Clevelander17

Haha, wow, I guess I need to pay closer attention. I walked by it probably hundreds of times last school year and never really noticed. I could have sworn that I saw students going in and out, though now that I think about it, it does seem like it was kind of dead around there. I just assumed that was typical of residential life at CSU. Hahaha... And you never noticed that it wasnt a Holiday Inn either... I was confused because there is a hotel further down Euclid at 18th. That's what I was thinking you guys were talking about. I knew that the building at 22nd was NOT currently a hotel.

This is what they're trying to do: http://development.cuyahogacounty.us/pdf_development/en-US/CSU_Viking_CORF_Summary071511.pdf I love it!

Haha, wow, I guess I need to pay closer attention. I walked by it probably hundreds of times last school year and never really noticed. I could have sworn that I saw students going in and out, though now that I think about it, it does seem like it was kind of dead around there. I just assumed that was typical of residential life at CSU. Hahaha...

Chagrin Highlands would have been perfect a few years ago before it became a place for Beachwood to cannibalize business from other parts of Greater Cleveland.

Was the Holiday Inn no longer in business? For some reason I thought it was. Also, was that Viking Hall before and then it became a Holiday Inn? Because I thought that Viking Hall was located further down at 22nd...

There's on the in the rec center, but it's indoors.

The only other thing I've heard is that Ken Blackwell, whose name was floated early as a potential candidate, has said that he will not run.

Not a fan at all (heard some pretty shady stuff about him through the grapevine) and I'd hate to see him take Brown's seat.

Signs outside of Myxx now indicate a July opening! :) ;)

Well, I guess you're right, when taking a bigger picture look at why they lost this game. Hopefully they can make a move before the trade deadline. Otherwise we're probably just going to have to accept the fact that if this team is going to win the division, it's going to be on the backs of the pitchers. Which isn't something you normally see in the AL, but not entirely impossible.

You can't pitch to Jose Bautista.

Ughhhh...so back to winless against the SEC in bowl games? :x There are so many things about this whole situation that piss me off...

I had this exact same thought. You should never lose a game in which you score 7 runs. And Talbot's gotta go. I wouldn't mind seeing someone like David Huff get another shot, he's pitching well in Capital City.

The issue at hand however is that when you're simply moving large concentrations from one community to another, you're not improving anything, and in fact, making once-viable communities worse for. Maybe, but if the population of the poor is static or shrinking, then if a large concentration moves *into* one neighborhood, then by definition, it moved *out* of another. Maybe that abandoned neighborhood really is truly abandoned now (and becomes fodder for a shrinking cities initiative later). That could occur if the people fleeing the neighborhood with all the new Section 8 housing have the inclination and ability to move even farther out--contributing to sprawl, as you noted. However, there may be a limited number of times that dynamic can repeat itself, particularly now that new suburban housing is so much less affordable for so many people, particularly given the upward spike in gas prices. Well, I'm not talking about completely relocated the population. I'm talking about relocating just enough (and really, it doesn't take that much), that in the short term both neighborhoods are ruined. Maybe in the long-term the "old" neighborhood will eventually become mostly abandoned, but that's not a good thing, either.

I really wish I could believe this, but somehow certain suburbs, even those with decent apartment/rental stocks, seem to have found themselves in situations where they're not taking on as much low-income/section 8 housing as their neighbors. I don't think this is a coincidence, either. Specifically, I'm thinking of cities like Beachwood or Solon, and I think it has at least something to do with willfully losing out on certain types of federal funds. Generally-speaking though, even though I don't think the above situation is fair, I'd still be opposed to forcing anything on those cities. I look at government-imposed housing as something that spreads exponentially once it's introduced into a community. The cycle begins harmlessly enough, but as the problems associated with the program become community issues, it depresses housing prices in the area, making such homes less-desirable and more susceptible to becoming section 8 themselves. The whole practice leads to the downfall of communities and hastens sprawl. The issue at hand however is that when you're simply moving large concentrations from one community to another, you're not improving anything, and in fact, making once-viable communities worse for.

Unbelievable!

This makes no sense whatsoever. We're talking about individuals, not corporations. Whatever you think of corporate welfare, your analogy is faulty. I think your knee-jerk, defensive reaction is unwarranted. There are correlations between those who are the beneficiaries of Section 8 and a lot of undesirable/illegal behavior. In fact, (just to spice up the conversation) I truly believe that a lot of the problems that Cleveland Heights (yes, the city as a whole) is facing is because of the problems directly associated with taking on such a large number of Section 8 residents, and in such large concentrations. When I read the story of what the Green Township residents were doing, I immediately thought of the possibilities for the Heights area. I think it's time for CH, SH, and UH to not only say "no more," but also do everything within their power to scale back on the current Section 8 housing situations within their respective borders.

Haven't done anything with it yet, is it worth it? In fact, what exactly is it? If it's supposed to be like Facebook, I'll hold off for a while.

Also, I apologize for taking this thread so far off-track. I will start another thread more specifically discussing this issue. Here: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,26051.new.html#new

I'm well aware of our opportunities and we've seized on some of them, despite what the narrative pushed by the national media outlets would like you to believe. But my point is that it makes little sense to compare Portland to the Midwest, because we're talking apples to oranges. A lot of Portland's "successes" are not only (over even mainly) because of urban policy, but also because of coincidence of situation. There is not a magic bullet there that cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc. should be looking to adopt.

No disrespect, but again, I think it's very misguided to point to a place like Portland as a model city. And to me, that sounds like an excuse. Greater racial diversity should be a strength of the Midwest, not a weakness. For some reason the Midwest can't aspire to have the strong ethinic enclaves of the Northeast, and many then also say the Midwest shouldn't compare itself to the Northwest due to its relative lack of racial diversity. I just think the Midwest needs to quit making excuses and put up, or shut up. It's got better than average historical building stock, nice racial and cultural diversity, strong cultural assets, and tremendous health and education sectors. Plus the Midwest is blessed with tremendous water assets. What in the world in the Midwest doing wrong?! I think that's way too idealistic, and quite honestly, disingenuous, coming from an outsider who doesn't seem to understand or respect the problems that can come with "nice racial and cultural diversity." No excuses here, just reality. What the Midwest is doing wrong is up for debate, but I'll leave it at this: Portland's solutions are not the industrial Midwest's solutions.

Green Township near Cincinnati is slated to receive more public housing. However many residents and local officials are opposing such a plan. I guess this discussion could go in many different directions, but, I'll ask a few questions to start it off. Is it fair for HUD to place low-income housing in otherwise stable communities? Should communities be able to say "no"? Would you want a large mass of low-income housing in your neighborhood, even next door to you? http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110706/EDIT02/107060328/Guest-column-Green-Twp-declines-HUD-agreement-because-not-fair?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110701/EDIT02/107010344/Guest-column-Localities-do-harm-by-opposing-public-housing

No disrespect, but again, I think it's very misguided to point to a place like Portland as a model city.

And as some have hypothesized, the lack of diversity really changes the dynamics of local politics. What is one of the main factors that drives sprawl in the older cities in the Midwest and Northeast? What happens when it is removed? Answer: Portland. (The judges would also have accepted Minneapolis or Seattle.)

I've been in Ohio 4 years but because I had a newer vehicle, this was the first year that my car was up for an E-Check. While I think it's good that we have a program in place, I couldn't help but think what an absurd waste of emissions the actually test is, and that the test really needs to target the vehicles that are prone to emissions problems. I drove 25 minutes to the nearest testing station on a very cold winter Saturday day. Of course being the weekend there were at least 40 cars in line waiting to be checked. There are giant signs saying do not turn off car engine, and being nearly zero degrees outside, it's not like anyone would want to just turn off their car. So, I sat in line, my car idling for almost 40 minutes with the other 40 cars. They "check" my car, and 2 minutes later I drive 25 minutes back home. In essence that test for me, and for hundreds of thousands in Northeast Ohio creates a HUGE amount of unnecessary emissions each year. I don't know what the pass/fail rate is, but it just seems like it's an almost zero sum game, with the test itself being a large source of pollution. I think they could almost push the age of the car limit to 6 or 7 years to reduce a lot of this unnecessary testing. Thanks, I knew I couldn't have been the only one that noticed that irony of the amount of emissions the test itself produces. ;)