First of all, I'm new to the forums. I love what you guys have here. I've been lurking for some time, but I finally thought of something that I couldn't keep to myself!

 

I've noticed that there's a lot of really solid urban architecture in Slavic Village along Broadway from about Mumford ave and east to Cable ave.  Do any of you see this as a possible spot for urban renewal in Cleveland?

 

I know that it needs a lot of work, but it just seems like a shame to drive by and see such beautiful buildings go neglected.

Seems like a great candidate.  The commercial corridors along Broadway and 71st are among the most intact in the city.  The main challenge is that the housing stock in that area has suffered greatly in recent years.  Another issue is that the area feels disconnected with other developing neighborhoods, including downtown.  Hopefully this can be addressed somewhat with the new innerbelt.  There also used to be a bridge connecting Slavic Village with Tremont, which would be great to have back.  Then Cleveland could have a contiguous south side.

  Do any of you see this as a possible spot for urban renewal in Cleveland?

 

 

In a nutshell, "no".

 

I think Cleveland is now a city with less than 400k people and we already have a number of neighborhoods where development and seeds are being focused.  Cleveland doesn't have the resources to nurture these areas as it is, they have to do it on their own and some are thriving, some are struggling.  People might tell you that Slavic Village is on the priority list for the city, but it's not from what I've seen.

 

 

Do any of you see this as a possible spot for urban renewal in Cleveland?

 

 

It's certainly got the physical attributes for it. Saving an ethnic neighborhood in the city of Cleveland requires the efforts of all peoples in Greater Cleveland, especially from that ethnic group. It's why the Little Italy still has many Italian-themed businesses even though Italian-Americans are a minority in that neighborhood today. Or, that the Ukrainian-American Museum was located in Tremont rather than in Parma, even though there are far more Ukrainians in Parma. Or that more Asians live in the eastern suburbs than in Asiatown, but they sustain that neighborhood as part of their original home base in the region.

 

If the Slavic community in Northeast Ohio values Slavic Village as its local ethnic homeland, then it needs to band together to invest in it. I hope they don't think that others will care for their old neighborhood after they set an example by discarding it themselves. If they want someone to take the leading in investing in Slavic Village, then they need to be the first ones to do it.

Seems like a great candidate.  The commercial corridors along Broadway and 71st are among the most intact in the city.  The main challenge is that the housing stock in that area has suffered greatly in recent years.  Another issue is that the area feels disconnected with other developing neighborhoods, including downtown.  Hopefully this can be addressed somewhat with the new innerbelt.  There also used to be a bridge connecting Slavic Village with Tremont, which would be great to have back.  Then Cleveland could have a contiguous south side.

 

In a perfect world,  I would like to see this bridge too....but as is the current status....metaphorically speaking....having a tree branch too close to the roof and the ants will drop in.  I hate to say this, but lack of a bridge may be the one thing deterring riff raff from escalating in another neighborhood. Or, I suppose one can debate that it will drive up revitalization. In the short term, I would bet on the former.  The neighborhood/area, as it is now, still has many anchor appealing attractions that could set the table. St. Stan's, Broadway Scenic Byway, Washington Park on the other side of I-77, Mill Creek, The Historical Center, a few good local cafes, stores, some new and renovated housing and other elements.

  Do any of you see this as a possible spot for urban renewal in Cleveland?

 

 

In a nutshell, "no".

 

I think Cleveland is now a city with less than 400k people and we already have a number of neighborhoods where development and seeds are being focused.  Cleveland doesn't have the resources to nurture these areas as it is, they have to do it on their own and some are thriving, some are struggling.  People might tell you that Slavic Village is on the priority list for the city, but it's not from what I've seen.

 

 

It's sad, but true. Detroit Shoreway/Ohio City/Tremont/Downtown/UC/LI are really the only areas of the city where the seeds are being nurtured to their full extent. Sadly, these neighborhoods probably make up 10-20% of Cleveland's total population. The resources just aren't there for the rest of the city. As these neighborhoods continue to blossom there will inevitably be spillovers into the neighboring areas. However Slavic Village's isolation from any one of these seeds is too far to benefit from spillover. It will take a lot of local citizen activism and neighborhood pride to maintain what they have, but a drive down many of the streets tells the story of how quickly things are slipping away. I think there's great architecture and great spaces in Slavic Village that maybe in 10-20 years it could be the next Tremont, but how far will it slip before there's enough demand to fully gentrify it remains to be seen.

  Do any of you see this as a possible spot for urban renewal in Cleveland?

 

 

In a nutshell, "no".

 

I think Cleveland is now a city with less than 400k people and we already have a number of neighborhoods where development and seeds are being focused.  Cleveland doesn't have the resources to nurture these areas as it is, they have to do it on their own and some are thriving, some are struggling.  People might tell you that Slavic Village is on the priority list for the city, but it's not from what I've seen.

 

 

It's sad, but true. Detroit Shoreway/Ohio City/Tremont/Downtown/UC/LI are really the only areas of the city where the seeds are being nurtured to their full extent. Sadly, these neighborhoods probably make up 10-20% of Cleveland's total population. The resources just aren't there for the rest of the city. As these neighborhoods continue to blossom there will inevitably be spillovers into the neighboring areas. However Slavic Village's isolation from any one of these seeds is too far to benefit from spillover. It will take a lot of local citizen activism and neighborhood pride to maintain what they have, but a drive down many of the streets tells the story of how quickly things are slipping away. I think there's great architecture and great spaces in Slavic Village that maybe in 10-20 years it could be the next Tremont, but how far will it slip before there's enough demand to fully gentrify it remains to be seen.

 

And the neighborhoods you've mentioned still have a pretty far way to go themselves.

I expected to get shredded for that viewpoint.  Surprised to see I'm not alone

IMO, Slavic Village has the best remaining untapped urban fabric in the city:

 

 

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=5605+broadway+ave&cp=18&qe=NTYwNSBicm9hZHdheSBhdmUg&qesig=Vs0kS0jCUCFp0WIc6-e0hw&pkc=AFgZ2tl4DQp7PxEXHOlP7EU0mgawc6UsvsMdv0poB_fkJht5cGVFMssFXmRtebQJ9cG5dszVtG63oArsIy_TWpNKZpvCGTBrxA&safe=off&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1525&bih=666&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x8830fad764427b73:0x548525323d0733b1,5605+Broadway+Ave,+Cleveland,+OH+44127&gl=us&ei=D1UBTv6XI8PcgQfj0r3mDQ&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBYQ8gEwAA

 

 

 

I've always wondered what a transit line would do for this part of the down...down E.55th from Euclid for example...making all that land around E.55 and Euclid a transit hub...ending at Slavic Village.

1) BTW, check out this presentation I found from 2005...look at slides 25, 26, and 27. :)

 

http://www.astswmo.org/Files/Meetings/2005/2005-Brownfields_Symposium/Comm%20Involvement%20and%20Village%20Redevelopment.pdf

 

2) Also, this 6-story building has been completely rehabbed: http://slavicvillage.org/atlasapartments

 

I expected to get shredded for that viewpoint.  Surprised to see I'm not alone

 

Hardly. Urban renewal is a block by block process, and drawing a circle on a map and saying, "The city wants X" cannot make it so. You nailed it; in time, perhaps, but not now. Not without a lot of money or a lot of new residents.

Unfortunately Slavic Village sits at the fringe of the most blighted part of Cleveland, which has been encroaching closer each year. Geographically speaking it's isolated today from the new job centers of Cleveland. Downtown just isn't convenient to get to along Broadway and 77 backs up past Fleet frequently.

 

If you ever drive down Union, Harvard, and Miles nearby, it makes you wonder if these neighborhoods can ever be restored to the way they once were. If you start taking inventory of every street in Cleveland based on blight level, there's a telling story about the future population and why we dropped so much in the last census. It's too easy for many here to live in a world where all we see are the few trendy neighborhoods and a downtown that's going through a billion dollars of reinvestment ... these crown jewel neighborhoods make up such a small part of the whole of Cleveland. Slavic Village is a perfect example of a neighborhood that has great urban fabric, but at the moment there just isn't enough gentrification demand in the city to do much about it.

 

What is great about this neighborhood is that it's very active. When the pope was beatified a few weeks ago, there was a parade. I've been to St. Stan's a few times and it's always been packed. The Red Chimney is always busy when I've been and the other Polish restaurants and bakeries have great patronage as well.

 

New eastern European immigrants to Cleveland might find that this neighborhood gives them the sense of community that they are looking for in a new country. I think that new immigration could keep this neighborhood going for a bit longer, even if it doesn't mean a full blown gentrification. Which is the other point to make. Not every neighborhood in Cleveland can be or will be gentrified and figuring out solutions for the residents of these neighborhoods to have healthy, safe, and vibrant communities without yuppies moving in is another critical point in "saving Cleveland."

 

What is great about this neighborhood is that it's very active. When the pope was beatified a few weeks ago, there was a parade. I've been to St. Stan's a few times and it's always been packed.

 

 

St. Stanislaus is the biggest hidden GEM in the city of Cleveland:

 

i agree with the depopulation its isolated, still what a great area for redevelopment. or at least to house a new immigrant wave.  i hope the stock holds out until people come back and pick up on that. in the meantime, looping a lightrail trolley down 55th and up 79th would help promote revival. i know, no $  :-(

Broadway is a good example of how damaging isolation can be.  You can see the skyline from there but you can't very well get to it.  The more I think about it, the more I wish some innerbelt money could go toward fixing Broadway Ave between downtown and 55th.  It's a confusing tangle... not walkable and barely driveable. 

Every City has a ghetto and the south side is exactly where ours should be.  For the greater good, all gentrification efforts on the east side should be focused north of Cedar.  If a new CMHA complex is desired, it should go south.

Why the south side? And why pick a site for a ghetto??

Every City has a ghetto and the south side is exactly where ours should be.  For the greater good, all gentrification efforts on the east side should be focused north of Cedar.  If a new CMHA complex is desired, it should go south.

 

What???  That's almost as bad as Ex-Mayor of Toledo Carty Finkbeiner saying we should move all the deaf people out by the airport.

Every City has a ghetto and the south side is exactly where ours should be.  For the greater good, all gentrification efforts on the east side should be focused north of Cedar.  If a new CMHA complex is desired, it should go south.

 

 

I find that view astonishing, especially since Cleveland doesn't have a north side.  Tremont is south side, so is Old Brooklyn... and they're some of the nicest parts of our city.  Why should they have garbage just across the river?  Broadway is the traditional route between Cleveland and Pittsburgh, and its historical importance is reflected in its built environment.  It features some of Clevleand's best remaining architecture.  As commercial corridors go it's in better shape than most things north of Cedar.  This neighborhood is an asset we can't afford to damage any more than we already have.

Every City has a ghetto and the south side is exactly where ours should be.  For the greater good, all gentrification efforts on the east side should be focused north of Cedar.  If a new CMHA complex is desired, it should go south.

They had a similar policy in Warsaw, Poland in 1940.

I was only referring to the east side, so I'm not sure how Tremont and Old Brooklyn got brought into the conversation..... well, on second thought, I know 'how', but still wonder 'why'

 

I also was not trying to advocate for the 'creation' of a ghetto.  I was simply advocating for better use of our limited resources.  Sorry if it came accross that way and 'astonished' a poster or two.  All I was saying is that it is inevitable that Cleveland, like any other major city, will have a ghetto.  I think we can all agree on that.  If I had my choice, it would be on the south side, not by the lake, not surrounding UC, downtown or other areas that have a legitimate shot at spill over gentrification, and not on the banks of our river.  I would prefer CMHA build more Garden Valleys before they build more Lakeview Terraces.  If one of the neighborhoods has to rot, I would prefer it be Kinsman, not Glenville or Hough.

 

Just ask yourself..... if CMHA announced that it was going to build a sizeable new projects in the City, where would you prefer it go?

I was only referring to the east side, so I'm not sure how Tremont and Old Brooklyn got brought into the conversation..... well, on second thought, I know 'how', but still wonder 'why'

 

I also was not trying to advocate for the 'creation' of a ghetto.  I was simply advocating for better use of our limited resources.  Sorry if it came accross that way and 'astonished' a poster or two.  All I was saying is that it is inevitable that Cleveland, like any other major city, will have a ghetto.  I think we can all agree on that.  If I had my choice, it would be on the south side, not by the lake, not surrounding UC, downtown or other areas that have a legitimate shot at spill over gentrification, and not on the banks of our river.  I would prefer CMHA build more Garden Valleys before they build more Lakeview Terraces.  If one of the neighborhoods has to rot, I would prefer it be Kinsman, not Glenville or Hough.

 

Just ask yourself..... if CMHA announced that it was going to build a sizeable new projects in the City, where would you prefer it go?

 

Id actually prefer across from Crocker Park in Westlake ;)

So would I!  But I did say "in the City"

Just a quick addition to this Slavic Village talk...

 

I've never been there myself. But I plan on doing the Walk & Roll in August (https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=206247489409921&ref=notif&notif_t=event_invite).

 

And because I'm always interested in hearing about neighborhood development, I spoke with someone who lives there and was quoted in Live Cleveland as loving living in Slavic Village. She backed up what the magazine quoted and said she feels completely safe there, while adding you have to be smart, because it is in the city - not a 'burb. She added that while there is no night life to speak of right now, there are other young people like her in the area that are working to make the neighborhood better.

 

Sooo I'm optimistic!

So would I!  But I did say "in the City"

 

For what it's worth, CMHA is pretty much single handedly rebuilding the Kinsman neighborhood...

Good!

Not sure of any updates to this cool project:

 

Velodrome in Slavic Village!!

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2010/01/fast_track_cycling_makes_progr.html

 

What???  That's almost as bad as Ex-Mayor of Toledo Carty Finkbeiner saying we should move all the deaf people out by the airport.

 

 

Actually, I think that was the comedian Gallagher who said it first. Finkbeiner copied it, apparently not realizing that a comedian should not be used as a policy adviser.

I was only referring to the east side, so I'm not sure how Tremont and Old Brooklyn got brought into the conversation..... well, on second thought, I know 'how', but still wonder 'why'

 

It was you who said the ghetto should be on the south side, and those neighborhoods are parts of ours.  Old Brooklyn even shares council representation with Broadway.  And if Broadway is going to flourish, it will be through proximity to other stable or growing neighborhoods of the south side... rather than areas further down Union and Miles.  The thread topic is Slavic Village gentrification.  I'm trying to light a path toward that.  You're talking about putting projects there instead, by merit of it being the south side.  Slavic Village has nothing to do with Garden Valley.  So my mention of OB and Tremont served two purposes:  "south side" doesn't mean ghetto, and Slavic Village is better off identfying as south instead of east. 

 

I realize it's debatable but I'd rather concentrate our limited resources where we retain the most urbanity.  I would not limit it with a "south side sucks" paradigm.  This neighborhood should be near the top of any redevelopment or gentrification list.  It's also notable that despite its recent challenges, Slavic Village remains one of the city's more integrated areas.  I don't think we should write it off because it's a mile inland.  Sometimes I think we go overboard with that "focus on the lake" business.  Focus on the city.

 

It's surrounded by a lot of industry and I think that hurts it (for a prospects of gentrification) although I realize that as I write this, Tremont negates that point. SV has some small pockets of old building stock [old Hruby Conservatory of Music for one], specifically right around 55th and Broadway and parts of Fleet Ave.

 

Although it feels old hat, it was hit pretty hard by the foreclosure epidemic and many residential blocks

 

Also, it's not far from the Towpath Trail and Metroparks, although you have to go through a bit of industry (in addition to Cuyahoga Heights and Newburgh Hts) to reach it. With the addition of the Morgana Run Trail (a railtrack that had been converted into a paved bike trail) and the Golf Course, SVD (the development corp. of Slavic Village) and other stakeholders are really trying to brand the neighborhood as 'active living' and being outdoorsy.

 

All in all, there's few characteristics of gentrification (yuppies, business growth, tightening of housing stock) in many parts of the gentrifying parts of Cleveland: Tremont, DS, and Ohio City, so I doubt that it will reach Slavic Village in the near future (10-15 years). :/

Werent' there some articles about how Slavic Village was becoming a preferred destination for artists, due primarily to the inexpensive cost of living there? That seems like it's a precursor toward gentrification. Well, that, and MTS moving in.

 

I'm with many on here as believing the great built environment lends itself to SV being gentrified at some point. But I think we need more economic activity before we've filled out the existing neighborhoods that are turning around. That's not to say that in 10-15 year, you don't see people focusing on the next trendy neighborhood.

I hear ya, but there are plenty of other areas in Cleveland with rents that are still pretty damn cheap and already established artist scenes...  Ohio City, Tremont, Waterloo  come to mind

But artists are often poor and need cheap work/studio/gallery spaces. I've often joked in seriousness that, if you want to revive a neighborhood, send in the artists!

But artists are often poor and need cheap work/studio/gallery spaces. I've often joked in seriousness that, if you want to revive a neighborhood, send in the artists!

 

And gay couples, people, families. I don't have a link, but I've read plenty on how gay folks do wonders with gentrifying any given neighborhood.

Gays are good at starting the change cause they have to worry less about schools which is a huge factor that pushes families away.