SixthCity

We might have dodged a bullet Fairmont Creamery developers hopeful despite fire CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Developers working to renovate the Fairmont Creamery said a fire that charred part of the structure on Friday morning should not significantly affect their plans. The fire was relatively small , and only affected a tiny portion of the 100,000 square-foot building, developer Josh Rosen said in a Facebook message sent to a Northeast Ohio Media Group reporter hours after the fire started. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/01/fairmont_creamery_developers_h.html#incart_river_default

Oye, this guy is such a drag... Cleveland's failed bicentennial bridge lighting project doesn't bode well for PlayhouseSquare's giant chandelier: Mark Naymik CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cleveland's bright ideas always seem to dim. PlayhouseSquare's plan to hang a giant crystal chandelier above Euclid Avenue in the theater district got me thinking about a couple other projects that were supposed to be something iconic and withstand the test of time.

University Circle is named one of "America's Prettiest Neighborhoods" http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efel45lkj/university-circle-cleveland-ohio/

^ Thanks

Honest question: What midsize/large American cities make you think of tennis?

I know the definition of density, thanks, as well as the difference between "objective" and "subjective." What I meant is that forumers here apparently have different definitions of what constitutes a "dense" city or neighborhood, and blanket statements like "Cleveland is a low-density city" therefore don't mean a whole lot because they're subject to individual definitions of high and low density (or just "density," for short.) I appreciate ClevelandOhio's reply, but I think I've made my point clear and this is veering way off topic, so my apologies, and I'm sure we can continue this discussion in another thread if you want. Sorry, I didn't mean to offend - I was just unclear what you meant.

Fixed that for you. Density is a rather subjective quality, and it's getting kind of tiresome to read the same statement repeated over and over like it's a fact and an excuse for why transit or TOD can't succeed in Cleveland. Truth be told, our current density doesn't matter in the sense that it shouldn't hold us back from making transit investments. We can always tear down and build at higher densities if and when demand is there. We know development follows infrastructure investment, so we should continue upgrading our transit capacities as we are able to, and encourage future growth in the core. I think the statement "Cleveland is low density at its core" is incorrect. Instead, Cleveland's core seems to be decidedly very dense (10,000 people in about 2 miles). Also, I agree that development follows infrastructure investments and therefore density can be changed. This all makes the larger (and correct) case investing in transit is well worth it. However, I don't understand the statement "Density is a rather subjective quality". What do you mean by this? Density seems to be a function of [(population/area) = density]. Having a calculation like that would make density a particularly objective attribute. Maybe you mean density is malleable quality?

Does anyone know where this is? Cleveland Heights City Council approves redevelopment deal for Edgehill Road property http://www.cleveland.com/cleveland-heights/index.ssf/2013/12/cleveland_heights_city_council_48.html#incart_river_default Might these be the lot next to the existing townhomes on the edge of Little Italy?

Whoa - you're right. I just searched for the stories he's recently written and it reads like a civil war is happening in the near east side neighborhoods. I think some Cleveland Heights kids beat him up when he was a kid or something. Check them out his latest stuff here: http://connect.cleveland.com/staff/adamferrise/posts.html *Note: Maybe he's assigned solely to cover crime in the near east suburbs? That's the only thing that makes sense given his laser focus on the issue. I'm assuming no dedication previously existed under the Plain Dealer.

Hasn't that always been the case?

Cleveland Heights police tries to conceal report of high school student robbed at gunpoint http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/12/cleveland_heights_police_tries.html#incart_river_default

Wait - on second look I realize I may have been duped by the renderings. I reacted positively to the outdoor seating scene but what are those people sitting there for?

Check out the link I posted.

No benches and lamp posts? What plan are you looking at my (wo)man? http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2013/12202013/index.php

Well, it certainly looks better. It could be sexier but I'm willing to take it, I guess. By the way, did anyone see the construction timeline? Start construction in April 2014 and completion in July 2014? That's crazy fast!

Whoa dude! Sweet! :laugh:

^ Well said

Man, whatta 'hood!!

As a downtown resident, I would love a Banana Republic.

=Schofield

Yeah, the more I think about it - that doesn't really make sense. Those countries have more low skilled workers than they know what to do with - why would they take more? Logistics are a nightmare and it violates a basic sense of fairness.

Right - I think we have two real choices: 1. Train the poor by offering full "wrap around" services like Jeffery Canada's approach in the Harlem Children's Zone. This has been proven one of the only transformative ways to tackle poverty by addressing it on every front. Pros: Fixes poverty Cons: Extremely expensive and politically unpopular with huge swaths of the county or 2. Do nothing. (our default policy) Pros: We don't have to do anything Cons: American society cracks in half. If you're not familiar, you can read about the Harlem Children's Zone here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlem_Children's_Zone

Either train the poor or pay to move them to places that do have unskilled work. Fair answer - thanks

Agreed but these basic "jobs" just aren't that readily available anymore. Obviously manufacturing has shrunk but so many other manual labor entry-level jobs are just being replaced by technology/automation. We are in a knowledge based economy. Just bringing a strong back & willingness to work is not enough. People have to seek out training & education. If you don't, you aren't qualified to do much of anything. And so the chasm in our society widens more every year. The barrier of entry into the economy to make a living wage has never been higher (excluding depressions & recessions). The social, financial, and emotional capital it requires to produce an 18 year old ready to participate in today's knowledge economy is a cost higher than human society has ever seen to this point. If the capital is not there to produce said 18 year old, as most parents of these broken neighborhood do not, there is almost no chance they will enter adulthood as competitive workers. With the disappearance of middle income jobs with lower barrier of entry, these kids don't have many paths to choose from. While I agree with "the best social program is a job" statement, the jobs are simply not there in sufficient numbers. So...I have to ask like Htsguy did - what the hell do we do? Article on job growth: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2013/09/uneven-growth-high-and-low-wage-jobs-across-america/6937/

Damn...