Author Topic: Cleveland: Ohio City: Development and News  (Read 1023889 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38247
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #175 on: March 03, 2006, 10:26:28 AM »
Yes, it can, but at great expense. The problem is the hillside rock formations beneath the soil are shale, which isn't stable. The most common solution is to dig and pour concrete caissons down 200 feet or so to bedrock.
"Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others." – Winston Churchill

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4271
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #176 on: March 03, 2006, 10:49:22 AM »
JDD,

The banks won't loan the money for construction on the hillside. They feel that its too risky.

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #177 on: March 03, 2006, 11:53:49 AM »
The figure I remember -- and if you search backwards in this thread you'll probably find it -- is that it would cost $20 million just to stabilize the hillside. That expenditure is not justified by the current Cleveland real estate market. Maybe some day.

In the meantime, the hill's lack of stability might help get some of those horrendous low-rise structures on the east side of W. 25th, near the Detroit-Superior Bridge, demolished (of course the current tenants would need to be sensitively relocated). One plan OCNW has for the site is a park, which I think would be beautiful (gorgeous skyline views, interesting topography, potential trails to the river, etc.).
« Last Edit: March 03, 2006, 11:56:00 AM by blinker12 »

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4271
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #178 on: March 03, 2006, 01:53:08 PM »
^considering that, I wish that the hill was a little more unstable.  It would be great if those towers were not there.  It could make for an amazing park.  I would imagine that developers would line up to build 5+ story condos on the west side of W.25th. Imagine the possibilities.

Offline Ewoops

  • 408'-Kettering Tower
  • **
  • Posts: 121
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #179 on: March 03, 2006, 01:57:24 PM »
^Even if we could just knock down the low rises and put a park there, you could put a lot of housing on the West side of the street and help to bridge Market Square to the Flats and downtown.

Offline JDD941

  • 555'-LeVeque Tower
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #180 on: March 03, 2006, 03:35:59 PM »
  That area has so much potential!  It's too bad that it would cost so much to stabilize that land...it has great acess from above or below, great views too!  I also think that the Northern end of West 25th has much potentila as well....from the lake on down to Bridge Ave.  If only they could get rid of the crappy projects (what a genious idea...projects on lakefront property!) and other one story buildings, then redevelope the area.  I guess it becomes difficult as to where to put people that are already living in the subsidized housing now.  Maybe they could relocate to Crocker Park?!?!  lol  Seriously though, that area from the river up to 25th needs to be looked at...as well as the peninsula.  WAY too much undeveloped land that close to downtown.

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #181 on: March 03, 2006, 03:51:58 PM »
Wim, I doubt Riverview Tower will ever come down. It just houses so many people. But I don't mind it as much as the hovels -- I don't know what else to call them -- that make for quite a depressing streetscape north of the tower on the east side of W. 25th.

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #182 on: March 04, 2006, 01:12:26 PM »
Of course the "hovels" aren't very attractive.  But as we saw from the demo that took place in the latter half of the 90s on the site that currently features a FENCED IN open space (come on, you don't think people want to use that for a dog park/ball field/etc???), re-housing these residents is not so easy.  Hundreds of CMHA residents were displaced and told that they would have the option to return to the exact same site when the new housing was built.  It's 10 years later and there's no housing and now it's all being built off-site. 

The low-rise buildings currently to the north of the site belong to Transitional Housing, Inc.  I would think that if a private developer had the confidence in the location to build something significant there, they would be able to offer them a nice profit for their land that would enable THI to move their housing and services somewhere comparable and build nicer facilities (much needed) with more capacity.  Most of the social service agencies that they connect to are in the urban core, though, so it would definitely have be somewhere close in on the near-west or east sides.

That leaves the properties on the west side of 25th.  These are apparently stable, engineering-wise, but are occupied by many parking lots (Lutheran, et al) and unsightly industrial space.  If the market was as kicking as we assume it could be, these would likewise be developed.  We know that OCNW is advocating for more market rate housing in the neighborhood, but the private market is just biding its time.  It's still a neighborhood in transition and things will happen, but it'll be a lot slower with things like Riverview being held up for a decade or more.

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #183 on: March 07, 2006, 12:05:20 PM »
Not directly linked to the Riverview project, but definitely a related issue... the full article speaks to some of the issues that are arising with the clash of market forces and public sector service provision in the Ohio City area.

From the March Plain Press http://www.nhlink.net/plainpress/march2006/news/01-UCAP-famloc.php

Low Income residents fight welfare office relocation
by Tim Walters

Late in January, members of United Clevelanders against Poverty (UCAP) were surprised and dismayed to learn that Cuyahoga County was planning to move the Ohio City Neighborhood Family Service Center from its current location at W. 25th and Lorain Avenue.  This center provides a variety of services to the community, including Ohio Works First, food stamps, child support and a career center.  The new site would at Fulton Parkway and Memphis Avenue.

UCAP immediately scheduled a community meeting at the May Dugan Center that over 80 residents of the Near West Side attended. Elsie Caraballo, director of the Ohio City Neighborhood Family Center, came and informed all that the move was being proposed as the W. 25th and Lorain location was considered poorly organized and in need of renovation.  Only two replies were received after the County put out requests for proposals for a renovated site. These were for the current Ohio City Location and Fulton Parkway. The reason Fulton Parkway was being considered is that the rent there would be almost one million dollars a year less than the cost of the Ohio City location.

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #184 on: March 07, 2006, 01:28:57 PM »
I think this is a sign that the OC is truly, once and for all, gentrifying -- for better or worse. Just a few months ago West Side Community House moved, now Neighborhood Family Center may go too. The location of these services in the neighborhood is a large part of what keeps it feeling economically diverse. (Of course, there are still lots of other services around, so that won't be changing completely anytime soon.)

Anyone up for a discussion of whether this is a good or bad thing? On the one hand, the utopian vision of Ohio City being open to all appeals to my idealistic side. On the other, I think Cleveland needs some higher-income -- i.e. gentrified -- neighborhoods if it is to survive (cribbing a little from grad school friends here who may or may not want to take credit). And since there's plenty of affordable housing in the city, I don't worry about people getting displaced too far afield, if at all. In fact, I would guess most of the users of these services don't even live in Ohio City. That was part of why WSCH moved to 93rd and Lorain -- to be closer to its constituency. At any rate, a very interesting topic for discussion...

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #185 on: March 07, 2006, 02:11:16 PM »
it is a very interesting topic and one that may demand its own thread, but like you said, these are just two facilities that are moving elsewhere.  CMHA, the Social Security Office, Riverview Towers and their attached clinic, several low-income health care providers (in the building on 25th & Lorain), soup kitchens, drop-in centers, etc. have a foothold in the neighborhood for a number of reasons...atop which are the concentration of low-income residents and the easy access to the neighborhood via public transit without paying Downtown rents. 

While parts of Ohio City are quickly becoming some of the more expensive places to live and rent space outside of Downtown, the Near West Side is definitely not the most expensive place to live in Cleveland.  We have our more middle class neighborhoods, like Old Brooklyn, Kamms Corners, Lee-Miles, and Puritas-Longmead that have had more stability over the years, but places like Tremont and Ohio City - where "gentrification" is most often cited - are still neighborhoods in transition.  They have been for most of their histories. 

I don't see the base of options and services being threatened for the lowest income groups anytime soon, but when you look at more moderate incomes...the working poor...that's where you start to see the impact.  As it stands, though, the OC is still one of the most economically mixed neighborhoods in the city.  In my opinion, it's going to take quite some time for that to change significantly. 

Of course, if anyone has data/evidence to show that I'm full of BS, please share it!
« Last Edit: March 07, 2006, 02:12:39 PM by Mister Good Day »

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38247
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #186 on: March 07, 2006, 03:46:03 PM »
Funny you should mention the county's Neighborhood Family Services Center in Ohio City.... I just finished writing an article about its relocation to Old Brooklyn, which will happen Oct. 1. I didn't realize it occupied five floors of the old bank building at West 25th and Lorain. That's going to be a substantial tenant loss for that building -- and a loss of about 300 jobs to the neighborhood. But Ohio City's loss will be Old Brooklyn's gain.
"Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others." – Winston Churchill

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #187 on: March 08, 2006, 11:35:13 AM »
I'm curious about the rest of that building.  According to Ed Small, the developer of the Environmental Center, Market Square (the one that burned) and the building that houses US Bank and the Film Society, there is an interesting niche market in the OC for smaller office tenants who are willing to pay Downtown rents.  I get the feeling that the big building on the corner of W. 25th and Lorain isn't going to attract these tenants without a serious rehab, but it's worth thinking about for the owner. 

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4271
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #188 on: March 09, 2006, 12:05:23 PM »
????  I am so confused about this project.  Will we end up sending the money back to Washington?  Good god, I hope not.

CMHA drops plans for rentals
Thursday, March 09, 2006
By David Plata
West Side Sun News
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority has scrapped plans to build 12 affordable rental units at West 41st Street and Lorain Avenue and instead will rehab a dozen boarded-up houses on scattered sites south of Lorain.

Councilman Joe Santiago said George Phillips, CMHA director, decided to rehab 12 rental units on scattered sites after Ohio City Near West Development Corp., the local nonprofit group and owner of the West 41st and Lorain site, turned down the plan.

The board discussed it and they do not support affordable rental units on the corner of West 41st and Lorain, Santiago said.

Anthony Fossaceca, OCNW board president, said the board suggested the site be developed with seven market-rate and five affordable rental units, but that CMHA wanted all 12 to be subsidized. He said CMHA turned down a compromise of six market-rate and six rental units.

They withdrew their offer, he said. CMHA took it off the table. They left us high and dry.

Phillips did not return calls Monday and Tuesday.

Fossaceca said he applauded Santiago's suggestion for CMHA to rehab 12 scattered sites as affordable rental units.

Santiago, D-14, said the houses to be rehabbed are between West 25th and West 48th Street south of Lorain. He said Phillips suggested rehabbing the properties.

I agreed that would be a great opportunity to help start rebuilding of that neighborhood that is so blighted, Santiago said. We have over 68 boarded-up homes in that area. Prostitution, drug-dealing, safety concerns, graffiti and blight are big problems in that area.

Santiago also said the OCNW board objected to plans to build 59 market-rate units and 12 affordable rental units at West 28th Street and Church Avenue, now the site of CMHA's offices. Plans are to start demolition once CMHA moves to the area of East 79th Street and Kinsman Avenue.

I feel the (OCNW) board is not representing the entire community and what the community feels affordability is in the community, Santiago said.

Fossaceca noted that CMHA owns most of the site.

But he said the OCNW board, believing the area has a high concentration of subsidized public housing _ with CMHA's Lakeview Terrace to the north and Riverview Towers just to the south _ asked for a higher mix of market-rate units.

We thought it would be way too concentrated in that area, he said.

The work would be paid with some $8.5 million remaining in a HOPE VI grant, awarded in 1996, to build some 420 units of mixed-income housing as a replacement for Riverview Towers. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development last year turned down an extension of the grant deadline, which looms March 22.

Meanwhile, opponents of the Columbus Road component of CMHA's plan, which calls for a 171-unit mixed-income development in five buildings, have started a petition drive against that part of the plan.

Pat Wisander, who lives on West 18th Street, said she had herself collected about 140 signatures.

We have close to 160 signatures against it, she said. Most of it is merchants at the West Side Market and residents in the area.

Wisander and others have complained the Columbus Road project will bring too much added traffic and that the sewer and water systems won't be able to handle the increase.

Santiago said added traffic will not be a problem and that CMHA will upgrade the sewers as needed.

Most of the OCNW service area is in the Ohio City area of Ward 13, represented not by Santiago but by Councilman Joe Cimperman.

Asked about Santiago's comments, Cimperman said he doesn't want to lose the HOPE VI money.

We have to make this work, he said. I don't know what the final mix will be. But one way or another, we have to figure out how to preserve this money. I don't want to see this money go back to Washington.

Offline smackem81

  • 468'-Scripps Center
  • ***
  • Posts: 251
  • Lost in cul-de-sac
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #189 on: March 09, 2006, 12:58:47 PM »
Most of it is merchants at the West Side Market and residents in the area. Why does it seem that the west side market merchants are anti development?

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #190 on: March 09, 2006, 01:33:25 PM »
good question.

also, these units are not replacing "Riverview Towers," as the article stated.  They're replacing the units that surrounded the towers. 

i'm starting to get a little peeved at OCNW as well.  it seems that these issues are popping up a little late in the discussion.  unless they were brought up earlier and not publicized. 

i also agree with Santiago that the rehabilitation of 12 homes south of Lorain between 25th and 48th will be a big plus.  i recently walked a large part of that neighborhood and was very surprised at how many boarded up and burnt out houses there were.  turing about a fifth of these blighted properties into assets will be a great boost for that part of the neighborhood.

Offline X

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #191 on: March 09, 2006, 03:01:48 PM »
I like the idea of making the affordable housing scattered site as well.  That will allow it to blend into the neighborhood better and result in less stigmatization.

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #192 on: March 09, 2006, 07:00:31 PM »
I love the idea of rehab instead of new construction. That's great.

Also, I agree with OCNW that more subsidized units at the CMHA office site would be a bad idea because it would increase concentration. Also, why are we talking about demolishing anything? Those are cool old buildings. Build the new units on some of the parking lots in the neighborhood.

The Duck Island people need to just move to North Royalton.

Offline theguv

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • my friends usually call me John
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #193 on: March 09, 2006, 11:50:26 PM »
the duck island people may not stop until there is pasture land under the bridges.  more room to put the cows and goats out.  i just hope they sell their feta cheese at the market.
"The way in which we experience and interpret the world obviously depends very much indeed on the kind of ideas that fill our minds. If they are mainly small, weak, superficial, and incoherent, life will appear insipid, uninteresting, petty, and chaotic."
-E.F. Schumacher

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #194 on: March 10, 2006, 08:51:34 AM »
^  :-D

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #195 on: March 10, 2006, 09:01:42 AM »
It's still unclear from this article whether the Duck Island proposal is going forward. I guess we can assume it is?

Housing agency trims size of proposed development
Friday, March 10, 2006
Angela D. Chatman
Plain Dealer Reporter
Public housing officials unveiled the latest version of a development plan for Cleveland's near West Side to the mixed reaction of a crowd as diverse as the neighborhoods involved.

The Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority's plan for the Riverview HOPE VI project now calls for 267 housing units -- down from the 384 envisioned last fall. The plan includes 186 market-rate and for-sale units and 81 lower cost -- called affordable -- rental units on scattered sites in Ohio City and Tremont.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has given the authority until March 22 to obtain control of all of the sites...


more at:  http://www.cleveland.com
« Last Edit: September 09, 2009, 02:20:52 PM by McCleveland »

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #196 on: March 10, 2006, 09:06:05 AM »
so, which ones do they still have issues with in gaining site control?  I would imagine that if they don't have this wrapped up by now, chances are very slim that they'll have it done in two weeks...

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #197 on: March 10, 2006, 09:12:47 AM »
^Hard to say. The article doesn't say for certain that there are any site-control issues at this time. OCNW withdrew the 41st and Lorain site, but that plan has been replaced by a rehab proposal.

For all we know, they're right on track to meet the deadline. I just wish the reporter would confirm that. Maybe (probably) CMHA is being cagey.

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #198 on: March 10, 2006, 03:53:08 PM »
On the subject of OCNW's role in the community:

The following passage is from an insightful article in Shelterforce, the publication of the National Housing Institute.  The source issue is January/February, 2004, which can be accessed online at http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/133/gentrify.html.

Steve Meachem of City Life/Vida Urbana in Boston recently framed the issue this way: “We’ve succeeded in turning around neighborhoods and now we need to figure out what we do to ensure that our success doesn’t destroy the communities we work in.” Based on my experience in the Allston Brighton and Fenway neighborhoods of Boston, I believe there are important reasons to encourage and support the activities of CDCs in gentrifying neighborhoods. Neighborhoods with active CDCs give low-income residents a chance to benefit from the rising tide instead of drowning in it. To be effective in this environment, CDCs must not only work to preserve and develop affordable housing but also organize residents and assist with employment, training and asset-building strategies. Although many CDCs in different areas engage in these activities, they take on different dimensions in gentrifying neighborhoods.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2006, 03:54:29 PM by Mister Good Day »

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #199 on: March 12, 2006, 03:13:38 PM »
The following are a few shots that I took recently (MLK Day and yesterday) of the proposed location for the 171 units of housing in 5 buildings along Columbus Road between Lorain Avenue and West 25th Street that have been so controversial with the Duck Islanders...

Looking southwest from the platform of the West 25th Street rapid station:

Another, wider view:

From above on Abbey Avenue, looking the same direction:

The sidewalk that would run along the largest portion of the development, towards West 25th:

A wider view of the same spot:

Looking northeast from Columbus and Abbey:

From the upper platform of the rapid station, looking at the smaller block of Columbus that would be developed:


How is it that developing this otherwise wasted land would have a negative impact on the community?

Offline theguv

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • my friends usually call me John
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #200 on: March 13, 2006, 09:34:07 PM »
It would be great WHEN this gets built if RTA could extend the platform a bit south and add another station entrance.  as it stands, as with many redline stations, the staircase is too narrow for two people (moving opposite directions) to be using it at the sametime!  hard to believe.  yet the platform appears to narrow to accomodate a wider staircase, hence adding another one further south would increase capacity.

anyone know why rta builds new stations with such  narrow staircases?  kjp?
"The way in which we experience and interpret the world obviously depends very much indeed on the kind of ideas that fill our minds. If they are mainly small, weak, superficial, and incoherent, life will appear insipid, uninteresting, petty, and chaotic."
-E.F. Schumacher

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38247
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #201 on: March 13, 2006, 11:18:35 PM »
I suspect it goes back to the line's original design, which had narrow platforms, but were wide enough for design standards of the day (1950s and 60s). Since then, federal regulations addressing disabled access require that there be enough space between the platform's tactile edge (the warning strip next to the edge to warn blind patrons of its presence) and fixed objects on the platform so that wheelchairs can move by them safely. RTA didn't spread the tracks farther apart for the rebuilt stations due to the cost.

A second entrance is a good idea, as is offering direct pedestrian access to the east side of the station site.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2006, 11:19:38 PM by KJP »
"Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees all others." – Winston Churchill

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #202 on: March 16, 2006, 03:59:22 PM »
This is a rather odd station that was built towards the front end of the recent era of Red Line station rebuilding.  Too bad for that, 'cause it's a really shoddy station!  Access is odd...with the site pretty isolated from the neighborhoods on either side...and you're right, Guv, that the stairs are quite narrow!

In other news, has anyone heard anything about the OCNW Board voting not to back the current CMHA proposal?  If this is true, this close to the deadline, would it effectively kill the project?

Offline X

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #203 on: March 16, 2006, 04:59:12 PM »
From the PD:

Ohio City development panel won't support CMHA project
Thursday, March 16, 2006
Angela D. Chatman
Plain Dealer Reporter
The Ohio City Near West Development Corp. Housing Committee voted Wednesday to withdraw support for public housing officials' plan for a project in Ohio City and Tremont.

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

achatman@plaind.com, 216-999-4115

« Last Edit: September 04, 2009, 11:27:02 PM by X »

Offline blinker12

  • 771'-Terminal Tower
  • *******
  • Posts: 1032
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #204 on: March 19, 2006, 10:39:47 PM »
Yuck.

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #205 on: March 22, 2006, 10:26:57 AM »
YSOH brought this to my attention...very interesting letter posted on the Ohio City Yahoo groups site (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ohiocity).  The discussion surrounding Riverview and other assorted issues on that sight is completely ridiculous:

...

RE: CMHA Hope VI Proposal at West 28th St. And Detroit Ave.

To All It May Concern,

To introduce myself, I am Tom Gillespie.  I have been a business
owner, employer, and owner of a property located at the corner of West
28th St. and Detroit Ave for more than ten years.  I have recently
been in negotiations and community discussions with CMHA and their
partner Telesis Corporation in regards to proposed development at the
intersection of West 28th St. and Detroit Ave and along Church Ave.
CMHA's original proposal entailed a housing distribution of 85% market
rate to 15% subsidized in this area.  This plan included a total of 20
subsidized units with 8 located on the corner of West 28th St.  and
Church Ave and 12 units along West 28th, South of the existing CMHA
offices.  The remainder of the proposed development consisted of 48
units along Detroit Ave and extending approximately 150 feet South of
Detroit along W 28th St. and the balance of the market rate (62 units)
was to be retrofitted into CMHA's current offices.  This was the
latest plan, as presented in September 2005 to Ohio City Near West
Corporation (OCNW), the city, and the community,  with varying levels
of support.  Issues with the entire Hope VI  Development have been
many and varied but in general the community supported the development
surrounding the 28th/ Detroit/ Church portion of the project.

On March 9th, nearly six months after the previously submitted plan
and with less than two weeks left to CMHA's filing deadline,  this
proposal was radically changed.  The changes have resulted in a
concentration of subsidized housing in the area of West 28th St. and
Detroit Ave., which is located within a few hundred feet of the
existing Lakeview Housing Project.  Additionally, the new proposal
includes subsidized housing units which extend from approximately 150
feet South of Church Ave all the way to Detroit Ave, acting to connect
to the existing Lakeview CMHA Project.  The end result is 35
subsidized units and 50 market rate units on this portion of the
project and a 60%/40% market rate to subsidized distribution, a far
cry from the 85%/15% previously proposed.


As the owner of the parcel located along Detroit Ave, I was and still
am willing to sell my property for the market rate development that
would help offset this concentration.  Alternatively, I was and still
am willing to purchase the corner lot from CMHA and complete the
development through my T.E.G. Properties Company.  Throughout
conversations with George Phillips and his staff it was clearly
expressed that either party, myself or CMHA, should sell their
property to the other party or to a third party so market rate
development could be possible at this location.  The reversal of this
opinion, especially introduced at the eleventh hour, shows that it is
not the intent of our Housing Authority to work with the community in
an attempt to adhere to the plans which were originally proposed and
supported.

Connecting to an existing housing project, and concentrating new
subsidized housing through CMHA's latest plan has a profound effect on
the future of the Knitting Mills, Detroit Lofts, the Painter's
Project, and numerous other development initiatives  which are in
various stages of completion. The appropriate development along
Detroit Avenue is clearly market rate housing.  That was the original
and supported plan set forth by CMHA Market rate development at the
gateway to Ohio City provides an opportunity to help revitalization of
the neighborhood and support existing development underway at this
vital intersection.  This opportunity is not just being overlooked,
but is being actively suppressed.  CMHA has the ability to achieve a
net gain in monetary return and zero loss in subsidized housing, while
coming closer to adhering  to their original plan, but is choosing not
to at the expense of a crucial development to the area.

To achieve the property development goal and galvanize community
support, CMHA needs only to relocate one or two subsidized units to
the Columbus Road Site.  Two subsidized units added to the Columbus
Road Site would result in a ratio of 136 market rate to 37 subsidized.
This is less than 0.9% change in distribution at the Columbus Road
Site.  While the change in planning at the Columbus Road Site is
negligible, the net result for the Detroit/West 28th St. area is
tremendous.  Relocating 2 units from the proposed 9 (originally eight) at
the corner of West 28th and Church Ave. allows  for a 40-unit market
rate housing development, virtually identical to the September plan.
The redistribution of units from the original 8 to 7 also allows for
the park envisioned on the corner of Church Ave and West 28th St. (as
shown in the March 9th plan).  This proposal not only benefits the
efforts and investments of committed developers, but also results in a
market rate to subsidized distribution of 74% to 26%, compared to the
existing plan of 59% to 41%.  This proposed distribution, although
still falling short of the original goal is clearly more in line with
the intended Hope VI vision.


It is almost unconscionable to undermine an existing, well conceived,
extensively planned development that achieves long sought after goals
of community development for the retention of 2 subsidized units which
could easily be absorbed at the Columbus Road Site.

The opinions of this correspondence are held by the vast majority of
the community, including our residents, elected  officials, employers,
and developers.  I implore all who have an investment in our city and
our future to help CMHA amend their plan and improve our neighborhood.

I appreciate your attention and support in this matter and look
forward to working together to help revitalize our community.  Please
sign below in a show of support to amend the proposed development in
our Ohio City Gateway.


Sincerely,

Thomas E. Gillespie, CPG
President
Principal Geologist
Ohio EPA VAP Certified Professional #234
« Last Edit: March 22, 2006, 11:18:12 AM by Mister Good Day »

Offline 3231

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4271
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #206 on: March 22, 2006, 10:56:34 AM »
At this point, I am really confused about this project. 

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #207 on: March 22, 2006, 11:19:24 AM »
and today's the deadline, right?  i guess we'll find out soon enough!

Offline theguv

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 448
  • my friends usually call me John
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #208 on: March 24, 2006, 09:17:53 AM »
In regards to the orientation of the redline station at w. 25th and the capacity limitation induced by the narrow staircases, what is the feasability of increasing capacity via the addition of a second entrance.  it should be noted that RTA plans to gradually change all fare collection to the "honor based system" that will be used on the silver (ECTP) line.  this, of course, would reduce the necessary size and complexity of a secondary station entrance.

take a look at the attached  aerial.


first off, we all know cleveland rocks and here we have the opportunity for an abbey rd station! 
the existing platform extends along the drawn red line.  therefore, it would seem relatively easy to add a second entrance. 
furthermore, the land below columbus and left of abbey (in the trench) would seem to be great for development.  take a look next time you are in the station.  KJP, perhaps you know what the regulations are in regards to how close residential development can be to tracks?
last, anyone know, where on this map the proposed CMHA development would be??
"The way in which we experience and interpret the world obviously depends very much indeed on the kind of ideas that fill our minds. If they are mainly small, weak, superficial, and incoherent, life will appear insipid, uninteresting, petty, and chaotic."
-E.F. Schumacher

Offline Map Boy

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 3210
Re: Cleveland: Ohio City & Market District Developments
« Reply #209 on: March 24, 2006, 11:23:55 AM »
dude, I totally posted pictures on here earlier!  They'd be lining Columbus, south of the L-C Bridge.

Remove Ads