Jump to content
zaceman

Cleveland: Midtown: Development and News

Recommended Posts

I'm not exactly sure I'd call places 20+ blocks west and 4-5 avenues north part of a walkable neighborhood.  Or at least I'll say I don't think you're going to find any developers to buy into that train of thought.

 

Then what was the purpose of all those BRT stops, and what was the purpose of all that talk about bringing people to Euclid Avenue?  How many families have to be torn apart by mental illness so that people are brought to Euclid Avenue?  You renovate your main street for a billion dollars for the purpose of building things there which no one would ever want to visit or live by?

 

Regarding geography, I don't know where you're getting your info.  It certainly isn't from having lived there.  If you're at Euclid and 55th and you can't walk to something on Payne Avenue, which is 3 avenues up, you need a Jazzy Power Chair right now.  The thrift store is directly adjacent to this intersection and Galluci's is about a 10 minute walk.  And when we're counting blocks E-W, remember that there's only about a block and half between 55th and 40th here.

 

Seriously, the only problem holding this area back is the fact everyone in town hates it.  So now it's a dumping ground for "jobs" that nobody wants near their home, even though we just spent all that money to give it a chance as a functional urban main street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when talking biomed how come you always want to imagine the umbrella company?  what about technology... medical devices, and implants... that stuff is hardly biohazzard stay away type stuff.  having the midtown technology center, (which was to front euclid with no setback) between 59th and 61st, and in a later phase between 57th and 59th with hundreds of workers on upper floors and 1st floor "retail", probably defined as a cafe or restaurant... would have made your dreams of residential in the rest of the area much more attainable.  The biggest problem with the hospital is perception, which will be very difficult to overcome.  Still doesn't sting nearly as much as the subsidized housing in the east 70's.  That will absolutely drive away market rate investment there.

 

If we really wanted residential at this intersection it'd best be put west of the bridge where that autocentric crap is, where the empty "midtown center" and clark station are.  It'd be significantly more linked to the main draw of the area in the agora.  You could even incorporate that odd C.A.A.A building (i have no idea what this is, but it appears to be a historic facade hiding).  Of course what hampers any such idea from hatching in this area is that it would take such a substantial investment.  No developer in their right mind is going to plop up 1 new building.  Not enough around, too risky.  You'd need something on the scale of uptown to draw enough interest, and I don't think anyone believes that's possible right now.  Hell I know one very prominent local developer who won't even sniff a project if they don't believe they can't turn at LEAST at 13.5% profit.  These guys aren't philanthropists playing sim city and just saying, wouldn't it be cool if... or I'll put something here and hope it catches on...

 

The hospital is short sighted, the subsidized housing is the worst... idea... ever...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the idea that these workers will ride a bus that only goes down Euclid is laughable.  So funny I could cry. 

 

Sorry, I can't resist...with my best Joe Pesci impersonation:

 

So you thought I was funny when I rode the #6 to go to school/downtown?  Funny, like how, like a clown?!?!

 

:shoot:

 

:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a VERY similar same email response from Bob Brown as did Oldmanladyluck

 

 

'Thank you for sharing your thoughts about the future of Euclid Avenue in Midtown.  The City continues to support the vision of Euclid Avenue in Midtown as a place for mixed-use development, with offices, housing and retail, in a pedestrian-oriented/ transit-oriented development.  We are confident that the recently proposed uses can be designed and sited in a manner that will contribute to realizing this vision for Euclid Avenue.  We will continue working to pursue development that is in accordance with the plan and the zoning for Midtown.  Please feel free to get back to me if you have further comments.  Again, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.'

 

 

 

Robert N. Brown, Director

 

Cleveland City Planning Commission

 

[email protected]

 

Tel: 216-664-3467  Fax: 216-664-3281

 

Web Site:  http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, you can do biomedical research in our new technology center, as long as it's not this or this or this or this or this or this because there's a restaraunt downstairs from your lab.  I know biomed isn't all Resident Evil, which was a poor metaphor on my part, but I used to be in the business of cleaning up after this stuff and you don't want it above a restaraunt even if it's a million miles from Resident Evil.  Manufacturing, even of innocuous little devices, involves all kinds of hazardous chemicals.  Maybe 350 days out of the year they don't need the special solvent, but sometimes they do.  So if they can't ever use their special solvent, they're not going to locate here.

 

If we're going to go after biomed, let's do it.  This isn't the way to do it.  High end research likes to be off on its own... it's the one instance where suburban style segregated land use really makes sense.  There are also some intellectual property issues bearing on this which I don't want to get into, but trust me not much of this biomed stuff is going on top of a restaraunt.  It just isn't a nutritious part of your mixed-use breakfast. 

 

The entire plan we're discussing, if that's the plan, is bunk.  Are they attempting to plan "biomedical cluster" with residents scattered throughout, and not have a single hazmat consultant at the table?  I don't think that's wise, and I don't think the end result will have many takers on the commercial or residential ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the idea that these workers will ride a bus that only goes down Euclid is laughable.  So funny I could cry. 

 

Sorry, I can't resist...with my best Joe Pesci impersonation:

 

So you thought I was funny when I rode the #6 to go to school/downtown?  Funny, like how, like a clown?!?!

 

:shoot:

 

:-)

 

I did that too, but I'm a freak who lived, worked, and went to school on Euclid Avenue and who loves transit.  I don't think for a minute that a hospital full of suburban workers is going to mimic my habits or yours.  What I meant by the quoted statement is that the BRT only serves to link attractions that are located on or near Euclid Avenue.  Unless you live on Euclid (ding ding ding let's build residential) it plays no part in getting you home from work.  If it gives you a 2-seat 2-hour trip to Strongsville... so what?  It's not a commuter line and nobody's going to use it for that... unless both ends of the "commute" somehow involve Euclid Avenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I with you BizBiz.  Agreed on almost all of your points.  Good point about the visitors/families.  I will add that these hospitals have rotational shifts working around the clock, so it is not a business development where the employees all disappear to the suburbs after 5 p.m.

 

Also agree with McCleveland that the subsidized housing is the much more troubling development proposed for Midtown in the past few weeks.  Terrible, terrible idea, especially considering that the location (unlike the location proposed for the Hospital) is ripe for residential development or at least REALISTICALLY could be within the next 10-15 years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man... somebody better tell these people to stop building the johns Hopkins science and technology park complete with restaurants, retail, and housing.  These people might all die.  Ditto for the East River Science park in Manhattan.  We definitely should make sure we stay away from doing anything like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man... somebody better tell these people to stop building the johns Hopkins science and technology park complete with restaurants, retail, and housing.  These people might all die.  Ditto for the East River Science park in Manhattan.  We definitely should make sure we stay away from doing anything like this.

 

East River Science Park or Fifth Avenue Science Park?  They made a choice and they made it for a reason.  The Johns Hopkins plan, based on their aerial rendering and description, is intended primarily as a job site.  If you look at where they're placing it, it's off to the side of the university in Baltimore's downtown-university duality... it's not directly between them!  That's where main street goes! 

 

Baltimore's is also promoted as a modern industrial park with one incidental bullet point about residential and services.  It isn't clear how or if that aspect will work out, or whether they've put much thought into it at all.  We haven't, so I'm not sure they have either.

 

Is either city expecting a project like that to remake its main thoroghfare into an active pedestrian zone?  I don't think they are, but I haven't been following their news.  A lot of these issues I'm raising are context-dependent.  Is this plan better than a stick in the eye?  Yes it is.  Is it better than losing 500 jobs to Morocco?  Indeed.  But those are insane benchmarks to use, when we just spent a billion dollars rebuilding Euclid Avenue specifically for pedestrians, and these developments could go anywhere in Cleveland besides that street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, you can do biomedical research in our new technology center, as long as it's not this or this or this or this or this or this because there's a restaraunt downstairs from your lab. I know biomed isn't all Resident Evil, which was a poor metaphor on my part, but I used to be in the business of cleaning up after this stuff and you don't want it above a restaraunt even if it's a million miles from Resident Evil. Manufacturing, even of innocuous little devices, involves all kinds of hazardous chemicals. Maybe 350 days out of the year they don't need the special solvent, but sometimes they do. So if they can't ever use their special solvent, they're not going to locate here.

 

If we're going to go after biomed, let's do it. This isn't the way to do it. High end research likes to be off on its own... it's the one instance where suburban style segregated land use really makes sense. There are also some intellectual property issues bearing on this which I don't want to get into, but trust me not much of this biomed stuff is going on top of a restaraunt. It just isn't a nutritious part of your mixed-use breakfast.

 

The entire plan we're discussing, if that's the plan, is bunk. Are they attempting to plan "biomedical cluster" with residents scattered throughout, and not have a single hazmat consultant at the table? I don't think that's wise, and I don't think the end result will have many takers on the commercial or residential ends.

 

I'm in the area of biomedical/chemical research and am familiar with all the regulations, but I have to say I don't really understand why you think they have to be segregated (not trying to pick a fight here).  As long as food for sale isn't transported in the same elevator or what not as lab stuff, there isn't a problem.  As long as the organic chemistry or infectious diseases labs are on the top floor, there's no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the area of biomedical/chemical research and am familiar with all the regulations, but I have to say I don't really understand why you think they have to be segregated (not trying to pick a fight here).  As long as food for sale isn't transported in the same elevator or what not as lab stuff, there isn't a problem.  As long as the organic chemistry or infectious diseases labs are on the top floor, there's no problem.

 

Not trying to fight, but do you do your biochemical research in a residential building?  And that part about "as long as food for sale isn't..." comes into play more than you'd think.  A lot more than you'd think.  In fact, you don't even want to think about it. 

 

All I'm saying is that these two goals we have, for the exact same place, aren't 100% compatible.  I'm not claiming they're 100% in-compatible, I'm claiming there's enough of an issue there that... given the context... we should reconsider these plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the area of biomedical/chemical research and am familiar with all the regulations, but I have to say I don't really understand why you think they have to be segregated (not trying to pick a fight here). As long as food for sale isn't transported in the same elevator or what not as lab stuff, there isn't a problem. As long as the organic chemistry or infectious diseases labs are on the top floor, there's no problem.

 

Not trying to fight, but do you do your biochemical research in a residential building? And that part about "as long as food for sale isn't..." comes into play more than you'd think. A lot more than you'd think. In fact, you don't even want to think about it.

 

All I'm saying is that these two goals we have, for the exact same place, aren't 100% compatible. I'm not claiming they're 100% in-compatible, I'm claiming there's enough of an issue there that... given the context... we should reconsider these plans.

 

I get what you're saying, and no, I don't live in the building I work in (although as a graduate student, that's debatable :().  However, very sick hospital patients sleep just across the street from my building.  My dorm in undergrad was just across the Adelbert bridge.  Even if a restaurant and a lab aren't in exactly the same building, they can co-exist in a small area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CHN Wins State Funding for 3 Affordable Housing Projects

 

On July 2nd, the Ohio Housing Finance Agency announced tax credit awards for 3 CHN affordable housing projects--the maximum number of awards to a single developer allowed by the State. The projects represent 138 affordable housing units for low-income families, chronically homeless individuals and young women aging out of foster care. The announcements included 39 tax credit awards statewide.

 

CHN funded projects include:

 

Cleveland Green Homes II — 45 single-family homes

CHN will acquire vacant, abandoned homes in Cleveland’s six Strategic Investment Initiative areas, renovating the homes using Green Communities standards adopted by Enterprise Community Partners. Three of the 45 homes will be new, fully handicap-accessible homes. Combined with two projects that received Tax Credits last year (Cleveland Green Homes and Cleveland Green Homes East) these projects will add a total of 121 affordable, single-family green homes to CHN’s Lease Purchase portfolio. The Lease Purchase program allows families who could not otherwise achieve homeownership to lease a home at an affordable rate with the option to purchase after 15 years of responsible residency.  

The State’s funding announcement of Emerald Alliance V (CHN’s fifth permanent supportive housing project located at 7515 Euclid Avenue), marks a combined investment of $25 million dollars by CHN in this once blighted section of Euclid Avenue.

 

Emerald Alliance V – 70 apartments for chronically homeless

CHN was also awarded Tax Credits to build a 70-unit apartment building at 7515 Euclid Avenue for chronically homeless individuals. Part of Cuyahoga County’s Housing First Initiative, the project represents CHN’s fifth permanent supportive housing project in Cleveland done in collaboration with experienced partners EDEN, Inc. and Mental Health Services. Based on national best-practice models, Housing First seeks to end long-term chronic homelessness among single individuals. The model is demonstrating success both nationally and locally. The local model has seen just 1% of Housing First residents return to homelessness.

 

The State’s funding announcement of Emerald Alliance V (CHN’s fifth permanent supportive housing project located at 7515 Euclid Avenue), marks a combined investment of $25 million dollars by CHN in this once blighted section of Euclid Avenue.

 

Independence Place — 23 apartments for homeless youth

A partnership with the YWCA will allow CHN to develop permanent supportive housing for young women aging out of foster care. Twenty three units will be developed on the second floor of the YWCA building on Prospect Avenue near East 40th. The YWCA is the owner and manager while CHN is the developer and supervising property manager.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emerald Alliance V – 70 apartments for chronically homeless

 

The State’s funding announcement of Emerald Alliance V (CHN’s fifth permanent supportive housing project located at 7515 Euclid Avenue), marks a combined investment of $25 million dollars by CHN in this once blighted section of Euclid Avenue.

 

 

Boy.... we owe the State a solid for fixing the 'blight' with this project.  It should spur other meaningful investment in the area.  Plus, the BRT will efficiently shuttle the panhandlers to and from public square and other parts of downtown.  I see nothing but positives.  :drunk: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hts44121, could not agree more. Absolutely the worst possible development to go there. I'm not going to argue that you need to have these sorts of services, but you also need to protect your public investment. CHN has property on Chester, a block away from the Health Line. There is absolutely no reason to build this on Euclid other than to satisfy some misconceived notion of status for the people in charge of CHN's mission.

 

The City should get involved and basically not allow this kind of development on the Euclid Corridor. Of course, the City will probably is pushing for it, so whatever. All I can do is shake my head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emerald Alliance V 70 apartments for chronically homeless

 

The States funding announcement of Emerald Alliance V (CHNs fifth permanent supportive housing project located at 7515 Euclid Avenue), marks a combined investment of $25 million dollars by CHN in this once blighted section of Euclid Avenue.

 

 

Boy.... we owe the State a solid for fixing the 'blight' with this project. It should spur other meaningful investment in the area. Plus, the BRT will efficiently shuttle the panhandlers to and from public square and other parts of downtown. I see nothing but positives.   :drunk:

 

At first I thought 327 was over-reacting when he went off about the psychiatric hospital on 55th, but that, with this? Oy vey. Just what you want to re-establish the former grandeur of Cleveland's primary corridor btwn UC and downtown. Methodone clinic anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I moved this over from the random cleveland developments as these are all located in midotwn.

 

I think everyone is in agreement that this is a putrid use of Euclid Avenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If my addition is correct, the housing mentioned here only equates to about 150 new low-income residents in the area.  If this is drawn in contrast to other proposed development, I think everyone is over-reacting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If my addition is correct, the housing mentioned here only equates to about 150 new low-income residents in the area.  If this is drawn in contrast to other proposed development, I think everyone is over-reacting. 

 

The shear number of low income residents not withstanding, my issue is the stigma this will put on potential business in the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all fairness, I think most of these permanent supportive housing projects have been well managed.  But this is an awful lot to see in one area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't there already low income housing in Cleveland? Maybe I don't understand the difference, but it would seem to me that market forces in Cleveland have created a good deal of low and moderate income options for housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Yes, there is an abundance of low income housing around this area, which is why we are so heated over this decision.  Why the FRACK put this on Euclid?  The same Euclid we just spent $400 million tax dollars on?  The same Euclid with so much potential, including in Midtown?

 

I hate this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

isn't there already low income housing in Cleveland? Maybe I don't understand the difference, but it would seem to me that market forces in Cleveland have created a good deal of low and moderate income options for housing.

 

Yes, there is.  A Lot, too.  The permanent supportive housing model that is being discussed here goes beyond just being low income housing, though.  It is a model of housing that is meant to provide people who have been chronically homeless with a stable housing situation first and foremost, and access to social services and the rest later.  I really like the model.  I wish it wasn't being placed along Euclid Ave, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes, there is.  A Lot, too.  The permanent supportive housing model that is being discussed here goes beyond just being low income housing, though.  It is a model of housing that is meant to provide people who have been chronically homeless with a stable housing situation first and foremost, and access to social services and the rest later.  I really like the model.  I wish it wasn't being placed along Euclid Ave, however."

 

I agree, nice model, bad location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the council rep for Midtown?

 

Midtown is part of four different wards.  The councilpeople are: Joe Cimperman, Phyllis Cleveland, T.J. Dow, and Mamie Mitchell.  Cimperman's district does not go far enough east to touch the proposed developments on Euclid.  He is, however, the city council representative on the Planning Commission, and thus still worth contacting about this.  I've written all four.  Only Cimperman responded (his response was to contact the other three).  Anyone who wants the letter I sent is more than welcome to it.  Just PM me and I'll send it to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand the frustration here ... The number of affordable housing units in the Gordon Square Arts District exceeds the numbers here; many of those units are directly over the storefronts, and development there seems to be anything but stigmatized.

 

As X noted, this is a model that actually provides a lot of additional support services and transitioning individuals out of poverty; this is not Caprini Green going up on Euclid. This is 70 units for single people ... 70 residents are going to destroy development opportunities along Euclid? I know I'll probably get lynched, but I think this is a potentially good location for this type of project. Access to reliable frequent mass transit service that connects the two largest employment centers in town seems like a no-brainer when trying to transition people out of extreme poverty. The program already boasts a 99% success rate in moving people permanently out of homelessness; I can only think that access to mass transit improves the odds for these people. From a social services perspective, I think it's actually pretty spot-on.

 

From a community development standpoint, I can't really say what adverse impact this will have on the corridor. You guys could be absolutely right. But the sheer VOLUME of frontage along Euclid that needs to be filled leads me to believe that this is not going to hamper the overall development of the corridor. Even if you had the rather robust development demand going on downtown, without a credit crunch or global financial crisis, and even if you focused exclusively on renovating buildings and filling gaps between Public Square and E. 55th Street, you're looking at years and years of work ... I don't think 20 years would be out of the question. Extend that development effort to the border of East Cleveland ... we have a TON of space to play with.

 

The fact is, no one has really been clamoring for development opportunities between E. 55th and the E. 70s. And I can't imagine that fallow lots and crumbling factories were really going to attract developers in a way that new housing (albeit low-income) and a major healthcare institution (albeit in the over-stigmatized field of mental health) can't. Increased ridership, eyes on the street, daytime and evening population in a currently largely abandoned swath of land ... what am I missing?

 

I think we should focus our efforts more on demanding quality design standards for the project and ongoing upkeep of the corridor. To me, advocating zoning conformity, inclusion of ground-level retail, avoidance of pointless dead spaces, an outright ban on surface parking lots fronting the street, etc ... these seem more reasonable arguments to make. Going in with guns blazing about why these projects are horrible for Euclid may just ring shrill for council leaders who've been around for DECADES where few wanted to develop anything in this area.

 

Final point, to suggest that mental health and transitional housing services are good things but should be tucked away where they won't offend anyone with money ... well, that strikes me as elitist. Not trying to name-call here, and I recognize people's very valid concerns, but I do think we need to stop and think about who we're developing this corridor FOR ... a representative population of the city of Cleveland or a wealthy sliver of population who may be interested in living here in a decade or so.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact is, no one has really been clamoring for development opportunities between E. 55th and the E. 70s.

 

 

I can say with reasonable certainty this is not true. There have been more than a few companies and developers looking at this area.

 

I don't think people are saying either service should be tucked away. In fact, Chester is a block away, has a bus line and could easily accommodate the housing. The Mental Health facility seems like a shame if only because the property represents one of the few significant pieces of land that has been amassed inside the city (by the CDC) and we are turning it over to the County instead of allowing private investment dollars to go there. (and there have been attempts by bio-tech companies to go there).

 

What is really frustrating to me is that you have a ton of (federal)tax dollars going into the Euclid Corridor project that will now have been spent in order to create more (city and county) tax dollar spending on service providers. At some point someone is going to have to make some money to sustain these types of things as well as convince somebody who has a salary to live in the city in order to tax them to pay for these types of things.  However, nobody who is running a business will be too excited about putting their business next to a shelter for the terminally homeless and my guess is that people looking to move into the city will now have more reason to avoid this area as a possible landing spot than they did in the past, despite the convenience of being located on the Health Line.

 

If I'm a Case Student I'm sticking it out on the Hill instead of heading closer to downtown (thus spending my parent's money in Cleveland Heights rather than Cleveland proper).

 

Finally, I don't think it's about filling the gap between Public Sqr and E. 55th. You have University Circle and CSU as two potential building blocks now connected the Euclid corridor project. Getting Case Students and CSU students to co-mingle with the Clinic, downtown and U.C. would do a good deal more than trying to get companies from downtown to spread out onto the Euclid (companies that tend to think Cleveland stops at e.13th anyway)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I would certainly like to know which developers and tech firms have been looking to do something in midtown.  Could you be specific and also let us know how serious each developer was and what obstacles prevented them from going forward (other than the credit crunch).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact is, no one has really been clamoring for development opportunities between E. 55th and the E. 70s.

 

 

I can say with reasonable certainty this is not true. There have been more than a few companies and developers looking at this area.

 

I don't think people are saying either service should be tucked away. In fact, Chester is a block away, has a bus line and could easily accommodate the housing. The Mental Health facility seems like a shame if only because the property represents one of the few significant pieces of land that has been amassed inside the city (by the CDC) and we are turning it over to the County instead of allowing private investment dollars to go there. (and there have been attempts by bio-tech companies to go there).

 

What is really frustrating to me is that you have a ton of (federal)tax dollars going into the Euclid Corridor project that will now have been spent in order to create more (city and county) tax dollar spending on service providers. At some point someone is going to have to make some money to sustain these types of things as well as convince somebody who has a salary to live in the city in order to tax them to pay for these types of things.  However, nobody who is running a business will be too excited about putting their business next to a shelter for the terminally homeless and my guess is that people looking to move into the city will now have more reason to avoid this area as a possible landing spot than they did in the past, despite the convenience of being located on the Health Line.

 

If I'm a Case Student I'm sticking it out on the Hill instead of heading closer to downtown (thus spending my parent's money in Cleveland Heights rather than Cleveland proper).

 

Finally, I don't think it's about filling the gap between Public Sqr and E. 55th. You have University Circle and CSU as two potential building blocks now connected the Euclid corridor project. Getting Case Students and CSU students to co-mingle with the Clinic, downtown and U.C. would do a good deal more than trying to get companies from downtown to spread out onto the Euclid (companies that tend to think Cleveland stops at e.13th anyway)

 

I think you're underestimating you people.  They are a bit more "gritty" than we assume they are.  Not everyone wants to live in the 'burbs.

 

I've been looking at homes in Hough and I've seen more than my share of young, white, Asian, gay, young families (regardless of race) out looking at homes.  Some are serious as I've seen peeps with contractors sizing up homes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I would certainly like to know which developers and tech firms have been looking to do something in midtown. Could you be specific and also let us know how serious each developer was and what obstacles prevented them from going forward (other than the credit crunch).

 

Are you asking for a post or a research project?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like these hundred units, combined with a too-small aquarium, are the two things that will finally reduce Cleveland to rubble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like these hundred units, combined with a too-small aquarium, are the two things that will finally reduce Cleveland to rubble. 

 

Why just why??  What value does this post add?

 

How many off topic speeches do we need to have? Sheesh!  I feel like (a taller) MayDay today! :whip:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you make some very good points, weepinwillow, and sorry if I understated development interest in that stretch. I realize that MidTown has done a good job of focusing attention on the neighborhood and drawing in interest for business relocation. That should not be underestimated, and I think we will see major holes plugged within that stretch, although I still believe, best-case scenario, we're looking at 10 years before it starts to feel like a wholly continuous corridor.

 

Just two notes, and beyond that I more or less agree. First, I cannot for one imagine that the area between E. 55 and the Clinic are going to be the common meeting ground of Case and CSU students anytime soon. I could be absolutely wrong, and I would definitely love to see something mixed-use and student-oriented somewhere in that area, but with so many gaps along the streetscape, I doubt that the East 60s are going to be at the top of the list for a development of that sort, at least not yet. I just can't imagine Case students who choose Cedar Fairmount or Coventry over University Circle would be willing to move down to the East 60s or 70s unless the development was absolutely spectacular. At least not yet.

 

I would be more inclined to focus our resources to build out residential in the 100s and 110s to try to lure kids down the hill and in the 20s and 30s to build the scant residential base of Cleveland State (and hopefully to fill the ugly surface lots on Prospect in the 30s to shore up the beautiful existing housing stock there). After that, the next most obvious connector to me would be to plug the upper 40s and lower 50s with mixed-use retail and residential and rehab some of the existing building stock; you could do a spectacular, HUGE-scaled project in a one-block radius from the Agora alone. Whatever we do, it makes sense to make it asset-based, and I am not sure if I see the assets that we would be building from in the East 60s or 70s.

 

Second, do keep in mind that this is assisted living, not a shelter. This is not going to look 2100 Lakeside nor like Riverside or Lakeside. This type of development is usually not fancy, but the ones that have been set up in Cleveland have at the very least looked more like traditional apartment complexes than shelters or "projects" (check out http://www.socfdncleveland.org/OurFocusAreas/SupportiveHousing/HousingFirst/tabid/310/Default.aspx and http://www.edeninc.org/housingfirst.html).

 

I work next to one downtown (1850 Superior), and it's actually a really cute building that was recently renovated. I don't think the average Clevelander knows that these are low-income facilities at all (let alone the suburbanites), so I don't think they defacto stigmatize a neighborhood (I certainly don't think the Famicos building is adversely impacting either the Avenue District or the Quarter).

 

That's why I think design standards are key; advocating that they conform to existing zoning regulations and create some kind of ground-floor retail could be pivotal in how a passing suburbanite views them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like these hundred units, combined with a too-small aquarium, are the two things that will finally reduce Cleveland to rubble.

 

Boy, it's a good thing you don't succumb to hyperbole.


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I personally am also still unsure about all these new "plans" for midtown, I have to say that I didn't know the 1850 Superior building was low-income housing, and I live 4 blocks away!  I mean, my neighborhood is the PERFECT example of mixed income housing.  We've got our townhomes, the Reserve Square market-rate apartments, St. Clair place apartments (Section 8, correct?) the CMHA Bohn Tower, and the transitional homeless shelter (still not sure quite what the definition of it is) near E. 15th and Superior.  I guess perhaps we'd all be more comfortable with these midtown plans if there were some market-rate real estate announced as well, but remember, the CMHA and Section 8 housing was in my 'hood way before I was!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Point taken (and a good one at that!). 

 

We all want to see this city succeed.  We all want the best options for future residents and businesses along the Corridor.  However, my biggest fear about the developments under scrutiny (by us) is that they will hinder the future growth of the area.  With the investment put in by the taxpayers into this corridor, it should be able to be enjoyed by all, and not just the affluent.  But will these developments stifle future developments that have not even come to the table for the corridor yet?  I guess only time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like these hundred units, combined with a too-small aquarium, are the two things that will finally reduce Cleveland to rubble. 

 

Boy, it's a good thing you don't succumb to hyperbole.

 

Or you to dry wit. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I would certainly like to know which developers and tech firms have been looking to do something in midtown. Could you be specific and also let us know how serious each developer was and what obstacles prevented them from going forward (other than the credit crunch).

 

I think this is better left to MidTown people to discuss, as I don't know what is common knowledge, and what was more underwraps. I can think of two inkling's of projects one dealing with the piece of land on the other side of the bridge that would have been health oriented and another one that could have been housing or office close to where Billie Lawless' talking chicken was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand the frustration here ... The number of affordable housing units in the Gordon Square Arts District exceeds the numbers here; many of those units are directly over the storefronts, and development there seems to be anything but stigmatized.

 

As X noted, this is a model that actually provides a lot of additional support services and transitioning individuals out of poverty; this is not Caprini Green going up on Euclid. This is 70 units for single people ... 70 residents are going to destroy development opportunities along Euclid? I know I'll probably get lynched, but I think this is a potentially good location for this type of project. Access to reliable frequent mass transit service that connects the two largest employment centers in town seems like a no-brainer when trying to transition people out of extreme poverty. The program already boasts a 99% success rate in moving people permanently out of homelessness; I can only think that access to mass transit improves the odds for these people. From a social services perspective, I think it's actually pretty spot-on.

 

From a community development standpoint, I can't really say what adverse impact this will have on the corridor. You guys could be absolutely right. But the sheer VOLUME of frontage along Euclid that needs to be filled leads me to believe that this is not going to hamper the overall development of the corridor. Even if you had the rather robust development demand going on downtown, without a credit crunch or global financial crisis, and even if you focused exclusively on renovating buildings and filling gaps between Public Square and E. 55th Street, you're looking at years and years of work ... I don't think 20 years would be out of the question. Extend that development effort to the border of East Cleveland ... we have a TON of space to play with.

 

The fact is, no one has really been clamoring for development opportunities between E. 55th and the E. 70s. And I can't imagine that fallow lots and crumbling factories were really going to attract developers in a way that new housing (albeit low-income) and a major healthcare institution (albeit in the over-stigmatized field of mental health) can't. Increased ridership, eyes on the street, daytime and evening population in a currently largely abandoned swath of land ... what am I missing?

 

I think we should focus our efforts more on demanding quality design standards for the project and ongoing upkeep of the corridor. To me, advocating zoning conformity, inclusion of ground-level retail, avoidance of pointless dead spaces, an outright ban on surface parking lots fronting the street, etc ... these seem more reasonable arguments to make. Going in with guns blazing about why these projects are horrible for Euclid may just ring shrill for council leaders who've been around for DECADES where few wanted to develop anything in this area.

 

Final point, to suggest that mental health and transitional housing services are good things but should be tucked away where they won't offend anyone with money ... well, that strikes me as elitist. Not trying to name-call here, and I recognize people's very valid concerns, but I do think we need to stop and think about who we're developing this corridor FOR ... a representative population of the city of Cleveland or a wealthy sliver of population who may be interested in living here in a decade or so.

 

 

 

 

You make several very good points I can agree with....However....Since when has wanting Cleveland's grand and main....and very storied avenue to have something of the best quality in design and what it offers to promote a new population in that area......become about being elitist?

 

It seems that society is soooooooo used to shooting for way below zero these days, that when someone promotes ideas or values that are AT or a little above zero, say ten degrees above....they're accused of being an 'elitist'  It is as though we have lowered standards or expectations on everything in ever way..and when they get back to average...  Someone thinks it is snobbish. My how complacency helps foster that attitude.

 

The fact is, you cannot deny the stigma attached to some of the projects proposed in this area. And, while there is a need for these institutions, they do not need to be located on what will beacon as our main thoroughfare to the whole world.

 

Do we want to have that part of Euclid  be a tribute to societal dysfunctional treatment? There is no nobility in boasting such social failure. But, as for being 'elite' Euclid was once one of the richest avenues in the world...  Simply wishing some institutions be located just off the main avenue is hardly being elitist. To do other than the best this showcase avenue can be, is insulting to the grand history of the avenue. There is nothing wrong with wanting to aspire for something more for this avenue...more than mediocrity.

 

What next? Wal-Mart, Lowes, and Taco Bell parked right next door to Severance!  HALL, that is....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think demanding good design is elitist ... particularly when that design has the interest of a cross-section of society in mind (thinking of the "Design for the Other 90%" concept). But there is a big difference between demanding good design and outright protesting particular lot uses. Everyone here is entitled to their personal opinions about best use and about best location for the proposed projects. But saying "Transitional housing doesn't belong on Euclid Avenue period" is not the same as saying "Said housing should front the sidewalk and be between 5 and 7 stories in height", etc. And yes, sorry, but I do think it's elitist to say, yes, we want a row of million-dollar townhomes here, but no, all people with mental health issues and who are homeless, go directly to Cedar Avenue, do not pass Go. I absolutely understand your points, and maybe you're right that your views are just in the best interest of the corridor ... but you can be right and still be elitist :)

 

Frankly, I don't want another Millionaire's Row. The most successful nabes in Cleveland have wide income distributions, with wealthy people living in close proximity to people of VERY limited means, and that lack of pretention is one of the things I love about this city. The last decade has seen a steady investment in places in downtown, Tremont, Ohio City and Detroit Shoreway, despite the abundance of public housing projects, social service organizations and low-income populations; meanwhile, Bratenahl lost more than 5% of its population. I'm not saying that the presence of disadvantaged populations has made them more desirable. But I am saying that an area can still be desirable even with these residents, and that the absence of these residents hardly ensures success for the corridor. Personally, I would rather show off a main street that welcomes everyone, regardless of their background, than to hold land fallow with a dream of creating a Magnificent Mile or recreating a Millionaire's Row.

 

As for being worried about design, I am too. We should definitely be demanding the utmost design standards possible, both to begin to build a contiguous corridor of mixed uses AND so that all residents, employees, etc., along Euclid Avenue enjoy the maximum benefit they can from the street and from other tenants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's said they want a Millionaire's Row?  It's a good strawman, but not an argument anyone has made.  People are saying that it is unlikely that we will have a the kind of neighborhood you say you want, one with a wide distribution of incomes, if we start with a series of low income housing projects and a mental health facility.  You may not agree, fine, but don't misrepresent what people are saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I want a millionaire's row. I agree that having a mix of income levels living in close proximity works better than sectioning off whole groups, I just don't think wanting some groups off the Euclid Corridor is out of bounds. In an ideal world I guess the market takes care of this, but perhaps we don't have that kind of luxury yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...