North87

Actually there are already people living there. There's a back entrance that residents can use. Not sure how that has worked out (or if it is legal) but no harm no foul I suppose. :wink:

Not taxis as you might be imagining but as a dt resident I use UberX and Lyft. The actual yellow "taxi" services in this city are a joke, people use UberX and Lyft because they are cheaper, more reliable, and don't require cash on hand.

That block is very interesting, it is nearly an empty triangle. Do we know which houses are on the chopping block? There is are a couple of houses that are painfully out of place and an old multi-unit building. Are they going to knock all of it down?

Maybe but there should be another building between it and the art institute. It is called parkside dwellings, it is managed by the same people who run Park Lane Villa. It is home to the oldest elevator in the city of cleveland (although it is not currently functional). A friend of mine lived in the tower room, it also has a nice roof deck. It's not a great building but it would be a shame to knock it down.

Let's hope. It is a great location, the whole area is just tragically underdeveloped/misused. I can understand the hesitancy of developers because the area is a mess, a condo would offer tenants magical views of . . . the huge a$$ surface lot across the street... We could call it Park(ing lot)side Estates. Anyways there is alot of really good attention in UC, FEB, and the westside in general but this area and the super block (apologies if the mere mention is too far off topic) are places where development would really change the feel of the actual downtown of the city. Making the right decision on this corner could be the catalyst for a larger plan, I hope the city stays firm.

"Commission members and the city's planning staff said they want one of two things: Specific plans showing what the property owner hopes to do with the site or a feasibility analysis illustrating that the historic building simply can't be saved." So next up is a study to show that is has to come down, which it will "Based in California, L&R is a major parking owner with a sister business focused on retail. The company has no interest in exploring other uses or constructing a taller building on the Prospect site." "The city prohibits downtown property owners from razing buildings for parking lots, though temporary lots have lingered for years on some potential development sites." Sounds like a future "temporary" parking lot is the end game here. :-( I give the city alot of credit for holding firm and making L&R give an honest effort but even with these mechanisms for forcing action, they can lead L&R to the water but they can't make them drink. If L&R doesn't want to unleash the potential of this corner then I guess they don't have to and get to contribute to Cleveland being the world leader in downtown surface lots. :drunk:

Agreed I never said there weren't things that the mayor can do to make the city more immigrant friendly (although some of that involves making the city more friendly for people in general AKA general economic development). I was more pointing out that a real program for immigration involves many different working parts, but ultimately FJ and the city are constrained by federal policy and state cooperation two things that FJ can't really control, which is why I am not surprised by FJ's tepid support for "doing something" to bring encourage more people who immigrate to this country to choose Cleveland. You can build an immigrant welcome center downtown, you can build relationships with sister cities abroad (although why would a foreign city want to start a relationship with you when your end goal is to poach high-value residents), you can encourage Case, CSU, KSU, Akron and other area schools to bring more exchange students over in hopes of someday getting visas but in the end if you want immigrants, you need visas. To get visas you need jobs for the people you are giving visas (which is something that FJ can control through growing the economy and attracting employers) and you need the federal government to give you the visas, something FJ doesn't control. That was all. I'm not poo-pooing the sentiment/idea, anybody with strong skills should be welcomed this region wholeheartedly, whether they are from Columbus, California, or Estonia. Personally, I think FJ has a passive approach because he fears the results won't justify the effort given the uncontrollable nature of a large-scale immigration program.

Thank you, I'm not trying to add more token cynicism to this discussion and I wasn't at the City Club so I cannot comment on any subsequent discussion of immigration strategies but to me the comment at best does what FJ usually does, it states the reality, we (meaning the city) can build a community that is amenable to many immigrants (which basically means continuing to develop the NEO economy AKA stay the course), but actual direct action on the issue is not feasible (because there is not much FJ can do directly on the issue). Immigration law is not my speciality but there is going to need to be federal (where the immigration landscape may or may not dramatically shift), state, and local coordination to have any meaningful programs to attract large amounts of immigrants to Cleveland (see Michigan). So it's good to hear that FJ is now (possibly) moving on this issue but the ability to do so goes way far above his office. I swear to god I meant to avoid being a nay-sayer when I started this post.

City of Cleveland ‏@CityofCleveland: 1+1=2 City of Cleveland ‏@CityofCleveland: the earth is round City of Cleveland ‏@CityofCleveland: Frank Jackson is my name City of Cleveland ‏@CityofCleveland: There is a lake to the north of us More highlights to come. :roll: Snide jokes aside, I guess the acceptance of objective facts about urban development is a starting point but still a little discouraging when the mere statement of those facts are considered "highlights" of the speech.