8ShadesofGray

Am I wrong in thinking this park would be in pretty close proximity to the Agora (having a hard time picturing the parcel)? Frankly, I don't think this is such a bad place for a bike park, given the lack of current investment in the area and its potential to highlight high visibility street use at multiple hours. Not to mention, I would think this would increase bicycle usage along Euclid ... it would be an additional node of bicycle activity on top of usage around downtown, Theatre District, CSU and University Circle. As has been mentioned by the guv and others, form will play a critical role in how the park is perceived. Personally, I'm excited to see the idea moving forward and thankful that such an amenity is being offered on the Near East side ... it seems that most quality-of-life investments right now are either taking place downtown or on the Near West Side. Does anyone know whether there are additional bike lanes slated for this area, other than along Euclid. I can't recall the details of the infrastructure plan, except for bike lanes along St. Clair? It seems apt to have lanes along E. 55th between Euclid and St. Clair.

Congrats on the CVB project ... that's awesome that you'll have a voice in the process. Represent us non-breeders well. And you're absolutely right - the CVB's approaches as of the last few years are a marked improvement. The LGBT strategy and their increasing focus on cultural and heritage tourism is excellent. I've worked quite a bit with a couple of their staff members and it seems to be on the ups. I'm not trying to foo-foo the efforts. It's just my personal belief that: 1. Top-down efforts to market a city are not likely to present as accurate a portrayal of the city as those that actively seek out the participation of people from different walks of life. 2. When a group of collaborators requires that any organization that wants to substantially participate in the marketing/branding project pony up $100,000, they are actively setting the process up to be exclusionary. I fully believe that people should have skin in the game, but being able to write a check for at least $100,000 (in a pretty short time period) means that only those organizations with substantial budgets are going to have a seat at the table. 3. If my viewpoint is a little jaded, it's not an attack on the CVB ... it's my perception of the GCP, its inability to capture the pulse of average Clevelanders and no appearance that the organization is becoming younger or more nimble or more inclusionary (as we have seen the last several years within the CVB). And you're right ... I'm probably being a little exclusionary myself; I just personally feel like I (and a large number of forumers) can have a larger impact by immediately collaborating on grassroots marketing efforts instead of trying to get "inside" a project that has been pretty tightly guarded to date. In the meantime, if their project does achieve its goals, I'll be the first to admit it and celebrate their accomplishments.

It's census data, as reported by the Cleveland Planning Commission: http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/census/factsheets/spa18.html.

Welcome to the forum, Graciesdad. So glad to hear about the progress (I'm pretty much Tyler's neighbor, over on 33rd). The only disappointment I have is that the residential component is being delayed for so long. Granted, I think the demand in this neighborhood will increase dramatically over the next 6 - 10 years and thus increase potential for higher net revenue. But I have heard a LOT of people express interest in living at Tyler Village in the nearer future; it would be great if Phase 3 could come online in chunks, rewarding people who buy in earlier with a lower price point. I think this makes the sell for the remaining units easier, and anything that increases pedestrian traffic within the complex for a longer period of the day is likely to make the Village more appealing to restaurants, art galleries, etc. Frankly, I'm pretty positive I'd be a candidate for buying in 3 - 4 yrs. (depending on the price point), but I don't know that I'll hold out for 6. Still, I am very pleased to see all that is happening here and look forward to continued updates.

I think the problem is not funding but rather a corporate management style that fails to connect organically with those of us who aren't in the power elite. TeamNeo, the Greater Cleveland Partnership and the Convention and Visitors Bureau are spending TONS of money in creating a comprehensive branding strategy, but you have to contribute at least $100,000 toward the project to have a seat at the table. Of course, they'll be doing surveys and focus groups, but by and large, I don't think Cleveland's Chamber would welcome the participation of young people. And if they did, it would probably be from the emerging Power Elite (e.g. Bridge Builders). Perhaps it's a little naive, but I think we just need to ban together and start really sinking our own personal energy into regular tours of the city ... building off the great work that people like MapBoy (I miss Mr. Good Day) and Blinker are already doing, rather than trying to participate in a branding campaign that a) doesn't necessarily want our participation and b) imho, is as likely to fail as it is to succeed.

I actually saw it as it played out live ... it was brilliant. It took them a second to cut away to the pre-recorded clip. The great irony is that it was a story about someone who had sadly thrown two cats from a moving car and was being forced to do community service at the humane society. I'm sure she was probably thinking, well hell, I'd probably throw this cat from a moving car, too. They showed the clip, and she was back on the air in a matter of minutes.

While the city-proper growth of Asian Americans in Cleveland has been pretty stagnant, Asiatown has seen a pretty remarkable increase over the last couple decades; some of this has been due to out-migration (The Goodrich-Kirtland neighborhood shrank from 5,737 residents in 1980 to 4,295 in 2000), but there have still been substantial real gains in the number of Asian residents: 1980 - 427 Asian residents in Goodrich-Kirtland (7.4% of neighborhood population) 1990 - 723 Asian residents (16.0%) 2000 - 1,111 Asian residents (25.9%) That's a 160% increase in real numbers and a 250% increase in concentration as a percentage of neighborhood racial composition over a 20-year period. Looking at the neighborhood, I don't anticipate this trend reversing, unless the neighborhood starts to gentrify at a much more rapid pace. Even then, you might see the gentrifiers moving into industrial buildings (like Tyler Village), while the Asian population continues to dominate the single-family homes in the neighborhood; this might lead to a drop in percentage of Asian residents but not a drop in real numbers.

The gay community (and friends thereof) can catch a sneak preview of the film festival Tuesday, March 13, 6:00 - 8:00, at the Great Lakes Science Center. http://www.forwardthought.net/plexus/PlexusNetworkTuesdays0307.pdf. There or square, people, there or square.

I heart Muji.

Sustainability is catching on! GreenCityBlueLake 03.06.07 Cuyahoga County announced yesterday that it is creating a new office of sustainability to review the environmental impact of current operations and coordinate green development across the region. Veteran county planner Joyce Burke-Jones has been named to lead the office. This follows the example of City of Cleveland, which hired a sustainability program manager in 2005 (with the assistance of EcoCity Cleveland and other local sustainability groups) ... ... More at: http://www.gcbl.org/blog/david-beach/cuyahoga-county-creates-office-of-sustainability

Ditto. That is one of my absolute favorites in Cleveland. I'll be interested to see what MRN puts forward in terms of use ... that would be an absolutely amazing residential building and is pretty well positioned for people who want proximity to either Case or the Clinic.

I thought the most blatant omission/falsehood in the article was its portrayal of Ohio being uniformly supportive of Republican candidates and conservative policy. I can forgive someone doing a political piece and failing to capture the full spirit of a city's vibrancy (or even lack thereof), but if you're doing a political piece with a focus on a particular city, then you should probably at least articulate that city's political environment accurately. She might have mentioned that while Republicans have dominated rural elections in the last couple decades, Democrats are pretty fierce adversaries in many cities throughout the state; meanwhile, Cleveland is one of the most heavily Democratic communities in the Midwest. I remember a Tubbs-Jones staffer telling me that the 13th Congressional District has 8 registered Democrats for every 1 Republican. We have a strong history of "blue-collar liberalism" which is still pervasive today and have been a national leader in advancing progressive policy, including some progressive social policy (Cleveland Heights' domestic partner registry comes to mind). I think it's unfair to suggest that we were a bunch of conservatives who started voting for Democrats after we lost our jobs at the mills. That being said, I don't know whether I advocate flooding the reporter with e-mails; our energy would probably be better spent trying to get the positive word out through other stories, rather than keeping a negative piece alive for longer than it should be.

It should also be noted that a couple of neighborhoods on the West Side are exploring live-work overlays; Matt Zone has been exploring opportunities for live-work within his Ward, and live-work showed up on the 2020 plan along W. 105th. Meanwhile, unless the district was scaled back after I got the map, I believe the Live-Work Overlay on the east side actually extends all the way to Addison along St. Clair, to E. 55th along superior and E. 45th along Payne ... it's a pretty huge footprint. Also, in addition to these industrial live-work areas, there are a number of opportunities for live-work in commercial spaces. Two that come to immediate mind are the income-controlled (beautiful) Gordon Square studio spaces that Detroit Shoreway was marketing to artists (not sure if they still are) and the apartments above Arts Collinwood (last I saw, these units were going for $150 PER MONTH, $75 IF YOU WERE WILLING TO PUT SWEAT EQUITY INTO IMPROVING THE SPACE). These are just two examples, but a number of neighborhoods have mixed use space that might be appealing as live-work; not sure if these are all zoned for mixed use, but I haven't heard of any evictions from commercial spaces (unlike in industrial spaces). Finally, Cimperman has expressed an interest in putting forward a home-based business exemption ordinance that would allow artists in certain residential areas to apply for a variance that would allow them to legally sell work out of their homes. When this is done, there will be opportunities to legally do live-work in a pretty full variety of building stock.

It seems a little bit funny that none of the panelists are from Lakewood ... CIA in University Circle, Cleveland Foundation and Theatre District in the Theatre District and CPAC in the Quadrangle. The only person from Lakewood on that panel is moderator Thomas Mulreadey. No one from Beck Center? Interesting.

An oldie but a goodie ... Nonprofit Fights Poverty With Poverty July 28, 2006 | Issue 42•31 Nonprofit Fights Poverty With Poverty CLEVELAND, OH—Helping Hearts, a nonprofit organization that assists low-income Clevelanders, marked its eighth anniversary Monday with its customary celebration of a box-mix home-made cake, a pitcher of Kool-Aid, and a promise from assistant director Susan Lindstrom to continue its tireless work alleviating some of the most pressing needs of the city's poor. http://www.theonion.com/content/node/51104

Ohio ... It's Cold, But You'll Have Caregivers.

^ And an army of well-informed forumers who are itching to serve as free tour guides :-D

I would have to think that Mayor Jackson has already had a conversation with someone (OneCommunity?) regarding the viability of providing the wireless network without the investment of tax dollars. I can't imagine that he would give it such a high profile in his State of the City unless there was something more solid than "Hey guys, how about you provide this citywide ... and we won't pay you anything for it."

I really like them :oops:

The last I heard (a couple months back), Florian was still a go. This is the 24-unit new construction townhome development being championed by St. Clair Superior that was developed using feng shui standards (see the beginning of http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=3128.0;topicseen). From what I had heard, the market demand was a little sluggish and they were thinking of target marketing a subset of the units to the artist population. Not sure where it stands, but the additional of 24 apartment units sounds promising.

Here's a link to how transportation to work varies in Cleveland census tracts (courtesy of NEO CANDO). http://neocando.case.edu/cdoutput/p998598598.pdf A couple of interesting points: - Walking to work is probably a poor proxy for "walkability", as it is more a function of how close someone lives to where they work than of how the streetscape is planned. Certainly, barriers to walkability probably decrease willingness to walk to work, but even the best planned areas (Shaker Square comes to mind) will have low people walking to work if they aren't also major centers of employment. - While access to public transportation might reduce the percentage of people walking to work, the larger factor is probably again where people live relative to where they work. A huge percentage of downtown Cleveland residents walk to work, but another huge chunk take public transportation (likely because they don't work downtown). - Nonetheless, it is interesting to see how much these statistics vary across the city.

I just guess I'm inclined to disagree that there's a correlation between Steelyard Commons and the exodus of young people from the region. There are a number of bright, young people in Cleveland, including a number on this board, and I don't anticipate any of us will be packing our bags for the east coast because of Steelyard. I agree that big box is not a sexy kind of development, nor one that will increase the "buzz" or "vibe" among affluent, educated and/or young people. But the sad fact is that Cleveland residents currently spend millions of dollars at big box in the suburbs. We have to face the reality that these developments were already accessible to the urban market, even if they weren't in the city proper. Moreover, while I think it's important to develop a city environment that's hospitable to bright, young people, catering exclusively to this demographic fails to serve the needs of an overwhelming majority of urban residents nationwide. Again, I'm not a fan of big box, but it does arguably have the ability to employ more city residents and to offer lower prices on consumer products than is currently available; in that sense, it will provide a service to a large number of Cleveland residents, beyond the tax revenue that it will generate.

I heart Battery Park, too, but as long as we're poking fun at the marketing: CAN WE GET SOME MINORITY REPRESENTATION IN OUR SKETCHES? In a city that is minority majority, I am always surprised that renderings and sketches of local development projects almost always show only white people. I understand why you would want the people to look wealthy, slim and self-actualized, but do they all have to be white?! If showing diversity in urban neighborhoods seriously hampers your ability to sell townhomes and condos, than we've got some serious work to do!

^ Well, then isn't this a rather moot debate? Steelyard Commons has been in development for well over a year now; if big box is inherently anti-urban, then debating its aesthetics after it's already been approved seems to be a pretty hollow exercise. I am inclined to agree that you are not going to get aesthetically pleasing design with big box. That being said, I have been pleasantly surprised with how Steelyard Commons has roled out and particularly the role that trail and potentially train connections have been incorporated into the plan. Am I excited about big box? No (okay ... I will be a patron of Target - sue me). But I feel that the developer and the tenants are going beyond what they had to do. It could be a WHOLE lot worse. As an aside, I heard from an artist the other day that there are plans to have multiple pieces of public art throughout the site (beyond the public art up the hill at the Quigley Connector, the historical steel pieces and the steel history exhibit). So, in addition to foregoing tax advantages, remediating a pretty toxic-looking site, injecting money into the school system, neighborhood storefront improvements and trail connectors and being an advocate for a north-south train connection, the developer is also supporting our local artist workforce. Frankly, I don't think we could have expected much better, and as has been noted, I don't think the city would have ever attracted a better use and certainly not in the foreseeable future.