wow, this thread makes me ill...

re: Chester

 

It has to be the Clinic and their parking needs. Why else would they take down all the trees along with the building? 

 

 

Well, according to the County Auditor's records, the property was transferred to the City of Cleveland Land Reutilization Program (Land Bank) in 2004 and was transferred to Madonna Hall Development LLC in December 2006.  From what I know of the Land Bank, there's no such thing as transferring a property of that size without imminent plans for development.  Also, the City generally doesn't pay for demolition and if they do demo a building, they'll do it prior to sale/transfer.  I'll look into the City and Council record, as both are required for these transfers, but I'm not sure what I'll find in regard to development plans.

btw, is there any new TOD talk at the W. 117 Rapid station?

With a Fifth Turd bank branch and an Aldi going on the parcel with the best TOD potential, not bloody likely. :-(

like i always say, Cleveland & RTA leading the way in TOD Dysfunctionality since 1974

If anyone is interested in giving their comments to Sun about the development patterns along West 117th, especially the section where West 117 is the border between Cleveland and Lakewood, I would encourage you to contact Sun's Lakewood reporter Lisa Novatny at 216-986-6065. Please contact her by midday Monday.

 

Residents of Lakewood and Cleveland, living near the area, are preferred. Don't be shy!

In regard to my inquiry about the demo on Chester (Madonna Hall) it appears that there is a proposed development of 32 townhouse and loft units on the site.  That's all I know so far!

OK, that sounds good!  Who's the developer?

I refer you to my previous post

With a Fifth Turd bank branch and an Aldi going on the parcel with the best TOD potential, not bloody likely. :-(

 

MayDay!  :-o

I was just in Buffalo and toured the F.L. Wright Martin house, where I learned about Buffalo's demo of the Larkin Administration Building (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larkin_Soap_Company). Talk about wanting to cry. You'd think events like this would learn us some moderation.

Yes, I saw a whole thing about that on the history channel or somewhere.  I also believe this to be the building that Steven Litt refers to and compares with the Ameritrust tower on East 9th and Euclid. (in regard to lessons not being learned)

Meanwhile, the Plain Dealer is endorsing Frank Jackson's plan to spend $3 million a year demolishing "run-down" (read: old) buildings. Newsflash: Rampant demolition is a big part of the reason we're in our current predicament. We've been destroying ourselves for more than 50 years.

 

Rebuilding Cleveland

 

Jackson's $1.6 billion capital improvement plan offers a prudent strategy based on solid ideas; now he has to sell it

Saturday, January 27, 2007

 

Mayor Frank Jackson has outlined a plan to prod economic development and strengthen neighborhoods by spending $1.6 billion on projects from building bike paths to rehabilitating homes.

 

The five-year strategy - the city's first capital plan in 16 years - spans departments, from aging to water, and sketches improvements across all of Cleveland's 36 neighborhoods.

 

Jackson's plan includes a good many things that critics might suggest won't result in an increase in jobs - things like landscaping some city streets, sprucing up the restrooms at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport and building a $10 million recreation center.

 

And it's true that job growth is a sure measure of economic development. But the goals of this plan are broader. It's a down payment on a huge, long-term investment - stabilizing Cleveland and recreating vibrant urban "neighborhoods of choice," as the mayor likes to say.

 

The plan seeks to build on ideas seeded by former city leaders, such as:

 

Ramping up the budget, by millions of dollars, for demolishing run-down buildings.

 

Threading miles of bike paths through the city and adding a $240,000 bike station to create recreational opportunities and better connect Cleveland with the region.

 

Buying and decontaminating Mittal Steel's unused coke plant so it can be returned to commercial use and contribute to economic growth as swiftly as possible.

 

The plan specifically lays out all spending, year by year, through 2011. Residents can see it online at www.city.cleveland.oh.us/pdf/CIPDraft-20070122.pdf.

 

The city can pay for the projects without raising taxes or its debt ceiling, which could have jeopardized its bond rating or increased borrowing costs.

 

Last year, Jackson shaved the city's operating expenses and didn't issue general obligation bonds. That combination created a cushion to help finance the projects in this plan.

 

Jackson also expects a third of the money to come from the state and federal governments.

 

Wisely, he has said he'll seek local partnerships with private development groups and foundations to help leverage the city's money. Those groups could offer grants, below-market financing or other investments.

 

Cleveland, of course, needs more than is called for in this $1.6 billion plan.

 

And in time, once it's clear these efforts are paying off, the mayor could carve out more ambitious projects.

 

Immediately, however, Jackson needs to sell this approach to a cynical and skeptical public. He can't stay inside the walls of City Hall and hope that residents, business owners and potential partners will just trust him on this one.

 

The hard work of creating the capital plan is behind him. The potentially harder work of convincing people of its worth and executing it has a way to go.

Some demolition is very good. Some demolition is very bad.  I don't think that the city necessarily sees a difference between the two.

Saw this PD article on cleveland.com this morning (too long to post) --

 

Inspectors refuse to use their computers

Finding $60,000 worth of missing PDAs is not a priority, official says

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1170149823119120.xml&coll=2&thispage=1

 

This is the second extremely un-flattering article I've seen written about Cleveland's Building and Housing Department. I'm beginning to think either these folks are legitimately do-nothing bums or have the worst PR rep in history.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure if this is a true statement or not but it seems conceivable to me that if we had competent inspections and code violation enforcement that we could potentially keep some  buildings from getting "too far gone", and increase the probability of redevelopment instead of the slash & burn approach.

yay for a capital plan, overall that is great news.

 

but somebody tell the mayor today's empty old building is tomorrow's hip rehab.

 

he needs to work harder on flexible neighborhood planning guides and promoting historic conservation as much as a capital plan so the city does not tear down these old structures and sell off its soul to these shoddy aldi/5/3rd bank/drug store, etc. developers. urban 'neighborhoods of choice' do not begin with empty lots mr. mayor. yeesh.

 

^the aldi/5/3 is a lakewood project.

good!

 

wait a sec, thats ohio's most urban suburb...so not good.

^^^ If you look at the Citywide Development Plan, each neighborhood has a specific and flexible plan geared toward that neighborhood.  The hope is to rehab in neighborhoods where it makes sense, and to do tear down when the houses are not salvageable or are in neighborhoods where there aren't market conditions to rehab these homes. 

 

While I am no expert on the plan, I know that there is a strategy based on each neighborhood, and that the plan is much more focused on housing than the larger buildings most of the people on this board are worried about.  Keep in mind that the vast majority of demolitions of both housing and commercial structures are conducted by the private sector, not the city.  While the City does play a role in approving those demolitions, it is a wholely different topic than the money the city is putting into demolishing structures on its own. 

thx for that info ewoops, certainly those processes are both tied together no? that is, approval and then the teardowns (no matter who pays)? how does that process work?

Saw this PD article on cleveland.com this morning (too long to post) --

 

Inspectors refuse to use their computers

Finding $60,000 worth of missing PDAs is not a priority, official says

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1170149823119120.xml&coll=2&thispage=1

 

This is the second extremely un-flattering article I've seen written about Cleveland's Building and Housing Department. I'm beginning to think either these folks are legitimately do-nothing bums or have the worst PR rep in history.

 

Yeah, the first of those options.  I've never met anyone who thinks B&H is doing a good job.

I love Santiago's final quote in the article:

 

Cleveland inspectors are now testing small laptop computers, which Rybka hopes they will find easier to use than PDAs.

 

Seven years ago, Cleveland inspectors tried laptops and found them too difficult to use.

 

They were replaced with the PDAs.

 

The irony amuses Councilman Santiago.

 

"If you can use a cell phone," he said, "you can use a PDA."

^^Mr. NYC, I'm sure the processes are tied together, but I think that the City will use its funds to tear down the worst structures in the City, while the function when it comes to private demolitions is determining whether or not to allow a proposed demolition.  I think the City funds will be used on properties that either fit into the strategic plan or are brought to the City by the local council member or CDC. 

 

I don't have knowledge of how it works exactly, nor am I an apologist for B and H.  I agree completely with the above posts about the utilization of the PDAs.  If they can't figure out the new technology, they should get canned and replaced with someone who does. 

That's assuming that any new, tech-savvy people coming in know the building codes. And I suspect the city's building codes, violations processes, etc. are pretty complicated for any large city. They can learn these things, but will it take longer for new hires to learn the building codes or the existing inspectors to learn how to use "new" technology? Oh dilemma.

Does Cleveland's historic preservation commission have any backbone; real power?  Some demo's, occasionally, do make sense IF there's a larger good involved and little to know use for such buildings in a GREATLY IMPROVED scheme -- Wolstein's East Bank proposal viz the (rather faceless) warehouse buildings existing.  But such demolition so ONLY come after extensive/intensive adaptive reuse study...

 

A blanket no-demolition policy can be as limiting and suffocating to positive growth and development as a the free-swinging wrecking ball we've (too much) had in Cleveland's more recent history.

From what I've heard (and I am working on finding out more), there are certain neighborhoods where a demolition permit requires that plans have been submitted for re-use of the site within 12 months.  Downtown is one example, but there may be others.  The other part of this is that the requirement really doesn't have any binding legal grounding.  So, if after 6 months, the owner has decided not to go through with the project, they can just paint those parking stripes on extra thick and add some shrubbery around the periphery and call it a day.

The Aldi's and Fifth/3rd which are being built in Lakewood, among anything else built out on this segment of land, will be built up against the street on W. 117th. The parking lots will be in the rear of the building, per Lakewood's building codes. Just a block or two down at Detroit and W. 117th is the Walgreens that had to abide by this code. The building is up against the street corner instead of having the building setback like it normally is in the suburbs. The Home Depot and Target are in the City of Cleveland and will not be models for what is happening on the Lakewood side of W. 117th St.

^^ Interesante! What about the CVS on Clifton and W. 117?

^^ Interesante! What about the CVS on Clifton and W. 117?

 

That's an older building that was put up a few decades ago.

 

I heard that something might be brewing for Lakewood.  I have no clue what it is, but the guy I was talking to led on that it might be something big (retail-wise). 

From what I've heard (and I am working on finding out more), there are certain neighborhoods where a demolition permit requires that plans have been submitted for re-use of the site within 12 months.  Downtown is one example, but there may be others. 

 

For downtown, a building can be demolished and used for parking (with a city-OK'd parking permit) for up to two years as long as the site owner either puts up a building or submits a plan for putting up a building. If neither happens before the two years has elapsed, the city can revoke the parking permit.

 

The Aldi's and Fifth/3rd which are being built in Lakewood, among anything else built out on this segment of land, will be built up against the street on W. 117th. The parking lots will be in the rear of the building, per Lakewood's building codes.

 

That's not what I'm hearing. I was told Aldi's threatened to sue the city if it required the grocer to build next to the street.

 

^^ Interesante! What about the CVS on Clifton and W. 117?

That's an older building that was put up a few decades ago.

 

The CVS was actually built in the 1930s as a Clark's restaurant (a chain of family restaurants).

^^ Interesante! What about the CVS on Clifton and W. 117?

 

 

 

 

 

That's an older building that was put up a few decades ago.

 

I heard that something might be brewing for Lakewood.  I have no clue what it is, but the guy I was talking to led on that it might be something big (retail-wise). 

I know there are plans to build a Golds Gym on Detroit Avenue.  Actually, it is pretty much a definate on that.  I have done some engineering work for the site.

KJP I am confused why Aldi's would be putting up such a fight so they don't have to build up to the sidewalk.  The store they just opened on Euclid is on the sidewalk.

^^ Interesante! What about the CVS on Clifton and W. 117?

 

 

 

 

 

That's an older building that was put up a few decades ago.

 

I heard that something might be brewing for Lakewood.  I have no clue what it is, but the guy I was talking to led on that it might be something big (retail-wise). 

I know there are plans to build a Golds Gym on Detroit Avenue.  Actually, it is pretty much a definate on that.  I have done some engineering work for the site.

 

where on Detroit?

I don't know for sure.  Location has no bearing in my line of engineering other than what existing soil conditions are.  I am pretty sure however that it is wast of Warren. 

I drove by the Aldi's site today. It is all staked out for the foundation and the stakes are nowhere near the sidewalk. Now that was a drive-by observation - maybe I missed something - but it sure looked as if it wouldn't be built to the corner.

Cleveland got Aldi's to build up to the sidewalk at E. 79th and Euclid -- though there's also a large curb cut off Euclid so people can access a side parking lot. In other words, it adheres to Midtown's form-based zoning overlay in fact but not in spirit.

I heard that something might be brewing for Lakewood.  I have no clue what it is, but the guy I was talking to led on that it might be something big (retail-wise). 

 

Could this be it? Another arts district... ho-hum. ;) From PURE e-news.

 

 

To Be Or Not To Be...

An Arts District in Lakewood?

Tuesday, March 13 at 7:00 p.m.

 

 

LakewoodAlive's next forum will explore the idea of an Arts District in Lakewood. A panel of experts will discuss what makes up an arts district, examples of thriving art districts and the economic benefits associated with them.

 

�We anticipate a lively discussion about whether an arts district would be appropriate and beneficial for Lakewood,� said Mary Anne Crampton, president of LakewoodAlive. �We would like to explore all of the issues that are critical to the development and sustainability of an arts district.�

Panelists include:

*Art Falco, President and CEO, Playhouse Square Association

 

*Tom Schorgl, President and CEO, The Community Partnership for Arts and Culture

 

*Daniel Cuffaro, Chairman and Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Design, Cleveland Institute of Art and current proponent of "District of Design" in Downtown Cleveland

 

*Kathleen Cerveny, Program Officer for the Arts, The Cleveland Foundation

 

Thomas Mulready, publisher of CoolCleveland, will moderate.

 

The forum will be held on Tuesday, March 13 at 7:00 p.m. at the Beck Center Armory, 17801 Detroit Ave., Lakewood. The Armory is located directly behind the Beck Center�s main building and parking is available in the adjacent lot and on nearby sidestreets.

 

This event is free and advanced registration is not necessary.

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.

...and nobody from Virginia Mari College???

I think Dan Cuffaro lives in Lakewood.  Does that count?

 

ps: what does this have to do with demolitions in Cleveland?

Maybe it's time for West 117th Street to have it's own thread.

 

Following up on the West 117th discussion:

 

Cities plan W. 117 future

Thursday, March 08, 2007

By Lisa Novatny

Lakewood Sun Post

 

A select group of individuals from Lakewood and Cleveland with interests in planning and development recently started discussions about the West 117th Street corridor.

 

While the meeting was a preliminary introduction, the goal of meeting was evident.

 

"The point of it is to dream up a great corridor of businesses, retail, entertainment and housing," said Ward 4 Councilwoman Mary Louise Madigan. "And a big piece of it is that we have two cities, willing to work together, open to developing ideas up and down two sides of a street that are in two different municipalities."

 

While the eastern boundary of Lakewood, Ward 4, is West 117th Street, two Cleveland wards also share the West 117th border Ward 18 and Ward 19.

 

Councilman Jay Westbrook, D-18, whose ward is at the northern and middle of the project area could not attend the meeting because of a scheduling conflict, but noted that redevelopment along West 117th Street was proposed informally two years ago.

 

"It could ultimately involve shared design guidelines, uniform streetscapes," he said. "Ultimately, it could include joint development agreements between the two cities."

 

At some point, he said, there may be joint participation in redevelopment projects along the length of West 117th.

 

"Down the road, that whole corridor might be better off going that way," he said. "We could upgrade those little, one-story scattered uses and get some projects of scale, like we did with Home Depot and Target, and Lakewood is doing now with the DeLorean site."

 

That idea was the point of the meeting, which was facilitated by Terry Schwarz and Paul Vernon, members of the Kent State University Urban Design Center.

 

"We've worked with both cities in the past," said Schwarz. "And we were asked to facilitate the workshop and to think about land use and physical design strategies with the question in mind . . . how can a strategy be developed that looks at the corridor holistically rather than as a piecemeal.

 

"We want to look at the needs of the corridor rather than at the two cities separately," Schwarz added.

 

According to Tom Jordan, Lakewood's director of planning and development, the group of stakeholders explored ideas such as changing some residential uses to retail shops, developing mixed used centers, and creating adequate parking to meet the needs and better serve the neighboring communities.

 

"We want to put together a set of design parameters and figure out what would like to be seen along West 117th Street by both cities," added Dryck Bennett, Lakewood assistant director of planning and development. "We want to vision a better West 117th Street and in the end, use that vision to create an RFP or request for proposals for a developer."

 

According to Jordan, while discussions will continue between Lakewood and Cleveland, facilitators from Kent State University's Urban Design Center will be working on putting their initial thoughts on paper.

 

"Right now we're producing an illustrative plan of the corridor, a conceptual plan looking at design, development and draft guidelines," said Schwarz. "The next phase is for this to go public and give people the opportunity to weigh in. This is not a closed strategy."

I think this project makes Battery Park and all of the Detroit Shoreway a really good thing!

It's too late. What are they planning to do, evict all the fast food joints?  Sure, they use phrases like "at some point" and "down the road" when Aldi's and Home Depot and Target are already being built!!!  Sorry, but this joint partnership business should've been discussed by these snails 10 years ago. 

Anyone familiar with this one?

 

Stanard School Case 07-010

5360 Stanard Avenue

Demolition

 

From the pics on the Landmarks agenda (assuming I've got the case right), it looks like this was once a beauty:

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/landmark/agenda/photo/030807/index.htm

 

Yes I thought the same thing.  Great detail and brickwork, but looks long neglected. 

 

I wasnt sure where it was and wondered if it would be in a good area for redevelopment as housing or studio space, so I looked up on mapquest and it puts it between St. Clair and Superior at E. 53rd Street, which should be ideal.  Maybe it is too far gone?  What a shame..   

^^Ugh, another piece of Old Cleveland that will disappear forever.  A very cool old building.  Any way to tell who sponsored the demo application?  Is it still owned by the school district?

An architecture firm my friend works for did a feasibility study on the Stanard buildings a few years ago, to turn them into condos.  After so many years of neglect, there was no way to renovate them economically. Doubly a shame that, in addition to being very, very nice buildings, they are the last standing examples of the work of the architect who did them. His name escapes me now, but he was somewhat notable in his time. If they weren't in such bad shape...

Major bummer.  Thanks for the info JoeM, and welcome.

I hope they can preserve some pieces of the building (cornices, details, bricks, etc) and incorporate them into whatever building(s) might ultimate take its place. The building is in a good location, near East 55th and St. Clair, so I hope the vacant lot gets new life soon, but with some touches of the old preserved.

 

P.S., welcome aboard JoeM76!