PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. Also, check your spam folder. *****

We are still having a lot of users try to log on before resetting your password. You will continue to get an error until you reset your password!!

Author Topic: Cleveland: Ohio City: Development and News  (Read 11474 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #90 on: September 23, 2005, 12:43:04 PM »
seriously, how many people live in "duck island" and how does this weigh in with the rest of the community?  I had the same question regarding the WSM merchants who were so vocal in opposing the Hicks Lot.  What it comes down to is the final recommendation of OCNW.  If they determine that the 4 or 5 (more or less) Duck Island residents at the meeting are either not representative of the whole of Duck Island and not representative of the whole of Ohio City, then they might just have to say "tough luck, this is for the good of the entire community."  This isn't eminent domain...this isn't a waste facility or a jail...it's HOUSING and it'll add "eyes on the street" and feet on the sidewalk and cash in the registers of local merchants.  Where's the harm in all that???

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #91 on: September 23, 2005, 03:39:19 PM »
That's why those of us living in OC or near west should e-mail OCNW with messages of support -- so they know not everyone is opposed to "density." (read: poor people)
sfointno@ohiocity.org

Offline buildingcincinnati

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 15773
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #92 on: October 01, 2005, 08:59:06 PM »
From the 9/29/05 PD:


CMHA plan for Ohio City development wins support
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Angela D. Chatman
Plain Dealer Reporter


The Ohio City Near West Development Corp. board of trustees voted Wednesday evening to support a revised mixed-income development proposed by public housing officials.

The board said the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority's project is consistent with the community development corporation's strategic plan...

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1127986597318330.xml&coll=2
« Last Edit: September 09, 2009, 02:25:41 PM by McCleveland »

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #93 on: October 02, 2005, 09:03:24 PM »
Ok, I agree that the Muni Lot needs to be home to hundreds of units of housing.  If the "tailgating" excuse holds ANY sway in City Hall, then I give up and admit that I will never understand this town....

However, this project was intended for the near west side and I feel like that's where it should end up!  I think the market will eventually (hopefully sooner than later) take care of sites like the Muni Lot and the old Riverview site, but I understand that at this point in time, subsidy might be necessary. 

On the other hand, I love the idea of extending the Avenue District north to the lake, while at the same time, I can only shake my head at the ineptitude of our efforts in the late 90s in losing the "Davenport Bluffs" to two suburban-style office buildings (WKYC & FBI) that will, for many years to come, serve as another barricade to northward development...

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #94 on: October 02, 2005, 10:08:36 PM »
At this stage in the game, it is starting to seem like people are just throwing out locations in desperation.  I would not be surprised if next week we hear about a site on stilts in Lake Erie.  I would hope that this project stays in Ohio City.  Something like this could change OC's status from Up and Coming to Established. 

I agree with MGD about the 'tailgating reference.  I am glad that we are keeping in mind the highest and best use.  I mean, 8 dates a year for tailgating should definetely take priority over housing. 

While I like the idea of connectivity, I would guess that it would be pretty expensive to raise the condo tower over the tracks.  If it is cost efffective, then by all means go for it.

Offline smackem81

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 395
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #95 on: October 02, 2005, 10:25:29 PM »
Conceptually I like the idea of a high rise over the tracks, so long as its cost feasable. Plop it down right in front of the FBI and the channel 3 news building. It would connect by eminint domaining some land to make e 13 extend down to the muni lot, and the waterfront line last stop.

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #96 on: October 02, 2005, 10:30:47 PM »
hmmm...now which tracks are we talking about here???  I doubt they'll be bridging the downtown tracks with this project.  that seems like a project for much further down the line...but perhaps the Red Line tracks in Ohio City?

Offline KJP

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 45317
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #97 on: October 05, 2005, 01:13:36 PM »
They're talking about the parallel sets of tracks belonging to Norfolk Southern Corp. and CSX Inc. (both used by Amtrak), as well as tracks for the RTA Waterfront Line, east of East 9th Street and south of the Shoreway (Route 2).

Constructing buildings over busy freight railroad tracks is not advisable. Overhead structures (especially residential) will be adversely affected by the vibrations, exhaust and dust from heavy freight trains. Hazardous materials are also a factor, but their shipments could affect every neighborhood or community along virtually every railroad.

Walkways are fine. Buildings? Not a good idea.

KJP
America will never be destroyed from the outside. -- Abraham Lincoln.

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #98 on: October 31, 2005, 11:29:05 PM »
Hmmm...never realized that they posted these...there are more at http://www.ocnw.org/index.cgi?id=130&p=5151


Offline smackem81

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 395
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #99 on: November 01, 2005, 12:03:33 AM »
This development is what duck island people are bitching about? It blocks raildroad noise ++, its not as tall as the one in ohio city and better able to blend in. On another note nobody lives in duck island really, the whines of a couple of households on the street should be no concern. If anything it acutally IMPROVES duck island, by actually putting residents there. Most of duck island is vacant land

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #100 on: November 08, 2005, 10:25:58 AM »
I finally got around to e-mailing OCNW today about the status of the low-rise buildings north of Riverview Tower on W. 25th. I'm sure anyone who lives in the area knows what I'm talking about, but for those who don't -- this is among the most frustrating real estate situations in the City of Cleveland. What you have are a series of incredibly ugly, low-rise public housing buildings set well back from W. 25th Street from Riverview Tower to the Detroit-Superior Bridge.
Now, if there's any place in the city that could attract a truly mixed-income population of the kind HOPE VI envisions, it's on this section of W. 25th. The views of downtown are spectacular and it's within walking distance of the Rapid, shops on W. 25th and entertainment in the Flats and Warehouse District. Yet while initial plans showed rebuilding on this site, it has been mysteriously absent from recent discussions of the project. Why? Because, according to the response I got today, that land was part of what was deemed "unstable" in the geo-technical study that also ruled out building on the riverbank nearby! So despite the fact that that land already supports buildings, it's no longer being considered for residential redevelopment! Truly frustrating.
Still, all is not lost. Apparently OCNW is in talks to do some development on the west side of W. 25th -- also underutlized, though some commercial buildings remain -- and there are ideas for creating green space to replace the low-rise buildings, which would be a vast improvement.

Here's more from OCNW:

"The geo-technical data showed that all the buildings north of Riverview Tower are on unstable ground. Therefore, its highly unlikely well ever see development from Riverview north to the bridge. Pretty sad. However, there might be opportunities for vastly improved green space and view sheds. The OCNW Board of Trustees made tearing down the low-rise buildings a specific request in the resolution of support we passed last month. Much of it was for safety reasons, but the improvements to the neighborhood would be large.

The west side (of W. 25th) is still under discussion. CMHA is in talks with several property owners on that side of 25th."

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #101 on: November 08, 2005, 10:43:23 AM »
Good sleuthing, B12!

I've been to a couple meetings in the buildings on the east side of 25th.  Transitional Housing Inc. has their offices over there and I believe an affiliate of theirs owns the land and buildings.  They could definitely do with a rehab, but I don't know if they're thinking about moving.

There's still a ton of land directly adjacent to Riverview that should be put to some productive use...ballfields, viewing plaza, whatever...and a decent amount of land behind them as well along Bridge, closer to the river.  Every time I go back there, I think of the tremendous potential of those city-owned parking lots south of Bridge, behind the market, where one component of the recent HOPE VI proposals was shot down by a VERY VOCAL MINORITY.  But do those fall into the "danger zone?"

I agree that the potential along the west side of 25th might be more promising right now, considering the conditions across the street and I hope they move on it!
« Last Edit: November 08, 2005, 10:44:21 AM by Mister Good Day »

Offline smackem81

  • One SeaGate 411'
  • **
  • Posts: 395
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #102 on: November 08, 2005, 11:58:30 AM »
I wonder what they deem as unstable? Is it under no circumstances can this land be built on? or is it We can build some things under some limited conditions on this land? There used to be buildings there back when it was irishtown. Iristown bend condos ~seem~ to have simmilar soil conditions. The area near there is full of freshwater springs, so they had to put huge concrete footers there just to keep a not so big building stable. I'd say CMHA should sell the land between riverbed and franklin to private developers, and limit the constuction scale to units simmilar in scale to irshtown bend condos and keep them spaced out enough too keep it woodsy and hopefuly prevent instability too. Just because the public finds impossiblites to build there, dosent mean greedy developers wont find a way

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #103 on: November 08, 2005, 12:08:51 PM »
From what I remember of the geotechnical study, the land could be stabilized but the cost would be prohibitive (especially for a public entity). What you're saying about the land being sold to a private developer makes sense, but under current market conditions in the city demand probably wouldn't be sufficient to justify the expenditure.
I wouldn't at all mind a park on the north end of W. 25th -- that would give everyone unobstructed views of downtown, and provide green space in an area where it's currently somewhat lacking.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2005, 12:09:39 PM by blinker12 »

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #104 on: November 08, 2005, 12:29:36 PM »
a park would be great and if that's all we can do for the next 30 years due to lack of funds to stabilize the hillside, then by all means, we should do it.  but right now, it's a big piece of green space with a fence around it.

from what i hear, there are several more rounds of studies that need to be done before cost estimates can be made for future development.  cost prohibitive is definitely the term for it, but it's also true that a private developer could find the cost acceptable with a certain type of development on site.  I have a feeling that this would include them asking for a big investment by the public sector to help offset the cost of site preparation...much like brownfield cleanup...

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #105 on: November 08, 2005, 12:31:16 PM »
I think that CMHA believes that things can be built there, but banks won't fund it if its unstable.

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #106 on: November 08, 2005, 12:37:55 PM »
a park would be great and if that's all we can do for the next 30 years due to lack of funds to stabilize the hillside, then by all means, we should do it. but right now, it's a big piece of green space with a fence around it.

And don't forget the ugly low-rise buildings blocking views of downtown! ;)

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #107 on: November 08, 2005, 02:20:08 PM »
^are you talking about the ones north of the CMHA property?  I know these were drawn up as something new in the initial drawings from a few years back, but I don't know if they've actually pursued acquiring the properties.  It's actually pretty surprising the the private market hasn't made any moves here already.  I mean, if I was some small non-profit sitting on a prime piece of land in a dilapidated building and someone offered me more than enough money to move and rehab a better location, I'd take the money!  I don't know anything about prior efforts, though, or what is keeping them in that location...
« Last Edit: November 08, 2005, 02:20:50 PM by Mister Good Day »

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #108 on: November 08, 2005, 02:44:30 PM »
Those parcels north of the tower were listed under "phase II."  No timeline was ever given for the second phase.

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #109 on: November 08, 2005, 09:17:23 PM »
Guys, these are the buildings I was referring to when I posted OCNW's e-mail: The ugly low-rise ones north of Riverview Tower, on the east side of W. 25th Street.
To quote OCNW again: "Its highly unlikely well ever see development from Riverview north to the bridge." The low-rise buildings are no longer part of *any* phase of the HOPE VI development. That's why I was so upset! It seems the best we can hope for now is a park.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2005, 09:17:50 PM by blinker12 »

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #110 on: November 09, 2005, 04:28:52 PM »
But why can't they develop up to the sidewalk on the CMHA land north of Riverview and south of the THI buildings and have a greenspace behind that on the unstable land?  I understand if they need to go further with studies before developing back there, but on the street frontage?  I'm sure it just has to do with determining the overall safety and potential for all that land...

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #111 on: November 09, 2005, 04:58:28 PM »
I know, it doesn't make sense. If there are already buildings there, it seems the land would be stable enough to support replacements. However, according to OCNW, "The geo-technical data showed that all the buildings north of Riverview Tower are on unstable ground."
The good news is that now OCNW is recommending tearing the buildings down for that very reason. And in a lot of ways, it might be better to have a park there than buildings; that way everyone can see the view!

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #112 on: November 10, 2005, 12:13:45 PM »
as it is, though, there is enough land on CMHA property to house a pretty significant (3-5 acre) park. We can start with that and when more studies are done and the development potential is more accurately assessed, CMHA can decide whether to build, sell, keep as a park, etc.  I guess one problem would be maintenance...if CMHA retains ownership, they'd be responsible for upkeep and safety.  If they turn it over to the City Parks Dept., that takes it out of the development arena...

Offline blinker12

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #113 on: November 13, 2005, 09:15:54 AM »
CMHA development awaits HUD approval of new plan
Officials hope long-delayed Ohio City project gets extension

Sunday, November 13, 2005
Angela D. Chatman
Plain Dealer Reporter

Federal housing officials will decide by year's end whether to approve the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority's revised plan for a mixed-income development in Ohio City.

The approval would also extend the long-delayed Riverview HOPE VI project by three years, to the end of 2009.

If the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development grants the authority's request, CMHA will retain the remaining $8.5 million of a project grant that is to expire on Dec. 31, 2006, and have more time to plan and carry out the development...


more at:  http://www.cleveland.com
« Last Edit: September 09, 2009, 02:27:05 PM by McCleveland »

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #114 on: November 16, 2005, 10:12:29 PM »
Two tidbits of info that I heard today:

HUD has given an extension to the Riverview Hope VI project.

The building that burned down on West 25th will be rebuilt preserving the original facade.

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #115 on: November 19, 2005, 01:40:45 AM »
wimwar, which building burned on W.25? (rough address? street corner?).

Also, I really wonder how much more it would cost to shore up that land to build NE of Riverview.  I think we've all seen greater engineering feats than this.

Finally, as much as I'm a TOD fan, I'm not sure the schematic of low rises rising over the Red Line tracks, in a line south of Lorain does the trick.  While it could have the effect of pulling some more development/retail activity on the still largely quiet quadrant of Ohio City (W. 25 south of the Lorain/WSM), I've got a feeling it would be too far isolated and linear in nature to develop the kind of residential density that would have a more positive impact (as in foot traffic) as say, a high or midrise --- but I could be wrong.

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #116 on: November 20, 2005, 10:40:53 AM »
Clvlndr,

Where have you been?

The burned building is about 3 structures to the north of the West Side Market. 

I agree with your observations on the Duck island proposal.  I know that the images are only preliminary massings, but it really fails as a design concept.  It would form a long wind tunnell corridor.  It is not very inviting and it looks like a superblock. While it is isolated from the rest of Ohio City, this could really succeed in sparking a new neighborhood if the project is less linear and incorporates smaller blocks within the development.   

Offline Map Boy

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4192
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #117 on: November 20, 2005, 10:57:07 AM »
I've had the same reservations and I agree... While Ohio City is one of the more vibrant urban neihborhoods in Cleveland, it is still functioning on a delicate balance.  I think that one day we'll have a contiguous corridor down West 25th into Clark/Metro/Fulton, but to concentrate so much new housing on that end of the district right now might be a mistake.  I think we really need to concentrate on the gaps along West 25th between Lorain and Detroit!  I wonder how active Lutheran Hospital has been in these discussions...they've got quite a few parking lots along that stretch...as do other companies.

Offline JT

  • Excavation Site
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #118 on: November 21, 2005, 03:28:58 PM »
The Building that burned down was called Market Square building. Also, I heard that Marous Brothers have made an agreement with the developer to build the CMHA housing project on west 25Th.

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #119 on: November 21, 2005, 03:37:48 PM »
The Building that burned down was called Market Square building. Also, I heard that Marous Brothers have made an agreement with the developer to build the CMHA housing project on west 25Th.


Where on West 25th???