be associated with it except to have a reduced/free fare transfer policy with whomever does own/operate it. And the central tower for the tram could be iconic, certainly more so than Portland's. Its design and lighting could be make it iconic.

 

Here is the low station by the Portland Streetcar and South Waterfront district of residential towers....

38868275400_a6848b73b8_b.jpgPortland Tram bottom by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

 

The aerial tram's lone, 100-foot-tall tower just 350 feet from the low station....

38868275090_aea08f4d65_b.jpgPortland Tram tower1 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

 

And the high station at the Oregon Health & Science University/VA Hospital/Shriners Hospital For Children....

38868275040_6756a5f679_b.jpgPortland Tram top by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

 


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are two concepts for a station on the Cuyahoga viaduct -- BTW, it is best to have a station on straight track because it limits the gap between train and platform and meets ADA requirements. Station platform need to be at least 300 feet long and preferably 350 feet and at least 15 feet wide with enough room along the platform past the elevator/stairwell for a wheelchair and not have to encounter the tactile edge.

 

One concept is a single-platform station that would likely cost less to build, operate and maintain because it would need only one elevator and one stairwell. It would require some track changes, but these might be needed anyway to accommodate the Red Line Greenway. The other is a two-platform station that is slightly better positioned and requires no change in track alignments other than what may be needed to build the Red Line Greenway. The two-platform station could also be accessible to users of the Greenway.

 

A possible pitfall -- A station located closer to Tower City would require major track and signal changes. Indeed, any station on the bridge might be too close to the Tower City station signal block which is a special operating situation. In fact, when I proposed to RTA a station near the Stone's Levee bridge, RTA staff said it wasn't possible because it was inside the Tower City signal block. That signal block, for reasons I don't remember, is a special circumstance on the RTA rail system and RTA staff didn't want to substantially alter it. A station at the new Commercial Road/East 9th extension might be possible, however. So, long story short, it is possible a Cuyahoga viaduct station at this location may be too close to Tower City too.

 

Anyway, here's the two concepts (zoom and overview)....

 

Single-platform station:

40690757831_facaf45445_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-1 platform-zoom by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

40690758221_6cb94c3e91_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-1 platform by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Two-platform station:

25819600757_15212d6275_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-2 platform-zoom by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

39980821754_e4d525b061_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-2 platform by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a few more graphics showing past uses of Scranton Peninsula. The Republic steel mill was demolished in stages throughout the 1960s-70s (see HistoricAerials). Is GLBC being built on the more industrial portion of the peninsula where more toxic chemicals were used? A commercial use (vs. residential) for the more troubled portions is probably more appropriate and less legally complicated. It looks like furnaces were located between Carter Road and the river along the west side of the peninsula. I seem to recall the developers were envisioning that for a park, correct?

 

Aerial views from the 1930s....

 

39797096525_e2184cef8f_b.jpgScrantonPeninsula1930L by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

40692201311_b82006e344_b.jpgCuyahoga River-CUT west approach-1930L by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Jump ahead to 1970, this was the Penn Central railroad yard called DK Yard between Republic Steel's Nut & Bolt Division and the lumber yard on the east side of the rail yard. You can see the steel mill's sign atop the mill including its plant office building. Most large mill complexes had decent-sized offices for plant managers, sales staff, human resources, research, etc. Too bad that building doesn't still stand as it would be a great housing conversion/live-work space, etc...

40649806892_1aa1369bc8_b.jpgDKYard1970-2 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

At the south throat of DK Yard, near where the Lorain-Carnegie bridge and the former Erie-Lackawanna Railroad line to the Riverbed ore docks crossed....

39797136425_807afc5dc0_b.jpgDKYard1970 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, KJP[/member] commercial is definitely better and the remediation requirements won't be quite as tough. Nonetheless, I'm not sure if that will hold true if they're bottling beverages for human consumption on that site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't like your Christmas Ale with a touch of chromium?


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It would be good to see the RTA operate such a tramway themselves. It might actually be close to the Cleveland "icon" that Mayor Jackson has been looking for.

 

RTA can't afford it unless someone else sponsors it, much like the downtown trolleys. But RTA has no expertise with aerial trams, so I'd prefer that it not be associated with it except to have a reduced/free fare transfer policy with whomever does own/operate it. And the central tower for the tram could be iconic, certainly more so than Portland's. Its design and lighting could be make it iconic.

 

And the high station at the Oregon Health & Science University/VA Hospital/Shriners Hospital For Children....

38868275040_6756a5f679_b.jpgPortland Tram top by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

 

Cool idea!

 

OHSU was where my daughter was born.  I've ridden that "pill" probably 20 times to the South Waterfront neighborhood.  It was financed mostly by OHSU.  Its wiki page is surprisingly thorough if we need to make any comparisons for a possible Cleveland application: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram .  Comparatively: "While most passengers are affiliated with OHSU, it is open to the public and operated as part of Portland's public transportation network that includes the Portland Streetcar, MAX Light Rail, and TriMet buses."

 

Since I was sad to see the Hardrock guitar go, I say make the tower a gigantic, upside-down electric guitar.  Or a Hulett.  Or a giant "DG" for Dan Gilbert.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are two concepts for a station on the Cuyahoga viaduct -- BTW, it is best to have a station on straight track because it limits the gap between train and platform and meets ADA requirements. Station platform need to be at least 300 feet long and preferably 350 feet and at least 15 feet wide with enough room along the platform past the elevator/stairwell for a wheelchair and not have to encounter the tactile edge.

 

One concept is a single-platform station that would likely cost less to build, operate and maintain because it would need only one elevator and one stairwell. It would require some track changes, but these might be needed anyway to accommodate the Red Line Greenway. The other is a two-platform station that is slightly better positioned and requires no change in track alignments other than what may be needed to build the Red Line Greenway. The two-platform station could also be accessible to users of the Greenway.

 

A possible pitfall -- A station located closer to Tower City would require major track and signal changes. Indeed, any station on the bridge might be too close to the Tower City station signal block which is a special operating situation. In fact, when I proposed to RTA a station near the Stone's Levee bridge, RTA staff said it wasn't possible because it was inside the Tower City signal block. That signal block, for reasons I don't remember, is a special circumstance on the RTA rail system and RTA staff didn't want to substantially alter it. A station at the new Commercial Road/East 9th extension might be possible, however. So, long story short, it is possible a Cuyahoga viaduct station at this location may be too close to Tower City too.

 

Anyway, here's the two concepts (zoom and overview)....

 

Single-platform station:

40690757831_facaf45445_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-1 platform-zoom by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

40690758221_6cb94c3e91_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-1 platform by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Two-platform station:

25819600757_15212d6275_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-2 platform-zoom by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

39980821754_e4d525b061_b.jpgRed Line mid-bridge station-2 platform by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Thanks, KJP!  I didn't know about the Tower City station signal block issue.  It's a shame, because I think the two stations I mentioned could make a lot of sense as those near Downtown neighborhoods get developed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been waiting for SP to be developed since I was a kid!  I always envisioned Venice-like mini canals crisscrossing through the area, maybe some canals flanked by green area like Common Wealth Ave/Rose Kennedy Parkway in Boston but smaller and with a shallow canal in the middle.  Anyhow, glad to see some action on this part of Cleveland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been waiting for SP to be developed since I was a kid!  I always envisioned Venice-like mini canals crisscrossing through the area, maybe some canals flanked by green area like Common Wealth Ave/Rose Kennedy Parkway in Boston but smaller and with a shallow canal in the middle.  Anyhow, glad to see some action on this part of Cleveland.

 

Ambitious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been waiting for SP to be developed since I was a kid!

 

Me too! I remember when Republic Steel Bolt & Nut Division stood shuttered on the peninsula for what seemed like an eternity when I was 8, 9, 10 years old. But for steel mills to sit empty for a few years before being demolished is pretty common. So for me, I've been hoping and waiting for redevelopment for 40 years. That's how long I've seen that peninsula sit empty.


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FerrariEnzo[/member] 's canal idea is actually pretty cool, and wouldn't be all that expensive to cut across the river as it otherwise would be, given the short distance.

 

I'm just unsure that canals would succeed as a "destination" in our climate. But I love the thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FerrariEnzo[/member] 's canal idea is actually pretty cool, and wouldn't be all that expensive to cut across the river as it otherwise would be, given the short distance.

 

I'm just unsure that canals would succeed as a "destination" in our climate. But I love the thinking.

 

It's slightly warmer, but Indy has canals (canal? singular?) that seems like it's fairly successful at being a great outdoor space that people and businesses locate along. Omaha has canals (I know less of their success though, maybe someone here knows more details), Buffalo still has some of its old canals that have been repurposed, a ton of New England towns have canals they have turned into public spaces, etc.

 

Point being, I think there is precedent for canals in similar (or colder) climates finding success. It's a cool idea that could create a really unique atmosphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digging a canal there would be more expensive than many think. Earthmoving can be quite expensive, especially when a navigable waterway is involved -- even for recreational boating. And there would have to be a minimum of three bridges on the canal (Carter Road, Scranton Road, Flats Industrial RR and possibly a Towpath trail bridge or another residential foot/street bridge), all of which would probably have to be movable bridges for to ensure overhead. That means staffing/maintenance costs for the bridges as well as for dredging the canal to ensure it has enough draft to float a boat. Perhaps this could be part of some special assessment district? Include my Skylift crossing to Tower City Center in the special assessment, please. :)


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the environmental history of the site would be the single most prohibitive factor in canal digging there (after the almighty dollar of course).  It's one thing to dig in the earth and build a building there, it's another to introduce water from an existing navigable waterway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digging a canal there would be more expensive than many think. Earthmoving can be quite expensive, especially when a navigable waterway is involved -- even for recreational boating. And there would have to be a minimum of three bridges on the canal (Carter Road, Scranton Road, Flats Industrial RR and possibly a Towpath trail bridge or another residential foot/street bridge), all of which would probably have to be movable bridges for to ensure overhead. That means staffing/maintenance costs for the bridges as well as for dredging the canal to ensure it has enough draft to float a boat. Perhaps this could be part of some special assessment district? Include my Skylift crossing to Tower City Center in the special assessment, please. :)

 

Is there any reason that, way in the past, a canal was never dug across any of the Cuyahoga peninsulas? Obviously there's the cut at the mouth of Lake Erie, but it seems strange that no one ever did bother to cut across to skip Collision Bend. Maybe ship weren't really big enough at the time to warrant it?


“To an Ohio resident - wherever he lives - some other part of his state seems unreal.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the environmental history of the site would be the single most prohibitive factor in canal digging there (after the almighty dollar of course).  It's one thing to dig in the earth and build a building there, it's another to introduce water from an existing navigable waterway. 

 

Yeah same thought. I’m not sure you want to be digging around that soil. However, maybe the canal concept could be incorporated as part of a wetland reclamation project. The major water quality issue we have is from rainwater rushing off hard surfaces - the steep streets into the flats for instance - and directly into the river.

 

Or perhaps a shallow decorative canal like in San Antonio would suffice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digging a canal there would be more expensive than many think. Earthmoving can be quite expensive, especially when a navigable waterway is involved -- even for recreational boating. And there would have to be a minimum of three bridges on the canal (Carter Road, Scranton Road, Flats Industrial RR and possibly a Towpath trail bridge or another residential foot/street bridge), all of which would probably have to be movable bridges for to ensure overhead. That means staffing/maintenance costs for the bridges as well as for dredging the canal to ensure it has enough draft to float a boat. Perhaps this could be part of some special assessment district? Include my Skylift crossing to Tower City Center in the special assessment, please. :)

 

Is there any reason that, way in the past, a canal was never dug across any of the Cuyahoga peninsulas? Obviously there's the cut at the mouth of Lake Erie, but it seems strange that no one ever did bother to cut across to skip Collision Bend. Maybe ship weren't really big enough at the time to warrant it?

 

There were plans to do just that at the height of Cleveland's industrial growth.  I don't know why they didn't happen, but I would guess it got prohibitively expensive with all the industrial development already in place.  Digging navigable channels would either redirect the Cuyahoga entirely, or would result in lots of islands.  Meaning that not only would you have to buy out the industries in the path of the channel, but also that many businesses would lose their dockage when the river channels were moved, or tons of bridges would have to be built to what would then be islands between the channels and the old river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There were plans to do just that at the height of Cleveland's industrial growth.  I don't know why they didn't happen, but I would guess it got prohibitively expensive with all the industrial development already in place.  Digging navigable channels would either redirect the Cuyahoga entirely, or would result in lots of islands.  Meaning that not only would you have to buy out the industries in the path of the channel, but also that many businesses would lose their dockage when the river channels were moved, or tons of bridges would have to be built to what would then be islands between the channels and the old river.

 

Read about it here......

https://clevelandhistorical.org/index.php/files/show/5318

 

And here:

http://www.clevelandareahistory.com/2010/10/new-cuyahoga-proposal-to-straighten.html

 

map1917s.jpg


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go to the historic Cleveland aerials website you can toggle between currents and historical maps. Several kinks in the river have been eliminated over the years. The blast furnace on Cambell Road is built atop an "island" that was created in what looks like the 30's. Looks like they used to cut the new path, drain the old path, and then fill it in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Side note; when going through the old maps it is absolutely staggering the amount of rail infrastructure around the Flats, lakefront and SE side east of Broadway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Side note; when going through the old maps it is absolutely staggering the amount of rail infrastructure around the Flats, lakefront and SE side east of Broadway.

 

Tell me about it.  :'(


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The river's a lot straighter near the mills.  That area wouldn't have been as developed when Cleveland was in it's peak "let's just straighten this river" mode.  The area near the mouth was already too developed for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa....I think I just had a little accident upon seeing this.....

 

http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/Scranton-Peninsula-Cleveland-OH/12944713/

 

This Land Property is For Lease.

Scranton Peninsula

Cleveland, OH 44113 ·  Land For Lease

Rent Not Disclosed

 

Highlights

Panoramic views of Cleveland skyline.

West 25th Street, West Side Market, Hoopples, Cleveland Rowing Foundation (less than 5 min walk).

Surrounded by trails and parks.

Less than a half mile (10 min walk) from Ohio City, Tremont and Public Square. 

Simple, private drives envisioned to create a small-block, urban neighborhood. 

Great Lakes Brewery will be joining the neighborhood with a new, state-of-the-art facility.

 

BROCHURE:

http://images4.loopnet.com/d2/_t0Rp4sk5er2KEGX2rWruRaBQItj_PUkEB9ieQk3D1A/document.pdf

 

Thunderbird - A New Mixed-Use Neighborhood

Rental Rate Rent Not Disclosed Property Type Land

Min. Divisible 88,900 SF Property Sub-type Commercial

Find out more...

Listing ID: 12944713 Date Created: 06/20/2018

 

Description

Thunderbird  |  A new mixed-use neighborhood in Cleveland  | Sites available for Sale or Lease

 

Thunderbird is one of the most uniquely positioned properties in Cleveland.  The site is located on the Scranton Peninsula, along the Cuyahoga River in the Flats, facing downtown Cleveland and surrounded by and connected to Ohio City and Tremont neighborhoods.  Thunderbird will establish a new dynamic neighborhood in the heart of a reemerging American City.

 

AN ASPIRATION  |  A Vision of Cleveland’s Future Located in the center of Cleveland and void of any existing buildings, the blank canvas of the Scranton Peninsula’s eastern side is envisioned as a small, compact and walkable community, designed with both the honest and self-evident character embedded in the city as well as a thoughtful overlay of place making that looks beyond Cleveland today and towards a bright future.

 

A CROSSROADS  |  From Downtown to Neighborhoods with well-established and burgeoning neighborhoods of Ohio City, Tremont and Downtown all within a half mile of the district, the district will be developed to support these neighborhoods, creating a waterfront link that binds them and establishes a continuous network of places to live, create, mix and work.

 

A WATERFRONT  |  An Amenity to the Neighborhood and Community. The district is designed with a continuous public waterfront, culminating in a world class park on the southern edge that will connect to the continuously expanding park system including direct adjacency with the new 17- acre park at Irish Town Bend and the existing park on the southern side of the Peninsula, creating an active and living waterfront experience on the south bank of the Flats.

 

A LIVING ROOM  |  Intimate and Human-Scaled Development conscious of the large site and surrounding infrastructure, the district is composed of a series of well-designed small spaces, cozy walkable streets, and short building blocks with compatible but diverse architecture.

 

A CONTEXT  |  With a Focus on Views, Adjacencies and a River home to some of the most spectacular views of Cleveland, the district is designed to orient viewers to the landmarks on the horizon through framed spaces and a gradient of building heights that respond to the site’s topographic changes. Thunderbird is conceived of a predominately mid-rise development (5-7 stories) with the potential for strategically placed higher rise buildings (8+ stories). All designed around view corridors and pedestrian experience.

 

A full Thunderbird development plan vision book is available – please contact brokers.

 

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

 


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While riding the Red Line last night, I could see that the area between Carter Road and the river was being scraped clean and graded, possibly for basic landscaping/grass seeding to improve the site's appearance and marketability.


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, this is all on the same big chunk of land bought last year by the investor group led by Fred Geis, Jesse Grant and Matthew Weiner. Great Lakes appears to be an anchor of sorts, and shown on the graphics as if they're assumed to be part of this. Otherwise they would list them as something like "Potential commercial tenant." The south

 

What's almost as interesting is that the rest of the peninsula's land, owned Scranton-Averell, Inc. and located north/east of the Flats Industrial Railroad, is shown with a land use concept too though only as a massing. That tells me the investor group has had dialogue and some early cooperation with Scranton-Averell, otherwise that portion of Scranton Peninsula would probably be shown in the graphics as a blank polygon, at most labeled with "future development."


"Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond." -- Coach Lou Holtz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...