Jump to content
FerrariEnzo

Cleveland: Little Italy: Development and News

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, skiwest said:

And how about the old Singer Steel property across the street.  Are there any re-development plans in the works?   

 

There was, but not for a long time. This was the Random Road Business Center from 2006.....

Little Italy-2066 Random Rd Business Ctr.jpg

  • Like 2

"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'd love for them to be buried everywhere. But aren't wild above ground power lines a trademarked aesthetic of the neighborhood? Without them and the vinyl siding, it just wouldn't be Little Italy. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow I don't associate "Little Italy"-type neighborhoods in various cities with having distinctive streetlights....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Building permit was filed today for 12501 Mayfield. As always with Cleveland permits, details are minimal. It's about opening up a "Borgata Bar." I can't find anymore info on what that is, but I guess Little Italy is getting another bar.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've been working off and on in the gelato space on Mayfield. Most recent addition was a Vespa parked inside the front corner a few days back.

 

In other news, someone was painting in the "Blue Sky Brews" – otherwise slow progress in the old Rising Star space at Cornell & Murray Hill.

 

I'll add 12501 to my watch list...

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this was appealed? So this appears to be a first hearing? Anyone know what happened (it was earlier today)?

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2020/crr01-13-2020.pdf

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

JANUARY 13, 2019

 

9:30 Calendar No. 19-300:

2193 Cornell Rd

Ward 6 Blaine A. Griffin 38 Notices

 

Hemingway Development, prospective purchaser, (owners: Minnillo Family Partners, Mike Iammarino Investment Properties and Carmen Petrello) proposes to construct a new three story, 44 unit apartment building on five parcels to be consolidated in a C1 Multi-Family Residential Zoning District. The applicant appeals for relief from the strict application of the following sections of the Cleveland Codified Ordinances: 1. Section 357.06(a) which states that a 26' front yard setback is required and 13 feet setback are proposed. 2. Section 357.08(b) states that a 44 foot rear yard setback is required; 14 feet are proposed. 3. Section 357.09(b)(2)(D) which states that required a 7 foot minimum interior side yard from property line is required and 0 is proposed. A 14 foot aggregate is required and 1.5 foot aggregate is proposed. And, a 10 foot minimum distance from adjacent building is required and 7 feet are proposed. 4. Sections 353.01 & 353.02 which state that a height of 35 feet is permitted and 39 feet 7 inches are proposed. 5. Section 355.04 which states that the maximum gross floor area of a residential building in a "C" area district is limited to ½ the total lot area or in this case 17,281 square feet are permitted and 58,857 square feet are proposed. (Filed November 22, 2019)


"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
2 hours ago, KJP said:

I thought this was appealed? So this appears to be a first hearing? Anyone know what happened (it was earlier today)?

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2020/crr01-13-2020.pdf

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

JANUARY 13, 2019

 

9:30 Calendar No. 19-300:

2193 Cornell Rd

Ward 6 Blaine A. Griffin 38 Notices

 

Hemingway Development, prospective purchaser, (owners: Minnillo Family Partners, Mike Iammarino Investment Properties and Carmen Petrello) proposes to construct a new three story, 44 unit apartment building on five parcels to be consolidated in a C1 Multi-Family Residential Zoning District. The applicant appeals for relief from the strict application of the following sections of the Cleveland Codified Ordinances: 1. Section 357.06(a) which states that a 26' front yard setback is required and 13 feet setback are proposed. 2. Section 357.08(b) states that a 44 foot rear yard setback is required; 14 feet are proposed. 3. Section 357.09(b)(2)(D) which states that required a 7 foot minimum interior side yard from property line is required and 0 is proposed. A 14 foot aggregate is required and 1.5 foot aggregate is proposed. And, a 10 foot minimum distance from adjacent building is required and 7 feet are proposed. 4. Sections 353.01 & 353.02 which state that a height of 35 feet is permitted and 39 feet 7 inches are proposed. 5. Section 355.04 which states that the maximum gross floor area of a residential building in a "C" area district is limited to ½ the total lot area or in this case 17,281 square feet are permitted and 58,857 square feet are proposed. (Filed November 22, 2019)

Okay here is my best guess as to what is going on and if I am correct it is good news for us and bad news for the Little Italy NIMBYS.  Again this is just speculation on my part.

 

First my backstory rant.  I have been trying to determine for a couple of months with no success what happen at the November 11, 2019 Board of Zoning Appeals hearing on this project.  If everyone recalls, after being rejected by Landmarks last spring with lots of city opposition the developer came back with a shorter revised plan and it was eventually approved by Landmark.  However, some next door NIMBYS filed an appeal of the approval and the Board of Zoning Appeals heard that appeal on November 11.  I have been asking over and over on the forum (as well as conducting internet searches and even calling the Board) what happen at the hearing (mostly in this thread but most recently a few days ago in response to a post in the Ohio City thread, even though it was technically off topic) and to my chagrin, my repeated questions have been ignored by forum members.  This has left me bitter and hateful towards you all but therapy is helping me a lot.🙂

 

In any event, @KJP post may shed some light.  If I recall correctly, even if Hemingway won the appeal of the Landmarks decision they still had to come back to the city to secure numerous zoning variances in order for the project to move forward.  According to the above the application was filed a November 22, 2019, a couple of weeks after the November 11 Landmark appeal hearing.  This leads me to believe that Hemingway actually won the appeal or they would not be moving forward with the variance application which apparently was heard today.

 

So if I am right (anybody know for sure?) yeah for our team.  And to answer @KJP question, I have no idea what happen at the today's hearing and I am clearly the wrong person to ask as I am still trying to find out what happen more than two months ago.

Edited by Htsguy
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been following this issue through Little Italy Facebook pages but nothing was posted today so that could mean one of two things; the appeal was denied and the developers may proceed or the decision will not be made for a few days. I'll post if anything else appears.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, akronurban1 said:

I've been following this issue through Little Italy Facebook pages but nothing was posted today so that could mean one of two things; the appeal was denied and the developers may proceed or the decision will not be made for a few days. I'll post if anything else appears.

Hero.  Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, akronurban1 said:

I've been following this issue through Little Italy Facebook pages but nothing was posted today so that could mean one of two things; the appeal was denied and the developers may proceed or the decision will not be made for a few days. I'll post if anything else appears.

It was postponed. It should return in February.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Old Not Obsolete said:

It was postponed. It should return in February.

 

😖🤮


"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
59 minutes ago, Old Not Obsolete said:

It was postponed. It should return in February.

I hope this is not a bad sign.  I am concerned the NIMBYS are stirring up the pot again with the councilman and CDC (I imagine at this point they are finally on board with the project).  Even if the NIMBYS are going forward without such support, I imagine they are opposing the variances now that they lost (at least I think they lost) their Landmark appeal.

Edited by Htsguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, akronurban1 said:

I've been following this issue through Little Italy Facebook pages but nothing was posted today so that could mean one of two things; the appeal was denied and the developers may proceed or the decision will not be made for a few days. I'll post if anything else appears.

How does Michael Panzica leaving Hemingway Development  affect the project? It seemed to be his baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why we didn't hear anything from the Jan. 13 meeting -- because action on this agenda item was postponed to Feb. 3.....

 

Board of Zoning Appeals

FEBRUARY 3, 2020

 

POSTPONED FROM JANUARY 13, 2020

 

9:30 Calendar No. 19-300:

2193 Cornell Rd

Ward 6 Blaine A. Griffin 38 Notices

 

Hemingway Development, prospective purchaser, (owners: Minnillo Family Partners, Mike Iammarino Investment Properties and Carmen Petrello) proposes to construct a new three story, 44 unit apartment building on five parcels to be consolidated in a C1 Multi-Family Residential Zoning District. The applicant appeals for relief from the strict application of the following sections of the Cleveland Codified Ordinances: 1. Section 357.08(b) states that depth of a rear yard in a Residence District shall not be less than 15% of the depth of the lot. In this case a 43 foot rear yard is required and a rear yard of 10 feet for the building and 21 feet 4 inches from the top floor is proposed. 2. Section 355.04 which states that the maximum gross floor area of a residential building in a "C" area district is limited to ½ the total lot area or in this case 17,281 square feet are permitted and 60,126 square feet are proposed. (Filed November 22, 2019-No Testimony)

FIRST POSTPONEMENT MADE AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPELLANT TO ALLOW FOR TIME TO RESPOND TO FRONT SETBACK ISSUE. REVISED DRAWINGS WERE RECEIVED ON JANUARY 15, 2020 WHICH ELIMINATED FRONT YARD SETBACK, INTERIOR SIDE YARD, AND HEIGHT VARIANCES PER FINAL NOTICE OF NONCONFORMANCE ISSUED JANUARY 21, 2020

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/bza/agenda/2020/crr02-03-2020.pdf


"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
On 1/28/2020 at 9:58 AM, BLDCLE said:

There was a meeting last night in Little Italy regarding this project.

 

Apparently there's still some vocal opposition to this project. So I strongly encourage all of you who live/work/study in this area to come to the BZA meeting this Monday to ask the board for its support of this project (preferably the earlier, larger version!!). 

  • Like 2

"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
10 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Apparently there's still some vocal opposition to this project. So I strongly encourage all of you who live/work/study in this area to come to the BZA meeting this Monday to ask the board for its support of this project (preferably the earlier, larger version!!). 

I haven't voiced an opinion either way, but I would encourage anyone for or against it to go to the BZA meeting. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 1920 census, Little Italy (census tract R-8) had a population of 8,003. 

According to a CSU study, Little Italy had a 2010 population of 2,081.

Can somebody going to the BZA meeting tell the NIMBYs that we need to restore Little Italy's historic character by bringing back density?

  • Like 7
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frmr CLEder said:

There may be concerns that "bringing back density" will not mean bringing back people of Italian decent.

Do these NIMBYs also realize that Little Italy barely has any Italian Americans living in it as well? If they're so worried about Italian Americans living in Little Italy, maybe their friends shouldn't have high tailed it out to Lyndhurst, Mayfield Heights, and now Geauga County

Edited by AsDustinFoxWouldSay
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main voice of opposition in the TV5 story on Washington Place Apartments came from a guy around the corner who bought a third floor new condo overlooking a smaller structure from the same vertical height line as Washington Place requiring the same zoning set backs. It's "Do as I say, not as I do."

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Poison 1

"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

Big difference is that Little Italy is next to Ohio's fourth-largest employment center that consistently adds jobs at rates above the national average.

 

So there are two principal options currently available to handle this -- either build housing within biking/walking distance of it or suffer more car traffic.

  • Like 6

"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

 

  • Like 17
  • Love 2
  • Thanks 1

"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

So do  we see the NIMBYs appealing to Common Pleas Court in connection with this project?  Lawyers are not cheap.  It is put up or shut time for them.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Lort! Is Carol Johnson still around? 😮  She was a long timer back when I used to sit in on BoZa hearings at the City of Cleveland in the 90s! 
(Have you ever met someone who smiled, but only with their mouth because their eyes were focused on something else.)

 

I do wonder about her justification for not approving those variances.

Edited by ExPatClevGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, KJP said:

 

The best thing about this development is the proposed renovation of three buildings on Murray Hill Road in conjunction with the construction of the apartment building.  I truly hope this is done contemporaneously with the apartments rather than a Phase 2.  Even worse, I hope the renovations are not nixed altogether due to cost.  For some reason this element of the development does not seem to be touted as much.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Centric (272 units), One University Circle (276 units), La Collina (32 units + 10,000 sqft of retail), all still having vacancies. Uptown phase 3(49 units), Mayfield Station(45 units), Top of the Hill(275 units) all being built, is there still a demand for more? Washington Inn (45 units) and Infinium (133) units?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BLDCLE said:

With Centric (272 units), One University Circle (276 units), La Collina (32 units + 10,000 sqft of retail), all still having vacancies. Uptown phase 3(49 units), Mayfield Station(45 units), Top of the Hill(275 units) all being built, is there still a demand for more? Washington Inn (45 units) and Infinium (133) units?

Add those together and it’s a minute fraction of workers/students in UC. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BLDCLE said:

With Centric (272 units), One University Circle (276 units), La Collina (32 units + 10,000 sqft of retail), all still having vacancies. Uptown phase 3(49 units), Mayfield Station(45 units), Top of the Hill(275 units) all being built, is there still a demand for more? Washington Inn (45 units) and Infinium (133) units?

 

 I guess my answer is you gotta build for the future to keep up with all the projections. 

 

Case Western Reserve has grown by over 2,000 students in the past 15 years (plus I'm sure an equal percentage increase in professors and staff).  Cleveland Clinic / UH continue to hire 100's if not 1000's more each year...IMO these two alone can fuel the needed housing expansion.  With all the other University Circle institutions (40+) inside this small area, I'd bet many others have seen some sort of growth or planned growth. 

 

Plus it's all being built near the intersection of public transit of the Red Line and Healthline, plenty of bike lanes, Opportunity Corridor under construction, etc

 

IMO it's literally being set up to be built properly in a smart, dense way. 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If your question is about Little Italy specifically, the growth seems to be going on directions in "Greater University Circle."   This isn't specific to Little Italy.

Edited by MuRrAy HiLL
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s funny how folks on this board always seem to imply the workers/students of UC are wondering around Homeless just waiting for new apartments to be built.  The increase in new apartments has begun to cause old housing stock not being rented.  Those landlords will have to either update their properties, lower their price or sell to developers.   It will be interesting to see how it plays out.  

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pigmeat said:

I think it’s funny how folks on this board always seem to imply the workers/students of UC are wondering around Homeless just waiting for new apartments to be built.  The increase in new apartments has begun to cause old housing stock not being rented.  Those landlords will have to either update their properties, lower their price or sell to developers.   It will be interesting to see how it plays out.  

 

@Pigmeat I think you hit the nail on the head here.  So many properties in Little Italy have been allowed to be chopped up and left to slowly degrade for decades and decades.  Most of these 120-year old wood frame houses absolutely NEED upgrades.  All these shiny new housing options are certainly putting pressure on the old guard to do something with these old houses.  Hopefully the answer is to remodel in order to compete. 

Edited by MuRrAy HiLL
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, San Francisco went through a similar period 40 years ago, with its aging Victorian stock.  Individual prospective home owners bought them cheap and rehabilitated them or developers snapped them up.  In a hot area, owners will need to either pony up for rehab/development or lose out; they will need to get on the train.  It's already left the station.

  • Like 6

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...