gg707

The role that restrictive zoning laws have played in segregating communities can't be ignored. Ohio City wasn't always zoned 2-family housing. It also shouldn't come as a shock that historic designations are more commonly located in more white and more affluent neighborhoods. These types of rules help preserve historic architecture, but they also serve to make it harder for undesirable people or buildings to make their way into the neighborhoods. A handful of NIMBYs going on about parking, building height, and nitpicking design doesn't have the power to block buildings proposed in Fairfax or Lee-Miles.

Exactly

I think they don't want multi-family development at that location or anywhere near them. I think they want more single-family homes, with many of them not even wanting townhomes (because those have too urban of a form). If you asked them, they wouldn't admit they are opposed to renters/multi-family, because they know better than to say that, but they will also oppose any and all building formats that would practically allow for a multi-family building to go in there. This is the same as the opposition of the 47th street block club to townhomes on a vacant lot at 47th and Bridge.

Unfortunately, people in this city have become so accustomed to living in a 2/3 abandoned city, they can't handle the idea of it only being 1/2 abandoned in some of the more popular neighborhoods.

Basically yes

Fulton House house's materials for landmarks tomorrow are here (look like the same as at the ohio city meeting): https://courbanize.com/projects/fultonhouse/updates/28420?utm_campaign=update&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sendgrid There are also email addresses at the link where people can send in comment and I'd encourage people to send in support if they feel so inclined.

Pretty sure the NIMBYs would be singing a different tune if this wasn't multi-family housing.

Are the actual email addresses of people on Landmarks and Design Review available somewhere? I'm having trouble finding anything other than the general city planning email.

Some updated Fulton House plans that will be presented at Design Review next week: https://res.cloudinary.com/courbanize-production/image/upload/v1/information_plans/pgrrdlqnitki9oncmy47 Looks like it is one story shorter, but less of a set-back. Overall it is a more attractive design and blends into the street better although I'm sure all the NIMBYs will still hate it. I'm glad that developer found a way for the shorter building to make financial sense. His reaction at the last meeting was not promising.

I hope Pour does well on their roasting and bean subscription business, but I didn't really understand the decision to drop their storefront downtown. If anything, it gave them more brand recognition in the area. Very glad another good (and broadly local) coffee option is taking over the space.

Hopefully this does well, helps to further fill in open lots, and brings more people to the area: https://www.thelandcle.org/stories/ohio-city-and-tremont-respond-to-calls-for-more-affordable-housing Seems like a good way to preserve affordable housing in both neighborhoods. I like that the solution is to build more housing, using different terms to reach affordability, rather than just stopping new development, which is often the knee jerk reaction of people in the area whenever something new is proposed now.

They do a great job. I'd also recommend donating to them as no subscription is required.

Although disappointing from a height perspective, this is probably more realistic to build from a financing perspective and is more likely to get more residents in that area sooner.

The capital stack for Viaduct sounds pretty unlikely based on KJP's earlier stories unfortunately.

Agree, nice pick-up for downtown. Getting more "cool" stuff like this downtown will also help it continue to shift from just a business district to an interesting neighborhood that people want to be in.

Ah, makes sense. That could make for a cool street-level presence if they add some signage.

Is that an apartment building?

I don't know anything about construction, but when we built our house, I did confirm that the foundation was included in the cost that I was paying the builder. Maybe I'm ready to be a CRE consultant?

They didn't work out the cost of the foundation before getting this far?

Does anyone know what happened with 1415 Kenilworth at the BZA meeting today?

There's definitely no public transportation within walking distance from this location...

It seemed like they killed it based on the reaction of the developer to the suggestions of the commission about the height.

So what is the process on this building now? Do they need to come back to Landmarks with a different design before they can go ahead?

Who knows what is actually happening in the conversations, but at least according to coUrbanize they have been considering things like that: https://courbanize.com/projects/wandoak-/information "The southwest corner of the site consists of the now-vacant former Club Azteca building. Bond Street and former Club Azteca stakeholders engaged in many conversations over the past many months largely focused on how the legacy and history of the Club may be honored and acknowledged in the new project. The Club Azteca stakeholders will continue to play a role and further develop those ideas. We happily welcome community feedback on the matter as well!"

For most development around Cleveland, objections based on gentrification = acceptable term for saying we don't want new people to move into the neighborhood. The real reason for people being upset is pretty apparent when the thing that they are trying to protect is a vacant building.